基于平板电脑的单平面自动量化每搏容积和左心室射血分数:与基于计算机的双平面和单平面工具的比较评估。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS Echocardiography-A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques Pub Date : 2024-08-19 DOI:10.1111/echo.15904
Frederique M. de Raat MSc, Peter Bingley MSc, Sjoerd Bouwmeester MD, PhD, Suzanne E. A. Felix MD, PhD, Leon J. Montenij MD, PhD, Arthur R. Bouwman MD, PhD
{"title":"基于平板电脑的单平面自动量化每搏容积和左心室射血分数:与基于计算机的双平面和单平面工具的比较评估。","authors":"Frederique M. de Raat MSc,&nbsp;Peter Bingley MSc,&nbsp;Sjoerd Bouwmeester MD, PhD,&nbsp;Suzanne E. A. Felix MD, PhD,&nbsp;Leon J. Montenij MD, PhD,&nbsp;Arthur R. Bouwman MD, PhD","doi":"10.1111/echo.15904","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Point-of-care cardiovascular left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) quantification is established, but automatic tablet-based stroke volume (SV) quantification with handheld ultrasound (HAND) devices is unexplored. We evaluated a tablet-based monoplane LVEF and LV volume quantification tool (AutoEF) against a computer-based tool (Tomtec) for LVEF and SV quantification.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>Patients underwent HAND scans, and LVEF and SV were quantified using AutoEF and computer-based software that utilized either apical four-chamber views (Auto Strain-monoplane [AS-mono]) or both apical four-chamber and apical two-chamber views (Auto Strain-biplane [AS-bi]). Correlation and Bland–Altman analysis were used to compare AutoEF with AS-mono and AS-bi.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Out of 43 participants, eight were excluded. AutoEF showed a correlation of .83 [.69:.91] with AS-mono for LVEF and .68 [.44:.82] for SV. The correlation with AS-bi was .79 [.62:.89] for LVEF and .66 [.42:.81] for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-mono was 4.88% [3.15:6.61] for LVEF and 17.46 mL [12.99:21.92] for SV. The limits of agreement (LOA) were [−5.50:15.26]% for LVEF and [−8.02:42.94] mL for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-bi was 6.63% [5.31:7.94] for LVEF and 20.62 mL [16.18:25.05] for SV, with LOA of [−1.20:14.47]% for LVEF and [−4.71:45.94] mL for SV.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>LVEF quantification with AutoEF software was accurate and reliable, but SV quantification showed limitations, indicating non-interchangeability with neither AS-mono nor AS-bi. Further refinement of AutoEF is needed for reliable SV quantification at the point of care.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50558,"journal":{"name":"Echocardiography-A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques","volume":"41 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/echo.15904","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automatic tablet-based monoplane quantification of stroke volume and left ventricular ejection fraction: A comparative assessment against computer-based biplane and monoplane tools\",\"authors\":\"Frederique M. de Raat MSc,&nbsp;Peter Bingley MSc,&nbsp;Sjoerd Bouwmeester MD, PhD,&nbsp;Suzanne E. A. Felix MD, PhD,&nbsp;Leon J. Montenij MD, PhD,&nbsp;Arthur R. Bouwman MD, PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/echo.15904\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Point-of-care cardiovascular left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) quantification is established, but automatic tablet-based stroke volume (SV) quantification with handheld ultrasound (HAND) devices is unexplored. We evaluated a tablet-based monoplane LVEF and LV volume quantification tool (AutoEF) against a computer-based tool (Tomtec) for LVEF and SV quantification.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients underwent HAND scans, and LVEF and SV were quantified using AutoEF and computer-based software that utilized either apical four-chamber views (Auto Strain-monoplane [AS-mono]) or both apical four-chamber and apical two-chamber views (Auto Strain-biplane [AS-bi]). Correlation and Bland–Altman analysis were used to compare AutoEF with AS-mono and AS-bi.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Out of 43 participants, eight were excluded. AutoEF showed a correlation of .83 [.69:.91] with AS-mono for LVEF and .68 [.44:.82] for SV. The correlation with AS-bi was .79 [.62:.89] for LVEF and .66 [.42:.81] for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-mono was 4.88% [3.15:6.61] for LVEF and 17.46 mL [12.99:21.92] for SV. The limits of agreement (LOA) were [−5.50:15.26]% for LVEF and [−8.02:42.94] mL for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-bi was 6.63% [5.31:7.94] for LVEF and 20.62 mL [16.18:25.05] for SV, with LOA of [−1.20:14.47]% for LVEF and [−4.71:45.94] mL for SV.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>LVEF quantification with AutoEF software was accurate and reliable, but SV quantification showed limitations, indicating non-interchangeability with neither AS-mono nor AS-bi. Further refinement of AutoEF is needed for reliable SV quantification at the point of care.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Echocardiography-A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques\",\"volume\":\"41 8\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/echo.15904\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Echocardiography-A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/echo.15904\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Echocardiography-A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/echo.15904","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:护理点心血管左心室射血分数(LVEF)定量已经确立,但使用手持超声(HAND)设备进行基于平板的自动搏出量(SV)定量尚未探索。我们对基于平板的单平面 LVEF 和 LV 容积量化工具(AutoEF)与基于计算机的 LVEF 和 SV 量化工具(Tomtec)进行了评估:患者接受 HAND 扫描,使用 AutoEF 和基于计算机的软件量化 LVEF 和 SV,该软件使用心尖四腔切面(Auto Strain-monoplane [AS-mono])或心尖四腔和心尖两腔切面(Auto Strain-biplane [AS-bi])。使用相关性分析和Bland-Altman分析比较AutoEF与AS-mono和AS-bi:在 43 名参与者中,有 8 人被排除在外。AutoEF与AS-mono的LVEF相关性为0.83[.69:.91],与AS-bi的SV相关性为0.68[.44:.82]。LVEF与AS-bi的相关性为0.79[.62:.89],SV为0.66[.42:.81]。对于 LVEF,AutoEF 与 AS-mono 之间的偏差为 4.88% [3.15:6.61];对于 SV,AutoEF 与 AS-mono 之间的偏差为 17.46 mL [12.99:21.92]。LVEF和SV的一致性极限(LOA)分别为[-5.50:15.26]%和[-8.02:42.94]毫升。AutoEF 和 AS-bi 之间的偏差为:LVEF 为 6.63% [5.31:7.94] mL,SV 为 20.62 mL [16.18:25.05] mL,LVEF 的 LOA 为 [-1.20:14.47]% ,SV 的 LOA 为 [-4.71:45.94] mL:结论:使用AutoEF软件进行LVEF定量准确可靠,但SV定量存在局限性,表明与AS-mono或AS-bi均不可互换。需要进一步改进 AutoEF 软件,以便在护理点进行可靠的 SV 定量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Automatic tablet-based monoplane quantification of stroke volume and left ventricular ejection fraction: A comparative assessment against computer-based biplane and monoplane tools

