Simultaneous contrast imaging of the left ventricle by two‐dimensional echocardiography and standard ventriculography

Abstract

Summary: Simultaneous contrast two-dimensional echocardiograms and contrast ventriculograms were analyzed for 19 cardiac cycles in 6 patients. Ventriculographic volume was underestimated by 40::1:4.5% (p<.OOl) by the contrast echocardiograms, despite good correlation (r = 0.88). Discrepancies could not be assigned to changes in volume between studies nor to a lack of precise endocardial definition. Simultaneous imaging demonstrated that the ultrasonic transducer was located 33° cephalad to the cardiac apex. Although angiographic volume was severely underestimated, ejection fraction (r = 0.93) and stroke volume (r = 0.90) could be calculated from two-dimensional echocardiograms using regression equations.

Cardiovascular Effects of Aging Interrelationships of Aortic, Left Ventricular, and Left Atrial Function

“…As a result, the values of left atrial and left ventricular volumes were similar to those reported by others using echocardiographic and magnetic resonance imaging technique [31][32]. Although echocardiography has been found to underestimate cardiac volumes, good correlations between echocardiographic and angiographic measurements as well as between angiographic and autopsy measurements of left atrial volumes have been reported [32][33][34][35]. The intraobserver variation for left atrial volumes ranges from 4.9% ± 1.3% to 5.4 ± 1.8% and interobserver variation from 5.3% ± 1.6% to 5.9% ± 2.3% [18,19].…”

Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction values obtained using invasive contrast left ventriculography, two-dimensional echocardiography, and gated single-photon emission computed tomography

“…Correlation coefficients ranged from 0.23 to 0.96, with most ranging from 0.75 to 0.80. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] The correlation coefficient reported in our study (0.69), while statistically significant, was among the lowest of those reported. Murarka et al 30 reported an overall correlation coefficient of 0.36 (p < 0.001).…”

“…[22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] Prior studies, like ours, reported mean LVEF values and binary correlations between imaging techniques. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] Our study demonstrated that mean LVEF values obtained from 2DE were nearly equal to those obtained from ICLV. Similar observations were reported by Murarka et al, 30 Godkar et al, 41 and Joffe et al 29 In contrast, mean LVEF values obtained using 2DE were lower than those obtained using ICLV in studies reported by Albrechtsson et al, 28 Nichols et al, 38 and Hoffman et al 27 In Hoffman's 27 study, mean LVEF values were higher and more comparable to those obtained with ICLV when contrast echocardiography was e...…”

“…[19][20][21] Multiple studies have compared ICLV and individual noninvasive techniques for measuring LVEF. [22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41] Some have compared LVEF measurements utilizing two or three noninvasive cardiac techniques. [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58] This study retrospectively compared LVEF in patients hospitalized for evaluation of chest pain, who underwent an ICLV, 2DE and gSPECT within 3 months of each other, not interrupted by myocardial infarction or by percutaneous or surgical coronary revascularization.…”

Accuracy of volume determination by two-dimensional echocardiography: defining requirements under controlled conditions in the ejecting canine left ventricle.

“…In addition, cineangiograms and echocardiograms have only recently been obtained simultaneously in patients. 9 We previously used isolated, ejecting dog hearts to compare directly measured ventricular volume (without reliance on geometric assumptions) with echocardiographic volume obtained by reconstructing multiple cross-sectional images obtained at 3-mm intervals along the vertical axis of the heart. '0 Comparison of simultaneous data obtained throughout the cardiac cycle revealed not only a high correlation of echo to direct volume, but also a high predictive value of direct volume from any echocardiographic determination owing to low variability (r = 0.972, SEE = 2.93 ml, direct volume range 9.4-54.7 ml).…”