Jakobsen Carl-Johan, Torp Peter, Sloth Erik
Department of Anaesthesia & Intensive Care, Aarhus University Hospital, Skejby Sygehus, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2006 Jun;29(6):978-82. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2006.02.014. Epub 2006 May 3.
To evaluate the impact of different echocardiographic methods for assessment of left ventricular dysfunction on the predictive value of EuroSCORE and thus its reliability in daily practice and benchmarking.
Twenty-five recordings obtained by transthoracic echocardiography, optimal for study using four different echocardiographic methods, were examined and placed into relevant EuroSCORE classes. The four methods were eyeballing, Wall Motion Index, Simpson 2D volumetric method and Motion mode.
Bland and Altman plots showed that the three specific methods were not fully interchangeable. Using eyeballing as the key reference, only 44% of patients were placed in the same EuroSCORE class with all four methods. The quantitative echocardiographic methods in general overestimate the ejection fraction compared to eyeballing.
The left ventricular dysfunction factor in the EuroSCORE risk assessment system needs a more precise definition.
评估不同超声心动图方法评估左心室功能障碍对欧洲心脏手术风险评估系统（EuroSCORE）预测价值的影响，从而评估其在日常实践和基准测试中的可靠性。
对通过经胸超声心动图获得的25份记录进行检查，这些记录最适合使用四种不同的超声心动图方法进行研究，并将其归入相关的EuroSCORE类别。这四种方法分别是目测法、室壁运动指数、Simpson二维容积法和M型。
Bland和Altman图显示这三种特定方法并非完全可互换。以目测法作为主要参考，所有四种方法中只有44%的患者被归入相同的EuroSCORE类别。与目测法相比，一般来说定量超声心动图方法高估了射血分数。
EuroSCORE风险评估系统中的左心室功能障碍因素需要更精确的定义。
