Loading…
Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography
Background Three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the most accurate echocardiographic method for ventricular chamber quantification. It is unclear how two‐dimensional (2D) techniques perform against 3D technology and whether 2D methods can be extrapolated to obtain 3D data. Methods Retrospective...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2019-06, Vol.36 (6), p.1054-1065 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373 |
| container_end_page | 1065 |
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 1054 |
| container_title | Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.) |
| container_volume | 36 |
| creator | Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor Salgado, Benjamin C. Badar, Faraz John, Anub Stoddard, Marcus F. |
| description | Background
Three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the most accurate echocardiographic method for ventricular chamber quantification. It is unclear how two‐dimensional (2D) techniques perform against 3D technology and whether 2D methods can be extrapolated to obtain 3D data.
Methods
Retrospective review of transthoracic echocardiography was performed, with comparison of ejection fraction (EF), end‐diastolic volume (EDV), end‐systolic volume (ESV), and 2D strain‐derived global longitudinal strain (GLS) and synchrony index.
Results
One‐hundred patients were identified. Using 3D echocardiography as reference standard, good correlation was noted with 2D strain‐derived EF (r = 0.89, P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/echo.14362 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2233850266</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2233850266</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcFO3DAQhq0KVLa0lz5A5SOqCMR2Ymd7QysolZC4wDly7DExcuytneySWx-BF-JleJImLO2BA3OZOXzzaUY_Ql9JfkKmOgXVhhNSME4_oAUpizyriCj30CIXBc1oRekB-pTSfZ7ngpDiIzpgU6toQRfo6WYbnv88atuBTzZ46XDqo7Qez1Ylo7bhLsp1O84URLsBjR2YHm_A99GqwcmI4R5UP21jE-XLcIw3wQ0dpGMsvcZ3LjSzeUx9cFZhPaY0etXG4EdsvYaHH3gVurWMNk2Wre1b3LcR4M1pb2_6jPaNdAm-vPZDdHtxfrO6zK6uf_5anV1litElzbTipmRSiQpAQCVYIww1hhVlteSK8kaxQhSl1kLyZUNF05hGcU7lUrOSMMEO0dHOu47h9wCprzubFDgnPYQh1ZQyVpU55XxCv-9QFUNKEUy9jraTcaxJXs9x1fMT9UtcE_zt1Ts0Hej_6L98JoDsgK11ML6jqs9Xl9c76V9aianp</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2233850266</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection</source><creator>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor ; Salgado, Benjamin C. ; Badar, Faraz ; John, Anub ; Stoddard, Marcus F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor ; Salgado, Benjamin C. ; Badar, Faraz ; John, Anub ; Stoddard, Marcus F.</creatorcontrib><description>Background
Three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the most accurate echocardiographic method for ventricular chamber quantification. It is unclear how two‐dimensional (2D) techniques perform against 3D technology and whether 2D methods can be extrapolated to obtain 3D data.
Methods
Retrospective review of transthoracic echocardiography was performed, with comparison of ejection fraction (EF), end‐diastolic volume (EDV), end‐systolic volume (ESV), and 2D strain‐derived global longitudinal strain (GLS) and synchrony index.
Results
One‐hundred patients were identified. Using 3D echocardiography as reference standard, good correlation was noted with 2D strain‐derived EF (r = 0.89, P < 0.01) and with 2D standard biplane EF (r = 0.90, P < 0.01) and similarly for EDV (r = 0.84 and r = 0.81, respectively, both P < 0.01). Two‐dimensional strain‐derived EDV by 8% and 2D biplane‐derived EDV underestimated by 8% (P < 0.01). In relation to 3D EF, 2D strain underestimated by 2% and 2D standard biplane overestimated by 2% (P < 0.01). There was a negative correlation between GLS and 3D EF (r = 0.84, P = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, 3D EF could be derived from 2D strain [3D EF = 34.345 + (0.125 * EDV) + (−0.289 * ESV) + (−1.141 * GLS)]. Three‐dimensional echocardiography‐derived synchrony parameter (ie, standard deviation from mean time to minimum systolic volume from 16 subvolumes) did not correlate with 2D strain‐derived synchrony index (r = 0.171).
