Diferencias en la infraestimación de los volúmenes del ventrículo izquierdo entre 2 sistemas de ecocardiografía 3D. Comparación con resonancia magnética

Abstract

Introduction3-D echocardiography (3DE) is superior to the 2-D technique in assessing left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF). This study compares two 3DE systems with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (cMRI): single-beat 3DE with automated endocardiac border detection (Siemens SC2000;A) and 3DE with multi-beat acquisition and semi-automated endocardiac borders detection (Philips iE33;B). MethodsA 3DE with single-beat acquisition and automated border detection (A) and 3DE with multi-beat acquisition and semi-automated border detection (B) was performed on 22patients referred for a study using cMRI. ResultsThe mean volumes and EF measured by cMRI were: DTV: 211.07±85.4mL; STV: 119.2±89.25mL; EF: 48.67±20.07%. The correlation between cMRI and the two 3DE systems was excellent for the DTV (rhoA 0.912; rhoB 0.907; P<.0001), STV (rhoA 0.877; rhoB 0.945; P<.0001) and EF (rhoA 0.974; rhoB 0.951; P<.0001). The Bland-Altman analysis showed an underestimation of the LV volumes with both 3DE systems, with the difference being lower in systemA than in systemB (–40±50.2 vs –82.2±40.9mL, respectively for DTV; –16±44.4 vs –43±43.5mL, respectively for STV; P=.001). There were no differences in the measurement of EF between the 3imaging techniques. Conclusion3DE underestimates LV volumes. In our series, this underestimate was lower in the system with single-beat acquisition and automated border detection.