Second Department of Internal Medicine, University of Occupational and Environmental Health, School of Medicine, Kitakyushu, Japan.
Canon Medical Systems, Otawara, Japan.
PLoS One. 2019 Aug 30;14(8):e0221204. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0221204. eCollection 2019.
To determine whether the semi-automated two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) layer strain software, compared to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR), is reliable for left ventricular (LV) volume quantification.
We retrospectively selected 84 patients who underwent CMR and 2DE on the same day. Novel 2DE layer strain software automatically provides LV contour in 3 myocardial layers and performs layer specific speckle tracking analysis, which calculates LV volumes, ejection fraction (LVEF), and global longitudinal strain (GLS) in each layer. These values were compared with reference values from CMR disk-area summation and feature tracking methods. Coverage probability (CP) was determined using predefined cut-off values and absolute differences in LV volumes of 30 mL, those in LVEF of 10%, and those in GLS of 4%. The software did not work in 3 patients (feasibility: 96%). Different layers resulted in different degrees of under- or over-estimation of LV volumes. Epicardial tracking significantly overestimated the LV volumes and significantly underestimated LVEF and GLS. Mid-myocardial tracking had less underestimation of LV volumes and equivalent CP values of LVEF (0.77 vs. 0.75 using the disk-area summation method and 0.90 vs. 0.94 using the feature tracking method) and GLS (0.95 vs. 0.92) compared with endocardial tracking. The new software showed excellent reproducibility, especially endocardial and mid-myocardial tracking.
Mid-myocardial tracking with the novel 2DE strain software provided less bias of LV volumes with high CP values of LVEF and GLS, which suggests that mid-myocardial layer speckle tracking analysis approximates CMR derived LV functional parameters.
确定半自动二维超声心动图(2DE)层应变软件与心脏磁共振(CMR)相比,是否可用于左心室(LV)容量定量。
我们回顾性选择了 84 名同一天接受 CMR 和 2DE 的患者。新型 2DE 层应变软件可自动提供 3 个心肌层的 LV 轮廓,并进行层特异性斑点追踪分析,计算各层的 LV 容积、射血分数(LVEF)和整体纵向应变(GLS)。这些值与 CMR 盘面积求和和特征跟踪方法的参考值进行比较。使用预设的截止值和 LV 容积相差 30 毫升、LVEF 相差 10%、GLS 相差 4%的绝对值来确定覆盖率概率(CP)。软件在 3 名患者中无法正常工作(可行性:96%)。不同的层导致 LV 容积的低估或高估程度不同。心外膜追踪显著高估了 LV 容积,显著低估了 LVEF 和 GLS。中膜心肌追踪对 LV 容积的低估程度较小,LVEF(盘面积求和法为 0.77 与 0.75,特征跟踪法为 0.90 与 0.94)和 GLS(0.95 与 0.92)的 CP 值与心内膜追踪相当。新软件显示出良好的可重复性,尤其是心内膜和中膜追踪。
新型 2DE 应变软件的中膜心肌追踪提供了 LV 容积的较小偏差,LVEF 和 GLS 的 CP 值较高,这表明中膜层斑点追踪分析可近似 CMR 得出的 LV 功能参数。