Conclusions
Two‐dimensional standard biplane and 2D strain EF and EDV strongly correlate with 3D EF and EDV. Although 2D methods are predictive of 3D findings, over‐ and underestimations may occur. Three‐dimensional echocardiography should be used when available.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0742-2822</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1540-8175</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/echo.14362</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31148242</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; biplane ; Echocardiography - methods ; Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional - methods ; ejection fraction ; Female ; Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Reproducibility of Results ; Retrospective Studies ; strain ; three‐dimensional echocardiography ; two‐dimensional echocardiography ; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - diagnostic imaging ; Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology ; ventricular synchrony</subject><ispartof>Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.), 2019-06, Vol.36 (6), p.1054-1065</ispartof><rights>2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4852-8704 ; 0000-0001-8296-7343</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31148242$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salgado, Benjamin C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badar, Faraz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>John, Anub</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoddard, Marcus F.</creatorcontrib><title>Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography</title><title>Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)</title><addtitle>Echocardiography</addtitle><description>Background
Three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the most accurate echocardiographic method for ventricular chamber quantification. It is unclear how two‐dimensional (2D) techniques perform against 3D technology and whether 2D methods can be extrapolated to obtain 3D data.
Methods
Retrospective review of transthoracic echocardiography was performed, with comparison of ejection fraction (EF), end‐diastolic volume (EDV), end‐systolic volume (ESV), and 2D strain‐derived global longitudinal strain (GLS) and synchrony index.
Results
One‐hundred patients were identified. Using 3D echocardiography as reference standard, good correlation was noted with 2D strain‐derived EF (r = 0.89, P < 0.01) and with 2D standard biplane EF (r = 0.90, P < 0.01) and similarly for EDV (r = 0.84 and r = 0.81, respectively, both P < 0.01). Two‐dimensional strain‐derived EDV by 8% and 2D biplane‐derived EDV underestimated by 8% (P < 0.01). In relation to 3D EF, 2D strain underestimated by 2% and 2D standard biplane overestimated by 2% (P < 0.01). There was a negative correlation between GLS and 3D EF (r = 0.84, P = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, 3D EF could be derived from 2D strain [3D EF = 34.345 + (0.125 * EDV) + (−0.289 * ESV) + (−1.141 * GLS)]. Three‐dimensional echocardiography‐derived synchrony parameter (ie, standard deviation from mean time to minimum systolic volume from 16 subvolumes) did not correlate with 2D strain‐derived synchrony index (r = 0.171).
Conclusions
Two‐dimensional standard biplane and 2D strain EF and EDV strongly correlate with 3D EF and EDV. Although 2D methods are predictive of 3D findings, over‐ and underestimations may occur. Three‐dimensional echocardiography should be used when available.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>biplane</subject><subject>Echocardiography - methods</subject><subject>Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional - methods</subject><subject>ejection fraction</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>strain</subject><subject>three‐dimensional echocardiography</subject><subject>two‐dimensional echocardiography</subject><subject>Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology</subject><subject>ventricular synchrony</subject><issn>0742-2822</issn><issn>1540-8175</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kcFO3DAQhq0KVLa0lz5A5SOqCMR2Ymd7QysolZC4wDly7DExcuytneySWx-BF-JleJImLO2BA3OZOXzzaUY_Ql9JfkKmOgXVhhNSME4_oAUpizyriCj30CIXBc1oRekB-pTSfZ7ngpDiIzpgU6toQRfo6WYbnv88atuBTzZ46XDqo7Qez1Ylo7bhLsp1O84URLsBjR2YHm_A99GqwcmI4R5UP21jE-XLcIw3wQ0dpGMsvcZ3LjSzeUx9cFZhPaY0etXG4EdsvYaHH3gVurWMNk2Wre1b3LcR4M1pb2_6jPaNdAm-vPZDdHtxfrO6zK6uf_5anV1litElzbTipmRSiQpAQCVYIww1hhVlteSK8kaxQhSl1kLyZUNF05hGcU7lUrOSMMEO0dHOu47h9wCprzubFDgnPYQh1ZQyVpU55XxCv-9QFUNKEUy9jraTcaxJXs9x1fMT9UtcE_zt1Ts0Hej_6L98JoDsgK11ML6jqs9Xl9c76V9aianp</recordid><startdate>201906</startdate><enddate>201906</enddate><creator>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor</creator><creator>Salgado, Benjamin C.</creator><creator>Badar, Faraz</creator><creator>John, Anub</creator><creator>Stoddard, Marcus F.</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4852-8704</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-7343</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201906</creationdate><title>Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography</title><author>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor ; Salgado, Benjamin C. ; Badar, Faraz ; John, Anub ; Stoddard, Marcus F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>biplane</topic><topic>Echocardiography - methods</topic><topic>Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional - methods</topic><topic>ejection fraction</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>strain</topic><topic>three‐dimensional echocardiography</topic><topic>two‐dimensional echocardiography</topic><topic>Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology</topic><topic>ventricular synchrony</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salgado, Benjamin C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Badar, Faraz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>John, Anub</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stoddard, Marcus F.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Vaidya, Gaurang Nandkishor</au><au>Salgado, Benjamin C.</au><au>Badar, Faraz</au><au>John, Anub</au><au>Stoddard, Marcus F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography</atitle><jtitle>Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.)</jtitle><addtitle>Echocardiography</addtitle><date>2019-06</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>1054</spage><epage>1065</epage><pages>1054-1065</pages><issn>0742-2822</issn><eissn>1540-8175</eissn><abstract>Background
Three‐dimensional (3D) echocardiography is the most accurate echocardiographic method for ventricular chamber quantification. It is unclear how two‐dimensional (2D) techniques perform against 3D technology and whether 2D methods can be extrapolated to obtain 3D data.
