Suppr超能文献

左心室射血分数保留患者超声心动图评估心脏指数的准确性

Accuracy of Echocardiographic Cardiac Index Assessment in Subjects with Preserved Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction.

作者信息

Maeder Micha T, Karapanagiotidis Sofie, Dewar Elizabeth M, Kaye David M

机构信息

Heart Failure Research Group, Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

Heart Center, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

出版信息

Echocardiography. 2015 Nov;32(11):1628-38. doi: 10.1111/echo.12928. Epub 2015 Mar 1.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to determine the accuracy of the echocardiographic assessment of cardiac index (CI) in subjects with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

METHODS

Thirty-three subjects with LVEF >50%, normal sinus rhythm, and a broad spectrum of hemodynamic profiles underwent echocardiography immediately followed by right heart catheterization. As gold standards, CI was assessed using thermodilution [CI (TD)] and the Fick method [CI (F)]. Echocardiographic CI was assessed by four methods: from the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) velocity time integral and the LVOT diameter as measured [CI (LVOTm)] as well as estimated from body surface area [CI (LVOTe)], and from stroke volume indices assessed using the biplane [CI (BP)] and monoplane [CI (MP)] methods.

RESULTS

The mean CI (TD), CI (F), CI (LVOTm), CI (LVOTe), CI (BP), and CI (MP) were 3.0 ± 0.9, 3.1 ± 0.7, 2.8 ± 0.6, 3.3 ± 0.6, 2.0 ± 0.6, and 2.2 ± 0.7 L/min/m(2) . There were modest correlations between CI (TD) and CI (F) and all four noninvasive measures of CI with r(2) values ranging from 0.09 to 0.30. CI (LVOTm) underestimated CI (TD) and CI (F) by 0.3 and 0.3 L/min/m(2) , CI (LVOTe) overestimated CI (TD) and CI (F) by 0.3 and 0.2 L/min/m(2) , and CI (BP) and CI (MP) underestimated CI (TD) and CI (F) by 1.1 and 1.1 L/min/m(2) and 0.9 and 0.9 L/min/m(2) , respectively, with large limits of agreement for all comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with nondilated left ventricles with preserved LVEF, flow- or volume-based measures of CI by 2D echocardiography may not accurately reflect CI (TD) and CI (F). Further larger studies are required to verify our findings and to evaluate the accuracy of contrast and 3D echocardiography in this setting.

摘要

引言

我们旨在确定超声心动图评估左心室射血分数(LVEF)保留患者心脏指数(CI)的准确性。

方法

33例LVEF>50%、窦性心律正常且血流动力学特征广泛的患者接受了超声心动图检查,随后立即进行右心导管检查。作为金标准,使用热稀释法[CI(TD)]和Fick法[CI(F)]评估CI。通过四种方法评估超声心动图CI:根据测量的左心室流出道(LVOT)速度时间积分和LVOT直径[CI(LVOTm)],以及根据体表面积估算[CI(LVOTe)],以及使用双平面[CI(BP)]和单平面[CI(MP)]方法评估的每搏量指数。

结果

CI(TD)、CI(F)、CI(LVOTm)、CI(LVOTe)、CI(BP)和CI(MP)的平均值分别为3.0±0.9、3.1±0.7、2.8±0.6、3.3±0.6、2.0±0.6和2.2±0.7L/min/m²。CI(TD)与CI(F)以及所有四种CI的非侵入性测量之间存在适度相关性,r²值范围为0.09至0.30。CI(LVOTm)分别低估CI(TD)和CI(F)0.3和0.3L/min/m²,CI(LVOTe)分别高估CI(TD)和CI(F)0.3和0.2L/min/m²,CI(BP)和CI(MP)分别低估CI(TD)和CI(F)1.1和1.1L/min/m²以及0.9和0.9L/min/m²,所有比较的一致性界限都很大。

结论

在左心室未扩张且LVEF保留的患者中,二维超声心动图基于流量或容积的CI测量可能无法准确反映CI(TD)和CI(F)。需要进一步的大型研究来验证我们的发现,并评估在此情况下造影剂和三维超声心动图的准确性。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验