Duncan Rae F, Dundon Ben K, Nelson Adam J, Pemberton James, Williams Kerry, Worthley Matthew I, Zaman Azfar, Thomas Honey, Worthley Stephen G
Cardiovascular Research Centre, Royal Adelaide Hospital and University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Echocardiography. 2011 Jul;28(6):597-604. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-8175.2011.01394.x. Epub 2011 Jul 1.
Accurate calculation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is important for diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic reasons. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is the reference standard for LVEF calculation, followed by real time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE). Limited availability of CMR and RT3DE leaves Simpson's rule as the two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) standard by which LVEF is calculated. We investigated the accuracy of the 16-Segment Regional Wall Motion Score Index (RWMSI) as an alternative method for calculating LVEF by 2DE and compared this to Simpson's rule and CMR.
The 2D echocardiograms of 110 patients were studied (LVEF range: 7-74%); 57 of these underwent CMR. A RWMS was applied, based on the consensus opinion of two experienced cardiologists, to each of 16 American Heart Association myocardial segments (RWMSI: hyperkinesis = 3; normal regional contraction = 2; mild hypokinesis = 1.25; severe hypokinesis = 0.75; akinesis = 0; dyskinesis =-1). LVEF was calculated by: LVEF(%) =Σ(16segRWMS)/16×30. LVEF was calculated by Simpson's rule and CMR using standard methods. Results were correlated against CMR. Intertechnique agreement was examined. A P value of<0.05 was considered significant. RWMSI-LVEF correlated strongly with Biplane Simpson's rule (P< 0.001, r = 0.915). RWMSI-LVEF had a strong correlation to CMR (P < 0.001, r = 0.916); Simpson's rule-LVEF had a moderate correlation to CMR (P< 0.001, r = 0.647). In patients with LV dysfunction (EF < 55%), on linear regression analysis, RWMSI-LVEF had a better correlation with CMR than Simpson's rule. Further more Simpson's rule overestimated LVEF compared to CMR (mean difference: -6.12 ± 16.44, P = 0.002) whereas RWMSI did not (mean difference: 2.58 ± 14.80, P = NS).
RWMSI-LVEF correlates strongly with CMR with good intertechnique agreement. In centers where CMR and RT3DE are not readily available, the use by experienced individuals, of the RWMSI for calculating LVEF may be a more simple, accurate, and reliable alternative to Simpson's rule.
由于诊断、预后和治疗方面的原因,准确计算左心室射血分数(LVEF)很重要。心脏磁共振成像(CMR)是计算LVEF的参考标准,其次是实时三维超声心动图(RT3DE)。CMR和RT3DE的可用性有限,使得Simpson法则成为二维超声心动图(2DE)计算LVEF的标准方法。我们研究了16节段室壁运动评分指数(RWMSI)作为通过2DE计算LVEF的替代方法的准确性,并将其与Simpson法则和CMR进行比较。
研究了110例患者的二维超声心动图(LVEF范围:7% - 74%);其中57例接受了CMR检查。根据两位经验丰富的心脏病专家的共识意见,对美国心脏协会的16个心肌节段分别应用室壁运动评分(RWMSI:运动增强 = 3;正常节段收缩 = 2;轻度运动减弱 = 1.25;重度运动减弱 = 0.75;运动消失 = 0;运动障碍 = -1)。LVEF通过以下公式计算:LVEF(%)=Σ(16节段RWMS)/16×30。使用标准方法通过Simpson法则和CMR计算LVEF。将结果与CMR进行相关性分析。检查不同技术之间的一致性。P值<0.05被认为具有统计学意义。RWMSI-LVEF与双平面Simpson法则密切相关(P<0.001,r = 0.915)。RWMSI-LVEF与CMR高度相关(P < 0.001,r = 0.916);Simpson法则-LVEF与CMR中度相关(P<0.001,r = 0.647)。在左心室功能不全(EF < 55%)的患者中,在线性回归分析中,RWMSI-LVEF与CMR的相关性优于Simpson法则。此外,与CMR相比,Simpson法则高估了LVEF(平均差异:-6.12 ± 16.44,P = 0.002),而RWMSI没有(平均差异:2.58 ± 14.80,P = 无统计学意义)。
RWMSI-LVEF与CMR密切相关,不同技术之间具有良好的一致性。在无法轻易获得CMR和RT3DE的中心,经验丰富的人员使用RWMSI计算LVEF可能是比Simpson法则更简单、准确和可靠的替代方法。