Gopal A S, Keller A M, Shen Z, Sapin P M, Schroeder K M, King D L, King D L
Columbia University, Division of Cardiology, New York, New York 10032.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 1994 Aug;24(2):504-13. doi: 10.1016/0735-1097(94)90310-7.
This study aimed to validate a method for mass computation in vitro and in vivo and to compare it with conventional methods.
Conventional echocardiographic methods of determining left ventricular mass are limited by assumptions of ventricular geometry and image plane positioning. To improve accuracy, we developed a three-dimensional echocardiographic method that uses nonparallel, nonintersecting short-axis planes and a polyhedral surface reconstruction algorithm for mass computation.
Eleven fixed hearts were imaged by three-dimensional echocardiography, and mass was determined in vitro by multiplying the myocardial volume by the density of each heart and comparing it with the true mass. Mass at diastole and systole by three-dimensional echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was compared in vivo in 15 normal subjects. Ten subjects also underwent imaging by one- and two-dimensional echocardiography, and mass was determined by Penn convention, area-length and truncated ellipsoid algorithms.
In vitro results were r = 0.995, SEE 2.91 g, accuracy 3.47%. In vivo interobserver variability for systole and diastole was 16.7% to 27%, 14% to 18.1% and 6.3% to 12.8%, respectively, for one-, two- and three-dimensional echocardiography and was 7.5% for MRI at end-diastole. The latter two agreed closely with regard to diastolic mass (r = 0.895, SEE 11.1 g) and systolic mass (r = 0.926, SEE 9.2 g). These results were significantly better than correlations between MRI and the Penn convention (r = 0.725, SEE 25.6 g for diastole; r = 0.788, SEE 28.7 g for systole), area-length (r = 0.694, SEE 24.2 g for diastole; r = 0.717, SEE 28.2 g for systole) and truncated ellipsoid algorithms (r = 0.687, SEE 21.8 g for diastole; r = 0.710, SEE 24.5 g for systole).
Image plane positioning guidance and elimination of geometric assumptions by three-dimensional echocardiography achieve high accuracy for left ventricular mass determination in vitro. It is associated with higher correlations and lower standard errors than conventional methods in vivo.
本研究旨在验证一种体外和体内质量计算方法,并将其与传统方法进行比较。
传统超声心动图测定左心室质量的方法受心室几何形状和图像平面定位假设的限制。为提高准确性,我们开发了一种三维超声心动图方法,该方法使用不平行、不相交的短轴平面和多面体表面重建算法进行质量计算。
对11颗固定心脏进行三维超声心动图成像,通过将心肌体积乘以每颗心脏的密度来体外测定质量,并与真实质量进行比较。在15名正常受试者体内比较三维超声心动图和磁共振成像(MRI)在舒张期和收缩期的质量。10名受试者还接受了一维和二维超声心动图成像,并通过Penn惯例、面积-长度和截断椭球体算法测定质量。
体外结果为r = 0.995,标准估计误差(SEE)为2.91 g,准确度为3.47%。在体内,对于收缩期和舒张期,一维、二维和三维超声心动图的观察者间变异性分别为16.7%至27%、14%至18.1%和6.3%至12.8%,舒张期末期MRI的观察者间变异性为7.5%。后两者在舒张期质量(r = 0.895,SEE 11.1 g)和收缩期质量(r = 0.926,SEE 9.2 g)方面高度一致。这些结果明显优于MRI与Penn惯例(舒张期r =
0.725,SEE 25.6 g;收缩期r = 0.788,SEE 28.7 g)及面积-长度(舒张期r = 0.694,SEE 24.2 g;收缩期r = 0.717,SEE 28.2 g)和截断椭球体算法(舒张期r = 0.687,SEE 21.8 g;收缩期r = 0.710,SEE 24.5 g)之间的相关性。
三维超声心动图的图像平面定位引导和几何假设的消除在体外测定左心室质量时可实现高精度。与传统方法相比,它在体内具有更高的相关性和更低的标准误差。