Quantitative assessment of two- and three-dimensional transthoracic and two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in normal canine hearts.

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the study was to evaluate the accuracy of two- and three-dimensional (2D, 3D) transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), 2D transesophageal echocardiography, and computed tomography angiography (CTA) compared with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) in normal dogs and to assess repeatability of 2D and 3D TTE for the assessment of left ventricular (LV) and left atrial (LA) dimensions.

ANIMALS

The study was performed on six healthy dogs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Transthoracic echocardiography, transesophageal echocardiography, CTA, and CMR were performed on each dog. Right ventricular (RV) and LV volumes (in systole and diastole), ejection fraction (EF), and LA and right atrial (RA) volumes were assessed. Repeatability and intrarater and interrater measurements of variability were quantified by average coefficient of variation (CV) for 2D and 3D TTE.

RESULTS

No clinically relevant differences in LV volume were detected between CMR and all modalities. Importantly, 3D TTE had the lowest CV (6.45%), correlated with (r = 0.62, p = 0.01), and had the highest overlap in distribution with CMR (OVL >80%). Left ventricular EF and LA size via CTA compared best with CMR and RV and RA volumes were best estimated by 3D TTE. Assessment of LV and LA volumes via 3D TTE had moderate repeatability (15-21%) compared with LV M-mode measurements and 2D LA-to-aortic ratio (<10%), respectively. For LV size, interrater CV for 3D TTE (19.4%) was lower than 2D TTE (23.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Measurements of LV, RV, and RA volumes via 3D TTE and LA volume and LV EF assessed by CTA compared best with CMR. Three-dimensional echocardiography had lower interrater and intrarater CV compared with 2D TTE.