Background

Point-of-care cardiovascular left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) quantification is established, but automatic tablet-based stroke volume (SV) quantification with handheld ultrasound (HAND) devices is unexplored. We evaluated a tablet-based monoplane LVEF and LV volume quantification tool (AutoEF) against a computer-based tool (Tomtec) for LVEF and SV quantification.

Methods

Patients underwent HAND scans, and LVEF and SV were quantified using AutoEF and computer-based software that utilized either apical four-chamber views (Auto Strain-monoplane [AS-mono]) or both apical four-chamber and apical two-chamber views (Auto Strain-biplane [AS-bi]). Correlation and Bland–Altman analysis were used to compare AutoEF with AS-mono and AS-bi.

Results

Out of 43 participants, eight were excluded. AutoEF showed a correlation of .83 [.69:.91] with AS-mono for LVEF and .68 [.44:.82] for SV. The correlation with AS-bi was .79 [.62:.89] for LVEF and .66 [.42:.81] for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-mono was 4.88% [3.15:6.61] for LVEF and 17.46 mL [12.99:21.92] for SV. The limits of agreement (LOA) were [−5.50:15.26]% for LVEF and [−8.02:42.94] mL for SV. The bias between AutoEF and AS-bi was 6.63% [5.31:7.94] for LVEF and 20.62 mL [16.18:25.05] for SV, with LOA of [−1.20:14.47]% for LVEF and [−4.71:45.94] mL for SV.

Conclusion

LVEF quantification with AutoEF software was accurate and reliable, but SV quantification showed limitations, indicating non-interchangeability with neither AS-mono nor AS-bi. Further refinement of AutoEF is needed for reliable SV quantification at the point of care.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
6.70%
发文量
211
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Echocardiography: A Journal of Cardiovascular Ultrasound and Allied Techniques is the official publication of the International Society of Cardiovascular Ultrasound. Widely recognized for its comprehensive peer-reviewed articles, case studies, original research, and reviews by international authors. Echocardiography keeps its readership of echocardiographers, ultrasound specialists, and cardiologists well informed of the latest developments in the field.
期刊最新文献
Multimodality Imaging in Chronic Constrictive Pericarditis. Advancements in Cardiac CT Imaging: The Era of Artificial Intelligence Incidental Finding of a Myxoma of Unusual Location in an Elderly Patient Multimodal Intravascular Imaging of the Vulnerable Coronary Plaque A Novel 2D Echo View to Determine Right Ventricular Lead Position on the Tricuspid Valve Level
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1