Systematic Evaluation of Current Possibilities to Determine Left Ventricular Volumes by Echocardiography in Patients after Myocardial Infarction

作     者：Stephan Stoebe Adrienn Tarr Tudor Trache Jens-Gerrit Kluge Dietrich Pfeiffer 

作者机构：Department of Cardiology-Angiology University of Leipzig Leipzig German Department of Internal Medicine & Cardiology Center Faculty of Medicine University of Szeged Szeged Hungary 

出 版 物：《Open Journal of Medical Imaging》 (医学影像期刊（英文）)

年 卷 期：2012年第2卷第2期

页      面：68-75页

学科分类：1002[医学-临床医学] 100201[医学-内科学(含：心血管病、血液病、呼吸系病、消化系病、内分泌与代谢病、肾病、风湿病、传染病)] 10[医学] 

主　　题：Contrast Echocardiography Left Ventricular Systolic Function Left Ventricular Volumes Remodeling Myocardial Infarction LVO Imaging 

摘      要：Purpose: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy for quantification of left ventricular (LV) volumes and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) with current echocardiographic methods of planimetry for analysis of LV remodeling after myocardial infarction in daily clinical routine. Methods: 26 patients were investigated directly after interventional therapy at hospital pre-discharge and at 6 month follow-up. Standardized 2D transthoracic native and contrast echocardiography were performed in all patients. Due to methodological aspects the results of LV volumes and LVEF using native echocardiography were compared to the results of LV opacification (LVO) imaging for analysis in mono-, bi- and triplane data sets using the Simpson’s rule. In addition corresponding multidimensional data sets were analyzed. Results: The assessment of LV volumes and LVEF is more accurate with contrast echocardiography. The comparison of LV volumes and LVEF shows significant increases using contrast echocardiography (p 0.001). Larger left ventricular end-diastolic volumes (LVEDV) are measured at follow up (p 0.05). Significant differences (p 0.001) are found for the determination of LVEDV and LVEF relating to apical mono-, bi-, tri- and multiplane data sets. Standard deviations of the triplane approach, however, are significantly lower than using other modalities. Conclusion: Depending on the localization of the myocardial infarction LV volumes and LVEF are less reliably evaluated using the mono- or biplane approach. According to standardization and simultaneous acquisition of all LV wall segments the triplane approach is currently the best approach to determine LV systolic function. In addition, contrast echocardiography is indicated to improve endocardial border delineation in patients using the triplane or multiplane approach. To our knowledge the present study is the first systematic evaluation of all current possibilities for determination of LV volumes and LVEF