Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

PURPOSE: Cardiac MR (CMR) is the gold standard for left ventricular (LV) quantification. However, two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) is the most common approach, and both three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) and multidetector CT (MDCT) are increasingly available. The clinical significance and interchangeability of these modalities remains under-investigated. Therefore, we undertook a systemic review to evaluate the accuracy and absolute bias in LV quantification of all the commonly available non-invasive imaging modalities (2DE, CE-2DE, 3DE, MDCT) compared to cardiac MR (CMR). METHODS: Studies were included that reported LV echocardiographic (2DE, CE-2DE, 3DE) and/or MDCT measurements compared to CMR. Only modern CMR (SSFP sequences) was considered. Studies involving small sample size (<10 patients) and unusual cardiac geometry (ie, congenital heart diseases) were excluded. We evaluated LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), end-systolic volume (LVESV) and ejection fraction (LVEF). RESULTS: 1604 articles were initially considered: 65 studies were included (total of 4032 scans (echo, CT, MRI) performed in 2888 patients). Compared to CMR, significant biased underestimation of LV volumes with 2DE was seen (LVEDV-33.30 mL, LVESV -16.20 mL, p<0.0001). This difference was reduced but remained significant with CE-2DE (LVEDV -18.05, p<0.0001) and 3DE (LVEDV -14.41, p<0.001), while MDCT values were similar to CMR (LVEDV -1.20, p=0.43; LVESV -0.13, p=0.91). However, excellent agreement for echocardiographic LVEF evaluation (2DE LVEF 0.78-1.01%, p=0.37) was observed, especially with 3DE (LVEF 0.14%, p=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: Comparing imaging modalities to CMR as reference standard, 3DE had the highest accuracy in LVEF estimation: 2DE and 3DE-derived LV volumes were significantly underestimated. Newer generation CT showed excellent accuracy for LV volumes.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/openhrt-2015-000388

Type

Journal article

Journal

Open Heart

Publication Date

2016

Volume

3

Keywords

CARDIAC FUNCTION, IMAGING AND DIAGNOSTICS