Comparison of echocardiography with magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of the athlete's heart.

AIM

The purpose of the study was to compare the accuracy of M-mode echocardiography and two different two-dimensional echocardiographic approaches in the assessment of left ventricular mass and volumes in endurance-trained and strength-trained athletes, using magnetic resonance imaging as reference standard.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We studied 19 athletes and 10 untrained control subjects, M-mode and two-dimensional echocardiography were compared to magnetic resonance imaging. M-mode echocardiographic left ventricular mass was calculated using the Penn cube convention. Two-dimensional echocardiographic left ventricular mass was calculated using (1) the area-length method as proposed by the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) and (2) as proposed by Reichek. The best correlation between magnetic resonance imaging and echocardiographic left ventricular mass and volumes was observed with the ASE two-dimensional echocardiographic method. The agreement between them (-3.4 +/- 7.6 g and 18.5 +/- 19.5 ml) was better than between Reichek two-dimensional echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (-39.4 +/- 15.4-g and 52.8 +/- 21.7 ml), and demonstrated less random difference than M-mode echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (3.2 +/- 21.1 g resp. 15.1 +/- 30.0 ml).

CONCLUSION

We conclude that the ASE two-dimensional echocardiographic approach, when using magnetic resonance imaging as a reference standard, was the most accurate estimator of left ventricular mass and volumes in both controls and athletes.