Two-Dimensional Echocardiographic Methods for Assessment of Left Atrial Volume

• Published in: The American journal of cardiology 2006-11, Vol.98 (9), p.1185-1188
• Main Authors: Ujino, Keiji, Barnes, Marion E., Cha, Stephen S., Langins, Andrew P., Bailey, Kent R., Seward, James B., Tsang, Teresa S.M.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Atrial Function; Biological and medical sciences; Cardiac Volume; Cardiology. Vascular system; Cardiovascular disease; Comparative studies; Diastole; Echocardiography; Female; Heart; Heart Atria - diagnostic imaging; Humans; Male; Measurement; Medical diagnosis; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Minnesota; Observer Variation; Prospective Studies; Reproducibility of Results; ROC Curve; Stroke Volume; Systole; Ultrasonic imaging
• ISSN: 0002-9149; 1879-1913
• DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.05.040

Left atrial (LA) size is an important predictor of cardiovascular events. Various methods of LA volume assessment exist, but their differences have not been defined. This prospective study included 631 patients (331 men; mean age of 68 ± 14 years) without a history of atrial arrhythmias, stroke, valvular heart disease, pacemaker implantation, or congenital heart disease. All underwent echocardiography with comprehensive diastolic function assessment and LA volume measurement by 3 commonly used methods: biplane area–length, biplane Simpson’s method, and the prolate-ellipsoid method. Mean LA volumes were 39 ± 14 ml/m 2 by the area–length method, 38 ± 13 ml/m 2 by the Simpson’s method, and 32 ± 14 ml/m 2 by the prolate-ellipsoid method. In 92% of patients, the prolate measurement was smaller than the 2 biplane methods. Pairwise correlations (r) were 0.98 for area–length versus Simpson’s, 0.85 for prolate versus area–length, and 0.86 for prolate versus Simpson’s (all p values