Methods
Retrospective review of transthoracic echocardiography was performed, with comparison of ejection fraction (EF), end‐diastolic volume (EDV), end‐systolic volume (ESV), and 2D strain‐derived global longitudinal strain (GLS) and synchrony index.
Results
One‐hundred patients were identified. Using 3D echocardiography as reference standard, good correlation was noted with 2D strain‐derived EF (r = 0.89, P < 0.01) and with 2D standard biplane EF (r = 0.90, P < 0.01) and similarly for EDV (r = 0.84 and r = 0.81, respectively, both P < 0.01). Two‐dimensional strain‐derived EDV by 8% and 2D biplane‐derived EDV underestimated by 8% (P < 0.01). In relation to 3D EF, 2D strain underestimated by 2% and 2D standard biplane overestimated by 2% (P < 0.01). There was a negative correlation between GLS and 3D EF (r = 0.84, P = 0.001). On multivariate analysis, 3D EF could be derived from 2D strain [3D EF = 34.345 + (0.125 * EDV) + (−0.289 * ESV) + (−1.141 * GLS)]. Three‐dimensional echocardiography‐derived synchrony parameter (ie, standard deviation from mean time to minimum systolic volume from 16 subvolumes) did not correlate with 2D strain‐derived synchrony index (r = 0.171).
Conclusions
Two‐dimensional standard biplane and 2D strain EF and EDV strongly correlate with 3D EF and EDV. Although 2D methods are predictive of 3D findings, over‐ and underestimations may occur. Three‐dimensional echocardiography should be used when available.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>31148242</pmid><doi>10.1111/echo.14362</doi><tpages>12</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4852-8704</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8296-7343</orcidid></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0742-2822 |
| ispartof | Echocardiography (Mount Kisco, N.Y.), 2019-06, Vol.36 (6), p.1054-1065 |
| issn | 0742-2822 1540-8175 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2233850266 |
| source | Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection |
| subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over biplane Echocardiography - methods Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional - methods ejection fraction Female Heart Ventricles - diagnostic imaging Humans Male Middle Aged Reproducibility of Results Retrospective Studies strain three‐dimensional echocardiography two‐dimensional echocardiography Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - diagnostic imaging Ventricular Dysfunction, Left - physiopathology ventricular synchrony |
| title | Two‐dimensional strain echocardiography‐derived left ventricular ejection fraction, volumes, and global systolic dyssynchrony index: Comparison with three‐dimensional echocardiography |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T17%3A58%3A20IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Two%E2%80%90dimensional%20strain%20echocardiography%E2%80%90derived%20left%20ventricular%20ejection%20fraction,%20volumes,%20and%20global%20systolic%20dyssynchrony%20index:%20Comparison%20with%20three%E2%80%90dimensional%20echocardiography&rft.jtitle=Echocardiography%20(Mount%20Kisco,%20N.Y.)&rft.au=Vaidya,%20Gaurang%20Nandkishor&rft.date=2019-06&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=1054&rft.epage=1065&rft.pages=1054-1065&rft.issn=0742-2822&rft.eissn=1540-8175&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/echo.14362&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2233850266%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3292-dc6f53ac78ee7e873b7f2ff345896c26bc34745dd7a69b27bbfbc662a9d351373%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2233850266&rft_id=info:pmid/31148242&rfr_iscdi=true |