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

<p>Abstract</p> <p>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 a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Basso Massimiliano, Pratali Lorenza, Santagata Patricia, Varnero Silvia, Gandolfo Alfredo, Bellotti Paolo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2008-06-01
Series:Cardiovascular Ultrasound
Online Access:http://www.cardiovascularultrasound.com/content/6/1/31
id doaj-9100b11aa19f4200b034189ac8ef310a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-9100b11aa19f4200b034189ac8ef310a2020-11-25T00:09:33ZengBMCCardiovascular Ultrasound1476-71202008-06-01613110.1186/1476-7120-6-31Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiographyBasso MassimilianoPratali LorenzaSantagata PatriciaVarnero SilviaGandolfo AlfredoBellotti Paolo<p>Abstract</p> <p>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.</p> http://www.cardiovascularultrasound.com/content/6/1/31
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Basso Massimiliano
Pratali Lorenza
Santagata Patricia
Varnero Silvia
Gandolfo Alfredo
Bellotti Paolo
spellingShingle Basso Massimiliano
Pratali Lorenza
Santagata Patricia
Varnero Silvia
Gandolfo Alfredo
Bellotti Paolo
Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
Cardiovascular Ultrasound
author_facet Basso Massimiliano
Pratali Lorenza
Santagata Patricia
Varnero Silvia
Gandolfo Alfredo
Bellotti Paolo
author_sort Basso Massimiliano
title Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
title_short Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
title_full Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
title_fullStr Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
title_full_unstemmed Head to head comparison of 2D vs real time 3D dipyridamole stress echocardiography
title_sort head to head comparison of 2d vs real time 3d dipyridamole stress echocardiography
publisher BMC
series Cardiovascular Ultrasound
issn 1476-7120
publishDate 2008-06-01
description <p>Abstract</p> <p>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.</p>
url http://www.cardiovascularultrasound.com/content/6/1/31
work_keys_str_mv AT bassomassimiliano headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
AT pratalilorenza headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
AT santagatapatricia headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
AT varnerosilvia headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
AT gandolfoalfredo headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
AT bellottipaolo headtoheadcomparisonof2dvsrealtime3ddipyridamolestressechocardiography
_version_ 1725411357647437824