Semi‐automated estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction by two‐dimensional and three‐dimensional echocardiography is feasible, time‐efficient, and reproducible

• Published in: Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2018-11, Vol.35 (11), p.1795-1805
• Main Authors: Myhr, Katrine A., Pedersen, Frederik H. G., Kristensen, Charlotte B., Visby, Lasse, Hassager, Christian, Mogelvang, Rasmus
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; cardiac imaging; Echocardiography - methods; Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional - methods; Feasibility Studies; Female; Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging; Humans; left ventricular ejection fraction; Male; Middle Aged; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; three‐dimensional echocardiography; Time Factors; Ventricular Function - physiology
• ISSN: 0742-2822; 1540-8175
• DOI: 10.1111/echo.14112

Purpose To compare two‐dimensional (2D) and three‐dimensional (3D) methods to estimate left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) with respect to feasibility, time consumption, and retest reproducibility. Methods A total of 100 patients planned to undergo coronary artery bypass grafting and/or aortic valve replacement were included consecutively. 2D and 3D echocardiography was performed on all patients. Acquisition and analysis time as well as intra‐ and inter‐examiner variability were assessed in 50 consecutive patients with 3 repeated echocardiographic examinations and analyses. LVEF was estimated by five different methods: uniplane, biplane, and single‐beat triplane (SB3P), as well as semi‐automated biplane (AutoEF) and 3D volumetric tracings (4D Auto LVQ). All methods were compared to Simpson's biplane method and feasibility was determined. Results Feasibility of Simpson's uniplane method, Simpson's biplane method, AutoEF, SB3P, and 4D Auto LVQ was 97%, 92%, 86%, 70%, and 89%, respectively. All methods evaluated were 18%–33% faster (P