Moriuchi Masahito, Saito Satoshi, Kasamaki Yuji, Komaki Kouichi, Kanmatsuse Katsuo, Hayasaka Kazumasa
Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Nihon University School of Medicine, Oyaguchi Kami-cho 30-1, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo 173-8610.
J Cardiol. 2003 Dec;42(6):249-60.
Reliability of left ventricular geometry assessed by echocardiography (Echo) using an assumed left ventricular mass (LVM) and one-dimensional eccentricity (relative wall thickness: RWT), remains questionable. This study evaluated the feasibility of three-dimensional left ventricular geometric analysis using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Echocardiography and MRI were performed on 55 patients with hypertension. LVM was calculated using 0.8 (American Society of Echocardiography-cube LVM) + 0.6 g for Echo and the slice summation method for MRI. Eccentricity was determined by RWT (septal wall thickness + posterior wall thickness/left ventricular inner diameter) for Echo and LVM/1.05/left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) ratio [MRI-mass volume/cavity (M/C) ratio] for MRI. Left ventricular geometry was classified into four patterns according to the presence/absence of left ventricular hypertrophy and abnormal/normal eccentricity (partition value: RWT = 0.44, MRI; M/C ratio = 2.0), and the patient distribution was compared between the two methods.
Although the mean values for LVM were similar, the mean value for LVEDV by echocardiography was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and the mean M/C ratio was significantly lower (r = 0.004) than those by MRI. There were widely dispersed LVM values at higher underlying values of LVM and significant correlations between MRI-LVEDV and MRI-LVM (r = 0.87) and between Echo-LVEDV and Echo-LVM (r = 0.75). There was a significant difference in patient distribution according to left ventricular geometric pattern between the two methods (p < 0.01). Concentric (n = 18) and eccentric hypertrophy (n = 12) were dominant patterns in Echo analysis, and concentric hypertrophy (n = 23) and concentric remodeling (n = 21) were dominant in MRI analysis. The left ventricular geometric patterns were different in 32 patients (58.0%). Inadequate LVEDV values in Echo were the primary cause of this phenomenon.
Left ventricular geometric analysis by Echo results in inaccurate values. Three-dimensional left ventricular geometric analysis using MRI provides more accurate information about left ventricular geometry.
通过超声心动图(Echo)使用假定的左心室质量(LVM)和一维偏心度(相对室壁厚度:RWT)评估左心室几何形态的可靠性仍存在疑问。本研究评估了使用磁共振成像(MRI)进行三维左心室几何分析的可行性。
对55例高血压患者进行了超声心动图和MRI检查。使用0.8(美国超声心动图学会 - 立方LVM)+ 0.6 g计算Echo的LVM,使用切片求和法计算MRI的LVM。通过RWT(室间隔厚度 + 后壁厚度/左心室内径)确定Echo的偏心度,通过LVM/1.05/左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)比值[MRI质量容积/腔室(M/C)比值]确定MRI的偏心度。根据是否存在左心室肥厚和偏心度异常/正常(分界值:RWT = 0.44,MRI;M/C比值 = 2.0)将左心室几何形态分为四种模式,并比较两种方法之间的患者分布情况。
虽然LVM的平均值相似,但超声心动图的LVEDV平均值显著更高(p < 0.0001),MRI的平均M/C比值显著更低(r = 0.004)。在较高的基础LVM值时,LVM值分布广泛,MRI-LVEDV与MRI-LVM之间(r = 0.87)以及Echo-LVEDV与Echo-LVM之间(r = 0.75)存在显著相关性。两种方法根据左心室几何模式的患者分布存在显著差异(p < 0.01)。在Echo分析中,向心性(n = 18)和离心性肥厚(n = 12)是主要模式,在MRI分析中,向心性肥厚(n =