Is review of videotape necessary after review of digitized cine-loop images in stress echocardiography? A prospective study in 306 patients

Abstract

The interpretation of stress echocardiography has been made easier by the comparison of digitized prestress and poststress frame-grabbed images (cine-loops), each representing a portion of a single cardiac cycle. Often, review of these digitized images is substituted for review of the complete videotape record of the examination. An alternative is to review both the digitized images as well as the videotape record of the rest and stress images. To date, there has been insufficient documentation of whether these options (cine-loop images alone versus cine-loop images plus videotape) provide comparable or additive information. Therefore, we prospectively evaluated information obtained from review of cine-loop images versus combined review of cine-loop images and videotape records in 306 consecutive patients undergoing treadmill (213 patients, 70%) or dobutamine (93 patients, 30%) stress echocardiography. An experienced echocardiologist first reviewed the cine-loop images and scored the wall motion in 16 segments at rest and with stress. Next, the complete videotape record was reviewed with repeated wall motion scoring. A questionnaire comparing cine-loop and videotape images was completed at the end of each review. Digitization of images was technically inadequate in 14 patients (4%). In 116 (40%) of the other 292 patients, the regional wall motion assessment, after relying solely on cine-loop images, was modified with subsequent videotape review. In 40 patients (14%), these modifications resulted in a change in the final impression regarding whether the study result was normal or abnormal. In a multivariate analysis, age, gender, and type of stress echocardiography had no significant influence on discordance of the cine-loop image and combined cine-loop and video information. Stepwise logistic regression analysis identified poorer image quality ( p < 0.0001) and regional wall motion abnormalities ( p < 0.0001) as predictors of discordance between cine-loop and combined review. We conclude that relying solely on digitized cine-loop images representing a single cardiac cycle is not optimal, especially if the quality of the digitized images is suboptimal and if regional wall motion abnormalities are present. Thus we recommend a combined review of both cine-loop images and videotape images in the interpretation of stress echocardiography. (J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1997;10:179-84.)