Suppr超能文献

超声心动图目测法与放射性核素定量法测定左心室射血分数的比较及可重复性

Comparison and reproducibility of visual echocardiographic and quantitative radionuclide left ventricular ejection fractions.

作者信息

van Royen N, Jaffe C C, Krumholz H M, Johnson K M, Lynch P J, Natale D, Atkinson P, Deman P, Wackers F J

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA.

出版信息

Am J Cardiol. 1996 Apr 15;77(10):843-50. doi: 10.1016/s0002-9149(97)89179-5.

Abstract

Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) is commonly assessed by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and echocardiography. These methods are presumed to be interchangeable for this purpose. This study (1) compares quantification of LVEF by equilibrium radionuclide angiography with visual estimation of LVEF by echocardiography, (2) determines the reproducibility of both methods, and (3) evaluates whether differences in determinations of LVEF are of clinical relevance. Seventy-three clinically stable patients had both equilibrium radionuclide angiography and echocardiography performed within a 4-day period. LVEF by both techniques was compared after blinded analysis by 3 echocardiographers and 3 nuclear technologists. Reproducibility was assessed by blinded repeat analysis after a 1-week interval. The frequency of differences in repeat assessments of EF that the authors considered to be of potential clinical relevance (i.e., difference > or = 10% EF units) was assessed for both techniques. Correlation of LVEF determined by both methods was good (r = 0.81, SEE = 3.5) but with substantial differences in individual patients (limits of agreement, 23.6%). Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was good for both methods, but better for radionuclide LVEF than for echocardiographic LVEF. Limits of agreement were substantially better for radionuclide LVEF than for echocardiographic LVEF (1.8% to 3.6% versus 13.4% to 17.4%, respectively). Clinically relevant differences did not occur on repeat processing of equilibrium radionuclide angiography. In contrast, potentially clinically relevant differences occurred in 8% to 26% of studies on repeat analysis of echocardiography. Thus, LVEF determined by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and echocardiography show good agreement. Both methods provide clinically valuable measurements for LV function. However, when a precisely reproducible measurement is required for patient management decisions, equilibrium radionuclide angiography is the method of choice.

摘要

左心室(LV)射血分数(EF)通常通过平衡放射性核素血管造影和超声心动图进行评估。一般认为这两种方法在此用途上是可互换的。本研究(1)比较平衡放射性核素血管造影对左心室射血分数的定量与超声心动图对左心室射血分数的目测估计,(2)确定两种方法的可重复性,以及(3)评估左心室射血分数测定结果的差异是否具有临床相关性。73例临床稳定的患者在4天内同时接受了平衡放射性核素血管造影和超声心动图检查。由3名超声心动图医师和3名核医学技术人员在盲法分析后比较了两种技术测得的左心室射血分数。在间隔1周后通过盲法重复分析评估可重复性。对两种技术均评估了作者认为可能具有临床相关性的射血分数重复评估差异的频率(即差异≥10% EF单位)。两种方法测定的左心室射血分数相关性良好(r = 0.81,标准误 = 3.5),但个体患者存在显著差异(一致性界限,23.6%)。两种方法的观察者内和观察者间可重复性均良好,但放射性核素左心室射血分数的可重复性优于超声心动图左心室射血分数。放射性核素左心室射血分数的一致性界限明显优于超声心动图左心室射血分数(分别为1.8%至3.6%对13.4%至17.4%)。平衡放射性核素血管造影重复检查时未出现具有临床相关性的差异。相比之下,超声心动图重复分析的研究中有8%至26%出现了可能具有临床相关性的差异。因此,平衡放射性核素血管造影和超声心动图测定的左心室射血分数显示出良好的一致性。两种方法都为左心室功能提供了具有临床价值的测量。然而,当患者管理决策需要精确可重复的测量时,平衡放射性核素血管造影是首选方法。

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