Reliability of reporting left ventricular systolic function by echocardiography: A systematic review of 3 methods

An accurate assessment of left ventricular (LV) systolic function is of central importance to the diagnosis and management of heart failure. Echocardiography is currently the technique most widely used for this purpose. A systematic review was performed of the evidence for the accuracy of 3 echocard...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American heart journal 2003-09, Vol.146 (3), p.388-397
Main Authors: McGowan, James H, Cleland, John G.F
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Algorithms
Bias
Biological and medical sciences
Cardiology
Cardiology. Vascular system
Clinical medicine
Data Interpretation, Statistical
Echocardiography, Doppler - standards
Geometry
Heart attacks
Heart failure
Humans
Medical sciences
Mortality
Reproducibility of Results
Statistical methods
Stroke Volume
Studies
Ventricular Function, Left - physiology
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!
Description
Summary:An accurate assessment of left ventricular (LV) systolic function is of central importance to the diagnosis and management of heart failure. Echocardiography is currently the technique most widely used for this purpose. A systematic review was performed of the evidence for the accuracy of 3 echocardiographic methods—Simpson's rule, wall motion index (WMI), and subjective visual assessment—compared with radionuclide or contrast ventriculography for the assessment of LV ejection fraction (LVEF). Twenty-five studies were identified in which data on agreement between echocardiography and reference methods were obtainable. A further 18 studies provided correlation data alone. For Simpson's rule, Bland-Altman limits of agreement (95% CI) ranged from LVEF ±7% to ±25% (median ±18%); for WMI ±13% to ±20% (median ±16%); and for subjective visual assessment ±16% to ±24% (median ±19%). Subject echogenicity, the nature of underlying disease, and the use of additional imaging technology, including secondary harmonic imaging and contrast agents, is likely to influence the accuracy of different methods. No method appears to systematically under- or overestimate LVEF to any major extent. These findings have important implications for the investigation of heart failure and for the practice and reporting of echocardiography.
ISSN:0002-8703
1097-6744
DOI:10.1016/S0002-8703(03)00248-5