Spitzer E, Pavo N, Abdelghani M, Beitzke D, Ren B, García-Ruiz V, Goliasch G, Gottsauner-Wolf M, Kaneider A, Garcia-Garcia H M, Soliman O I I, Wolf F, Loewe C
Thoraxcenter, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Cardialysis, Clinical Trial Management & Core Laboratories, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Internal Medicine II, Division of Cardiology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Radiography (Lond). 2018 Nov;24(4):e85-e90. doi: 10.1016/j.radi.2018.04.007. Epub 2018 May 5.
Multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) is an accurate tool for the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, in order to reduce radiation dose, prospective acquisition protocols are currently used, in which the end-systole and end-diastole are not scanned. Our aim was to study the accuracy of the assessment of LVEF using fixed late-systolic and mid-diastolic cardiac phases compared with echocardiography.
MSCT-derived LVEF was measured with off-line commercially available software packages, and compared with echocardiography-derived LVEF using the Simpson's method. LVEF was categorized as normal vs. abnormal (50% cut-off) and was also analyzed as a quantitative parameter. Bland-Altman plots and Pearson correlations were used for inter-technique comparisons.
58 patients were included. The sensitivity and specificity of fixed-phase MSCT when compared with echocardiography for detection of LVEF ≤50% was 79% (95% CI = 65-89%) and 43% (10-82%). Misclassification was associated with older age (68 ± 12 vs. 54 ± 13 years, p < 0.01), faster heart rate (79 ± 14 vs. 68 ± 10 bpm, p = 0.01), and LV hypertrophy (86% vs. 52%, p = 0.03). The quantitative comparison revealed no correlation (r = 0.095, p = 0.478) and a significantly different LVEF (median[IQR], 57.0[50.5-63.1]% vs. 61.0[57.3-64.3]%, p = 0.03). The observed bias between the two methods was -3.7% with broad limits of agreement (±25.5%).
Fixed-phase MSCT assessment using late-systole and mid-diastole agreed in defining normal and abnormal LVEF in 76% of patients when compared with echocardiography. Quantitation of LVEF by this method yielded significantly lower values of LVEF and showed no correlation. Thus, accurate quantitation of LVEF by MSCT requires the acquisition of end-systolic and end-diastolic phases.
多层螺旋计算机断层扫描(MSCT)是评估左心室射血分数(LVEF)的一种准确工具。然而,为了降低辐射剂量,目前采用前瞻性采集方案,在此方案中不扫描收缩末期和舒张末期。我们的目的是研究与超声心动图相比,使用固定的收缩晚期和舒张中期心脏相位评估LVEF的准确性。
使用离线商业软件包测量MSCT得出的LVEF,并与使用辛普森法则得出的超声心动图LVEF进行比较。LVEF分为正常与异常(临界值为50%),并作为定量参数进行分析。采用布兰德-奥特曼图和皮尔逊相关性进行技术间比较。
纳入58例患者。固定相位MSCT与超声心动图相比检测LVEF≤50%的敏感性和特异性分别为79%(95%CI=65-89%)和43%(10-82%)。错误分类与年龄较大(68±12岁vs.54±13岁,p<0.01)、心率较快(79±14次/分钟vs.68±10次/分钟,p=0.01)和左心室肥厚(86%vs.52%,p=0.03)有关。定量比较显示无相关性(r=0.095,p=0.478),且LVEF有显著差异(中位数[四分位间距],57.0[50.5-63.1]%vs.61.0[57.3-64.3]%,p=0.03)。两种方法之间观察到的偏差为-3.7%,一致性界限较宽(±25.5%)。
与超声心动图相比,使用收缩晚期和舒张中期的固定相位MSCT评估在76%的患者中对正常和异常LVEF的定义是一致的。通过这种方法对LVEF进行定量得出的LVEF值显著较低且无相关性。因此,通过MSCT准确定量LVEF需要采集收缩末期和舒张末期相位。