...
首页> 外文期刊>The American Journal of Cardiology >Comparison of left and right atrial volume by echocardiography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging using the area-length method.
【24h】

Comparison of left and right atrial volume by echocardiography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging using the area-length method.

机译:超声心动图与使用区域长度法进行的心脏磁共振成像对左右心房容积的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Increased atrial volumes predict adverse cardiovascular events. Accordingly, accurate measurement of atrial size has become increasingly important in clinical practice. The area-length method is commonly used to estimate the volume. Disagreements between atrial volumes using echocardiography and other imaging modalities have been found. It is unclear whether this has resulted from differences in the measurement method or discrepancies among imaging modalities. We compared the right atrial (RA) and left atrial (LA) volume estimates using the area-length method for transthoracic echocardiography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging. Patients undergoing echocardiography and CMR imaging within 1 month were identified retrospectively. For both modalities, the RA and LA long-axis dimension and area were measured using standard 2- and 4-chamber views, and the volume was calculated using the area-length method for both atria. The echocardiographic and CMR values were compared using the Bland-Altman method. A total of 85 patients and 18 controls were included in the present study. The atrial volumes estimated using the area-length method were significantly smaller when measured using echocardiography than when measured using CMR imaging (LA volume 35 +/- 20 vs 49 +/- 30 ml/m(2), p <0.001, and RA volume 32 +/- 23 vs 43 +/- 29 ml/m(2), p = 0.012). The mean difference (CMR imaging minus echocardiography) was 14 +/- 14 ml/m(2) for the LA and 10 +/- 16 ml/m(2) for the RA volume. Similar results were found in the healthy controls. No significant intra- or interobserver variability was found within each modality. In conclusion, echocardiography consistently underestimated the atrial volumes compared to CMR imaging using the area-length method.
机译:心房容量增加预示着不良的心血管事件。因此,在临床实践中,准确测量心房大小变得越来越重要。面积长度法通常用于估计体积。已经发现使用超声心动图检查的心房容积与其他成像方式之间存在分歧。目前尚不清楚这是由于测量方法的差异还是成像方式之间的差异所致。我们使用经胸超声心动图和心血管磁共振(CMR)成像的面积长度方法比较了右心房(RA)和左心房(LA)的体积估计值。回顾性分析1个月内接受超声心动图和CMR成像的患者。对于这两种模式,都使用标准的2室和4室视图来测量RA和LA长轴尺寸和面积,并使用面积长度方法对这两个心房计算体积。使用Bland-Altman方法比较超声心动图和CMR值。本研究共包括85位患者和18位对照。使用超声心动图测量时,使用面积长度法估算的心房容积明显小于使用CMR成像时测量的心房容积(LA容积35 +/- 20 vs 49 +/- 30 ml / m(2),p <0.001和RA体积32 +/- 23 vs 43 +/- 29 ml / m(2),p = 0.012)。 LA的平均差异(CMR成像减去超声心动图)为14 +/- 14 ml / m(2),RA的体积为10 +/- 16 ml / m(2)。在健康对照组中发现了相似的结果。在每个模态内均未发现观察者间或观察者间的显着差异。总之,与使用面积长度法的CMR成像相比,超声心动图一直低估了心房容积。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号