International Centre for Circulatory Health, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, 59-61 North Wharf Road, London W2 1LA, UK
International Centre for Circulatory Health, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, 59-61 North Wharf Road, London W2 1LA, UK.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Jul;15(7):817-27. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jeu040. Epub 2014 Apr 2.
Variability has been described between different echo machines and different modalities when measuring tissue velocities. We assessed the consistency of tissue velocity measurements across different modalities and different manufacturers in an in vitro model and in patients. Furthermore, we present freely available software tools to repeat these evaluations.
We constructed a simple setup to generate reproducible motion and used it to compare velocities measured using three echocardiographic modalities: M-mode, speckle tracking, and tissue Doppler, with a straightforward, non-ultrasound, optical gold standard. In the clinical phase, 25 patients underwent M-mode, speckle tracking, and tissue Doppler measurements of s', e', and a' velocities. In vitro, the M-mode and speckle tracking velocities agreed with optical assessment. Of the three possible tissue Doppler measurement conventions (outer, middle, and inner edge) only the middle agreed with optical assessment (discrepancy -0.20 (95% CI -0.44 to 0.03) cm/s, P = 0.11, outer +5.19 (4.65 to 5.73) cm/s, P < 0.0001, inner -6.26 (-6.87 to -5.65) cm/s, P < 0.0001). A similar pattern occurred across all four studied manufacturers. M-mode was therefore chosen as the in vivo gold standard. Clinical measurements of s' velocities by speckle tracking and the middle line of the tissue Doppler showed concordance with M-mode, while the outer line overestimated significantly (+1.27(0.96 to 1.59) cm/s, P < 0.0001) and the inner line underestimated (-1.82 (-2.11 to -1.52) cm/s, P < 0.0001).
Echocardiographic velocity measurements can be more consistent than previously suspected. The statistically modal velocity, found at the centre of the spectral pulsed wave tissue Doppler envelope, most closely represents true tissue velocity. This article includes downloadable, vendor-independent software enabling calibration of echocardiographic machines using a simple, inexpensive in vitro setup.
在测量组织速度时,不同的超声仪器和不同的模式之间存在可变性。我们评估了在体外模型和患者中,不同模式和不同制造商的组织速度测量的一致性。此外,我们还提供了免费的软件工具来重复这些评估。
我们构建了一个简单的设置来产生可重复的运动,并使用它来比较三种超声心动图模式:M 模式、斑点追踪和组织多普勒,以及一种简单、非超声的光学金标准。在临床阶段,25 名患者接受了 M 模式、斑点追踪和组织多普勒测量 s'、e'和 a'速度。在体外,M 模式和斑点追踪速度与光学评估一致。在三种可能的组织多普勒测量方案(外、中、内边缘)中,只有中间与光学评估一致(差异-0.20(95%CI-0.44 至 0.03)cm/s,P=0.11,外+5.19(4.65 至 5.73)cm/s,P<0.0001,内-6.26(-6.87 至-5.65)cm/s,P<0.0001)。所有四个研究的制造商都出现了类似的模式。因此,M 模式被选为体内金标准。斑点追踪的 s'速度和组织多普勒的中间线的临床测量与 M 模式一致,而外边缘线显著高估(+1.27(0.96 至 1.59)cm/s,P<0.0001),内边缘线低估(-1.82(-2.11 至-1.52)cm/s,P<0.0001)。
超声心动图速度测量可能比以前怀疑的更一致。在频谱脉冲波组织多普勒包络的中心发现的统计模态速度最能代表真实的组织速度。本文包括可下载的、与供应商无关的软件,可使用简单、廉价的体外设置对超声心动图机进行校准。