{"title":"经胸三维超声心动图评估风湿性二尖瓣狭窄患者二尖瓣面积的可重复性:实时与ecg门控三维超声心动图对比","authors":"Nidhal Bouchahda, Marwa Jarraya, Yessine Kallala, Ghada Sassi, Mehdi Boussaada, Mouna Bader, Marwen Mahjoub, Hassen Haj, Imen Zemni, Fethi Betbout, Habib Gamra, Majed Hassine, Mejdi Ben Messaoud","doi":"10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess reproducibility of Real time 3D echocardiography (RT3D) and ECG-gated 3D echocardiography (EG3D) when measuring the mitral valve area (MVA) in rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MVA was assessed by three operators in 68 MS patients using RT3D and EG3D. Reproducibility of each technique was determined by calculating the standard error of measurements (SEM).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>SEM was similar between RT3D and EG3D. MVA variability was of 0.4 cm² or 30% of any RT3D or EG3D measured MVA. The minimal change in MVA above which two measurements should be considered to differ significantly for the same operator was of 0.4 cm² for RT3D and 0.5 cm² for EG3D. For two different operators making successive measurements, the minimum significant change was of 0.5 cm² for RT3D and 0.6 cm² for EG3D. The minimum significant difference when switching from RT3D to EG3D or vice versa is of 0.6 cm². Low temporal resolution of 6 Hz has the least variability when using RT3D (0.19 cm² vs. 0.26 cm², p = 0.009) but significantly underestimated MVA (1.3 ± 0.4 cm² vs. 1.4 ± 0.4 cm², p < 10<sup>- 3</sup>) when compared to EG3D. MVA variability was significantly higher in mild MS when compared to severe MS whether it is RT3D (0.23 cm² vs. 0.18 cm², p = 0.02) or EG3D (0.27 cm² vs. 0.16 cm², p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RT3D and EG3D are equally reproducible in the assessment of MVA in patients with MS. Further measurements standardization is required to have a clinically acceptable estimations of the true 3D MVA and minimal detectable differences.</p>","PeriodicalId":50332,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging","volume":" ","pages":"2419-2426"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reproducibility of transthoracic 3D echocardiography in the assessment of mitral valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis: real time versus ECG-gated 3D echocardiography.\",\"authors\":\"Nidhal Bouchahda, Marwa Jarraya, Yessine Kallala, Ghada Sassi, Mehdi Boussaada, Mouna Bader, Marwen Mahjoub, Hassen Haj, Imen Zemni, Fethi Betbout, Habib Gamra, Majed Hassine, Mejdi Ben Messaoud\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To assess reproducibility of Real time 3D echocardiography (RT3D) and ECG-gated 3D echocardiography (EG3D) when measuring the mitral valve area (MVA) in rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>MVA was assessed by three operators in 68 MS patients using RT3D and EG3D. Reproducibility of each technique was determined by calculating the standard error of measurements (SEM).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>SEM was similar between RT3D and EG3D. MVA variability was of 0.4 cm² or 30% of any RT3D or EG3D measured MVA. The minimal change in MVA above which two measurements should be considered to differ significantly for the same operator was of 0.4 cm² for RT3D and 0.5 cm² for EG3D. For two different operators making successive measurements, the minimum significant change was of 0.5 cm² for RT3D and 0.6 cm² for EG3D. The minimum significant difference when switching from RT3D to EG3D or vice versa is of 0.6 cm². Low temporal resolution of 6 Hz has the least variability when using RT3D (0.19 cm² vs. 0.26 cm², p = 0.009) but significantly underestimated MVA (1.3 ± 0.4 cm² vs. 1.4 ± 0.4 cm², p < 10<sup>- 3</sup>) when compared to EG3D. MVA variability was significantly higher in mild MS when compared to severe MS whether it is RT3D (0.23 cm² vs. 0.18 cm², p = 0.02) or EG3D (0.27 cm² vs. 0.16 cm², p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>RT3D and EG3D are equally reproducible in the assessment of MVA in patients with MS. Further measurements standardization is required to have a clinically acceptable estimations of the true 3D MVA and minimal detectable differences.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50332,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2419-2426\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reproducibility of transthoracic 3D echocardiography in the assessment of mitral valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis: real time versus ECG-gated 3D echocardiography.
Purpose: To assess reproducibility of Real time 3D echocardiography (RT3D) and ECG-gated 3D echocardiography (EG3D) when measuring the mitral valve area (MVA) in rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS).
Methods: MVA was assessed by three operators in 68 MS patients using RT3D and EG3D. Reproducibility of each technique was determined by calculating the standard error of measurements (SEM).
Results: SEM was similar between RT3D and EG3D. MVA variability was of 0.4 cm² or 30% of any RT3D or EG3D measured MVA. The minimal change in MVA above which two measurements should be considered to differ significantly for the same operator was of 0.4 cm² for RT3D and 0.5 cm² for EG3D. For two different operators making successive measurements, the minimum significant change was of 0.5 cm² for RT3D and 0.6 cm² for EG3D. The minimum significant difference when switching from RT3D to EG3D or vice versa is of 0.6 cm². Low temporal resolution of 6 Hz has the least variability when using RT3D (0.19 cm² vs. 0.26 cm², p = 0.009) but significantly underestimated MVA (1.3 ± 0.4 cm² vs. 1.4 ± 0.4 cm², p < 10- 3) when compared to EG3D. MVA variability was significantly higher in mild MS when compared to severe MS whether it is RT3D (0.23 cm² vs. 0.18 cm², p = 0.02) or EG3D (0.27 cm² vs. 0.16 cm², p < 0.001).
Conclusion: RT3D and EG3D are equally reproducible in the assessment of MVA in patients with MS. Further measurements standardization is required to have a clinically acceptable estimations of the true 3D MVA and minimal detectable differences.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging publishes technical and clinical communications (original articles, review articles and editorial comments) associated with cardiovascular diseases. The technical communications include the research, development and evaluation of novel imaging methods in the various imaging domains. These domains include magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, X-ray imaging, intravascular imaging, and applications in nuclear cardiology and echocardiography, and any combination of these techniques. Of particular interest are topics in medical image processing and image-guided interventions. Clinical applications of such imaging techniques include improved diagnostic approaches, treatment , prognosis and follow-up of cardiovascular patients. Topics include: multi-center or larger individual studies dealing with risk stratification and imaging utilization, applications for better characterization of cardiovascular diseases, and assessment of the efficacy of new drugs and interventional devices.