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.
Echocardiography
Four-Dimensional
Mitral valve stenosis
Journal
The international journal of cardiovascular imaging
ISSN: 1875-8312
Titre abrégé: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100969716
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Dec 2023
Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
14
02
2023
accepted:
18
08
2023
medline:
4
12
2023
pubmed:
4
9
2023
entrez:
2
9
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
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). 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). 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 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.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37658988
doi: 10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2
pii: 10.1007/s10554-023-02939-2
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2419-2426Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.
Références
Sebag IA, Morgan JG, Handschumacher MD, Marshall JE, Nesta F, Hung J et al (2005) Usefulness of three-dimensionally guided Assessment of mitral stenosis using matrix-array Ultrasound. Am J Cardiol 96:1151–1156
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.06.046
pubmed: 16214455
Cordeiro P, Sugeng L, Isla LP, De, Weinert L, Macaya C, Rodrı E et al (2004) Real-time Three-Dimensional Echocardiography for rheumatic mitral valve stenosis evaluation an Accurate and Novel Approach. J Am Coll Cardiol 43(11):2091–2096
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.01.046
pubmed: 15172418
Lang RM, Badano LP, Tsang W, Adams DH, Agricola E, Buck T et al (2012) EAE / ASE Recommendations for Image Acquisition and Display using Three-Dimensional Echocardiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 13:1–46
doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jer316
pubmed: 22275509
Vegas A (2016) Three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography: principles and clinical applications. Ann Card Anaesth 19(5):S35–43
doi: 10.4103/0971-9784.192622
pubmed: 27762247
pmcid: 5100241
Schlosshan D, Aggarwal G, Ed BSCM, Mathur G, Allan R, Cranney G (2011) Real-time 3D transesophageal echocardiography for the evaluation of rheumatic mitral stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 4(6):580–588
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.12.009
pubmed: 21679891
Wunderlich NC, Beigel R, Siegel RJ (2013) Management of mitral stenosis using 2D and 3D echo-doppler imaging. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 6(11):1191–1205
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2013.07.008
pubmed: 24229772
Baumgartner H, Hung J, Bermejo J, Chambers JB, Evangelista A, Griffin BP et al (2009) Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice. Eur J Echocardiogr 10(1):1–25
doi: 10.1093/ejechocard/jen303
pubmed: 19065003
Silva AG, Cerqueira M, Santos AR, Ferreira C, Alvarelhão J, Queirós A et al (2019) Inter-rater reliability, standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change of the 12-item WHODAS 2. 0 and four performance tests in institutionalized ambulatory older adults. Disabil Rehabil 41(3):366–373
doi: 10.1080/09638288.2017.1393112
pubmed: 29065719
Stratford PW, Goldsmith CH (1997) Use of the standard error as a reliability index of interest: an applied example using elbow flexor strength data. Phys Ther 77(7):745–750
doi: 10.1093/ptj/77.7.745
pubmed: 9225846
Shrout PE, Fleiss JL (1979) Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86(2):420–428
doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
pubmed: 18839484
WEIR JP (2005) Quantifying test-retest reliability using the Intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res 19(1):231–240
pubmed: 15705040
Mlchael Ellaszlw S, Lorralne Young M, Gall Woodbury KF (1994) Statistical methodology for the Concurrent Assessment of Interrater and Intrarater Reliability: using goniometric measurements as an Fxample. Phys Ther 74(8):777–788
doi: 10.1093/ptj/74.8.777
Mitchell JR, Karlik SJ, Lee DH, Eliasziw M, Rice GP, Fenster A (1996) The variability of manual and computer assisted quantification of multiple sclerosis lesion volumes. Med Phys 23(1):85
doi: 10.1118/1.597685
pubmed: 8700036
Otto CM, Nishimura RA, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Iii JPE, Krieger EV et al (2021) 2020 ACC / AHA Guideline for the management of patients with Valvular Heart Disease A Report of the American College of Cardiology / American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 143:e72–e227
pubmed: 33332150
Isla D, Casanova C, Almerı C, Rodrigo L, Cordeiro P, Mataix L et al (2007) Which method should be the reference method to evaluate the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis ? Gorlin ’ s method versus 3D-echo. Eur J Echocardiogr 8:470–473
doi: 10.1016/j.euje.2006.08.008
Popovi ZB, Thomas JD (2017) Assessing observer variability: a user ’ s guide. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther 7(I):317–324
doi: 10.21037/cdt.2017.03.12
Hui W (2020) A letter to editor regarding the recent publication, a practical guide to assess the reproducibility of echocardiographic measurements. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 33(10):1292
doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.004
pubmed: 32782132
Bunting KV, Kotecha D, Fesc M (2020) Response to the letter from Dr. Wei Hui, regarding the recent publication of ‘A practical guide to assess the reproducibility of echocardiographic measurements’. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 33(10):1293
doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.002
pubmed: 32709478
Min SY, Song JM, Kim YJ, Park HK, Seo MO, Lee MS et al (2013) Discrepancy between mitral valve areas measured by two-dimensional planimetry and three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography in patients with mitral stenosis. Heart 99(4):253–258
doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302742
pubmed: 23125249
Mahmoud Elsayed HM, Hassan M, Nagy M, Amin A, Elguindy A, Wagdy K et al (2018) A novel method to measure mitral valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis using three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography: feasibility and validation. Echocardiography 35(3):368–374
doi: 10.1111/echo.13786
pubmed: 29271495
Bouchahda N, Kallala MY, Zemni I, Ben Messaoud M, Boussaada M, Hasnaoui T et al (2021) Left atrium reservoir function is central in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging.
Ancona R, Comenale Pinto S, Caso P, Di Salvo G, Severino S, D’Andrea A et al (2013) Two-dimensional atrial systolic strain imaging predicts atrial fibrillation at 4-year follow-up in asymptomatic rheumatic mitral stenosis. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 26(3):270–277
doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2012.11.016
pubmed: 23261148
Caso P, Ancona R, Di Salvo G, Comenale Pinto S, Macrino M, Di Palma V et al (2009) Atrial reservoir function by strain rate imaging in asymptomatic mitral stenosis: prognostic value at 3 year follow-up. Eur J Echocardiogr 10(6):753–759
doi: 10.1093/ejechocard/jep058
pubmed: 19443469