Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography

26Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Real-time three-dimensional (RT-3D) echocardiography has entered the clinical practice but true incremental value over standard two-dimensional echocardiography (2D) remains uncertain when applied to stress echo. The aim of the present study is to establish the additional value of RT-3D stress echo over standard 2D stress echocardiography. We evaluated 23 consecutive patients (age = 65 ± 10 years, 16 men) referred for dipyridamole stress echocardiography with Sonos 7500 (Philips Medical Systems, Palo, Alto, CA) equipped with a phased - array 1.6-2.5 MHz probe with second harmonic capability for 2D imaging and a 2-4 MHz matrix-phased array transducer producing 60 × 70 volumetric pyramidal data containing the entire left ventricle for RT-3D imaging. In all patients, images were digitally stored in 2D and 3D for baseline and peak stress with a delay between acquisitions of less than 60 seconds. Wall motion analysis was interpreted on-line for 2D and off-line for RT-3D by joint reading of two expert stress ecocardiographist. Segmental image quality was scored from 1 = excellent to 5 = uninterpretable. Interpretable images were obtained in all patients. Acquisition time for 2D images was 67 ± 21 sec vs 40 ± 22 sec for RT-3D (p = 0.5). Wall motion analysis time was 2.8 ± 0.5 min for 2D and 13 ± 7 min for 3D (p = 0.0001). Segmental image quality score was 1.4 ± 0.5 for 2D and 2.6 ± 0.7 for 3D (p = 0.0001). Positive test results was found in 5/23 patients. 2D and RT-3D were in agreement in 3 out of these 5 positive exams. Overall stress result (positive vs negative) concordance was 91% (Kappa = 0.80) between 2D and RT-3D. During dipyridamole stress echocardiography RT-3D imaging is highly feasible and shows a high concordance rate with standard 2D stress echo. 2D images take longer time to acquire and RT-3D is more time-consuming to analyze. At present, there is no clear clinical advantage justifying routine RT-3D stress echocardiography use. © 2008 Varnero et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Varnero, S., Santagata, P., Pratali, L., Basso, M., Gandolfo, A., & Bellotti, P. (2008). Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography. Cardiovascular Ultrasound, 6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-6-31

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free