首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography: official publication of the American Society of Echocardiography >Quantification of left ventricular volumes and function in patients with cardiomyopathies by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography: a head-to-head comparison between two different semiautomated endocardial border detection algorithms.
【24h】

Quantification of left ventricular volumes and function in patients with cardiomyopathies by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography: a head-to-head comparison between two different semiautomated endocardial border detection algorithms.

机译:实时三维超声心动图对心肌病患者左心室容积和功能的量化:两种不同的半自动心内膜边界检测算法之间的头对头比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated two different commercially available real-time 3-dimensional echocardiographic semiautomated border detection algorithms for left ventricular (LV) volume analysis in patients with cardiomyopathy and distorted LV geometry. METHODS: A total of 53 patients in sinus rhythm with various types of cardiomyopathy (mean age 56 +/- 11 years, 28 men) and adequate 2-dimensional image quality were included. The real-time 3-dimensional echocardiographic multiplane interpolation (MI) and full volume reconstruction (FVR) methods were used for LV volume analysis. Magnetic resonance imaging was used as the reference method. RESULTS: A strong correlation (R(2) > 0.95) was found for all LV volume and ejection fraction measurements by either real-time 3-dimensional echocardiographic method. Analysis time was shorter with the FVR method (6 +/- 2 vs 15 +/- 4 minutes, P < .01) as compared with the MI method. Bland-Altman analysis showed greater underestimation of end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes by MI compared with FVR. For the MI method a bias of -24.0 mL (-15.0% of the mean) for end-diastolic volume and -11.3 mL (-18.0% of the mean) for end-systolic volume was found. For FVR analysis these values were -9.9 mL (-6.0% of the mean) and -5.0 mL (-9.0% of the mean), respectively. Ejection fraction was similar for the MI and FVR method with a mean difference compared with magnetic resonance imaging of 0.6 (1.0%) and 0.8 (1.3%), respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients with cardiomyopathy, distorted LV geometry, and good 2-dimensional image quality, the FVR method is faster and more accurate than the MI method in assessment of LV volumes.
机译:目的:我们评估了两种不同的市售实时3维超声心动图半自动边界检测算法,用于心肌病和左心室几何形状扭曲的患者的左心室(LV)体积分析。方法:共有53例窦性心律不同类型的心肌病患者(平均年龄56 +/- 11岁,男性28例),其二维图像质量良好。实时3维超声心动图多平面插值(MI)和全容积重建(FVR)方法用于左室容积分析。磁共振成像被用作参考方法。结果:通过任何一种实时3维超声心动图方法,所有左室容量和射血分数测量值均具有很强的相关性(R(2)> 0.95)。与MI方法相比,FVR方法的分析时间更短(6 +/- 2 vs 15 +/- 4分钟,P <0.01)。与FVR相比,Bland-Altman分析显示,MI引起的舒张末期和收缩末期容积被低估了。对于MI方法,发现舒张末期容积的偏差为-24.0 mL(平均值的-15.0%),收缩末期容积的偏差为-11.3 mL(平均值的-18.0%)。对于FVR分析,这些值分别为-9.9 mL(平均值的-6.0%)和-5.0 mL(平均值的-9.0%)。 MI和FVR方法的射血分数相似,与磁共振成像相比的平均差异分别为0.6(1.0%)和0.8(1.3%)。结论:对于心肌病,左心室几何畸形和二维图像质量良好的患者,在评估左心室体积方面,FVR方法比MI方法更快,更准确。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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