Suppr超能文献

心脏磁共振成像和放射性核素心室造影用于测量植入式心律转复除颤器候选者的左心室射血分数

Cardiac MRI and radionuclide ventriculography for measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction in ICD candidates.

作者信息

Kotha Vamshi K, Deva Djeven P, Connelly Kim A, Freeman Michael R, Yan Raymond T, Mangat Iqwal, Kirpalani Anish, Barfett Joseph J, Sloninko Joanna, Lin Hui Ming, Graham John J, Crean Andrew M, Jimenez-Juan Laura, Dorian Paul, Yan Andrew T

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada.

University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada; Department of Medical Imaging, St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Oct;52:69-74. doi: 10.1016/j.mri.2018.05.012. Epub 2018 May 31.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Current guidelines provide left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) criterion for use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) but do not specify which modality to use for measurement. We compared LVEF measurements by radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) vs cardiac MRI (CMR) in ICD candidates to assess impact on clinical decision making.

METHODS

This single-centre study included 124 consecutive patients referred for assessment of ICD implantation who underwent RNV and CMR within 30 days for LVEF measurement. RNV and CMR were interpreted independently by experienced readers.

RESULTS

Among 124 patients (age 64 ± 11 years, 77% male), median interval between CMR and RNV was 1 day; mean LVEF was 32 ± 12% by CMR and 33 ± 11% by RNV (p = 0.60). LVEF by CMR and RNV showed good correlation, but Bland-Altman analysis showed relatively wide limits of agreement (-12.1 to 11.4). CMR LVEF reclassified 26 (21%) patients compared to RNV LVEF (kappa = 0.58). LVEF by both modalities showed good interobserver reproducibility (ICC 0.96 and 0.94, respectively) (limits of agreement -7.27 to 5.75 and -8.63 to 6.34, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Although LVEF measurements by CMR and RNV show moderate agreement, there is frequent reclassification of patients for ICD placement based on LVEF between these modalities. Future studies should determine if a particular imaging modality for LVEF measurement may enhance ICD decision making and treatment benefit.

摘要

目的

当前指南提供了使用植入式心脏复律除颤器(ICD)的左心室射血分数(LVEF)标准,但未指定使用哪种方法进行测量。我们比较了ICD候选患者中放射性核素心室造影(RNV)与心脏磁共振成像(CMR)测量的LVEF,以评估其对临床决策的影响。

方法

这项单中心研究纳入了124例连续转诊接受ICD植入评估的患者,他们在30天内接受了RNV和CMR检查以测量LVEF。RNV和CMR由经验丰富的阅片者独立解读。

结果

在124例患者(年龄64±11岁,77%为男性)中,CMR和RNV之间的中位间隔时间为1天;CMR测得的平均LVEF为32±12%,RNV测得的为33±11%(p=0.60)。CMR和RNV测得的LVEF显示出良好的相关性,但Bland-Altman分析显示一致性界限相对较宽(-12.1至11.4)。与RNV测得的LVEF相比,CMR测得的LVEF使26例(21%)患者的分类发生了改变(kappa=0.58)。两种方法测得的LVEF均显示出良好的观察者间可重复性(组内相关系数分别为0.96和0.94)(一致性界限分别为-7.27至5.75和-8.63至6.34)。

结论

尽管CMR和RNV测得的LVEF显示出中等程度的一致性,但基于LVEF,这些方法之间对ICD植入患者的分类常有改变。未来的研究应确定用于测量LVEF的特定成像方法是否可改善ICD决策和治疗效益。

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