Left ventricular function and mass after orthotopic heart transplantation: a comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with echocardiography
- PMID: 10808151
- DOI: 10.1016/s1053-2498(00)00079-6
Left ventricular function and mass after orthotopic heart transplantation: a comparison of cardiovascular magnetic resonance with echocardiography
Abstract
Objective: We compared the assessment of left ventricular function and mass by M-mode echocardiography (echo) with fast breath-hold cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) in patients who received orthotopic heart transplantation. We also sought to establish the reproducibility of breath-hold CMR in this patient population.
Methods: We prospectively acquired 51 sets of echo and CMR data in 21 patients who had undergone orthotopic heart transplantation. We examined the intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility of breath-hold CMR in this group and compared it with published data. We compared the left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and mass determined by echo with the CMR data.
Results: The average time between CMR and echo was 0 +/- 7 days (mean +/- SD), the time between each set of CMR-echo data acquisition was 5.1 +/- 4.1 months. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance showed good reproducibility in this population, with intraobserver percentage variability of 2.2% +/- 2.4% for EF and 3. 2% +/- 2.7% for mass, and interobserver percentage variability of 2. 4% +/- 1.9% for EF and 2.2% +/- 1.9% for mass. The Bland-Altman limits of agreement between echo and CMR were wide for both EF (-9. 6% to 15%) and mass, irrespective of the formula used (-61.3 to 198 g for the Bennett and Evans formula, -65.4 to 196.8 g for the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) formula, -65.3 to 181 g for the Devereux formula, and -95.2 to 64.6 g for the Teichholz formula).
Conclusion: Fast-acquisition CMR is reproducible in recipients of transplanted hearts. We found poor agreement with the results of echo. The choice of technique will depend on local resources as well as the clinical importance of the result. Echo remains readily available and gives rapid assessment of volumes, EF, and mass. However, the good reproducibility of CMR may make it a more suitable technique for long-term follow-up of an individual or of a study population.
Similar articles
-
Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable?Eur Heart J. 2000 Aug;21(16):1387-96. doi: 10.1053/euhj.2000.2011. Eur Heart J. 2000. PMID: 10952828 Clinical Trial.
-
Comparison of echocardiographic and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging measurements of functional single ventricular volumes, mass, and ejection fraction (from the Pediatric Heart Network Fontan Cross-Sectional Study).Am J Cardiol. 2009 Aug 1;104(3):419-28. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2009.03.058. Epub 2009 Jun 6. Am J Cardiol. 2009. PMID: 19616678 Free PMC article.
-
Assessment of left ventricular parameters in orthotopic heart transplant recipients using dual-source CT and contrast-enhanced echocardiography: comparison with MRI.Eur J Radiol. 2012 Nov;81(11):3282-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.04.001. Epub 2012 May 4. Eur J Radiol. 2012. PMID: 22561021 Clinical Trial.
-
Assessment of ventricular function and mass by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.Eur Radiol. 2004 Oct;14(10):1813-22. doi: 10.1007/s00330-004-2387-0. Epub 2004 Jul 17. Eur Radiol. 2004. PMID: 15258823 Review.
-
Assessment of cardiac function by CMR.Eur Radiol. 2005 Feb;15 Suppl 2:B23-32. doi: 10.1007/s10406-005-0096-7. Eur Radiol. 2005. PMID: 15801054 Review.
Cited by
-
Quantification of left ventricular mass by echocardiography compared to cardiac magnet resonance imaging in hemodialysis patients.Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2020 Sep 16;18(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s12947-020-00217-y. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2020. PMID: 32938484 Free PMC article.
-
Improved left ventricular mass quantification with partial voxel interpolation: in vivo and necropsy validation of a novel cardiac MRI segmentation algorithm.Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Jan;5(1):137-46. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.111.966754. Epub 2011 Nov 21. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012. PMID: 22104165 Free PMC article.
-
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the diagnosis of acute heart transplant rejection: a review.J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2009 Mar 12;11(1):7. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-11-7. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2009. PMID: 19284612 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Clinical applications of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging.CMAJ. 2006 Oct 10;175(8):911-7. doi: 10.1503/cmaj.060566. CMAJ. 2006. PMID: 17030942 Free PMC article. Review.
-
The role of imaging in the management of cardiorenal syndrome.Int J Nephrol. 2011 Jan 24;2011:245241. doi: 10.4061/2011/245241. Int J Nephrol. 2011. PMID: 21318046 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical