TY - JOUR
T1 - 3-D Echocardiography Is Feasible and More Reproducible than 2-D Echocardiography for In-Training Echocardiographers in Follow-up of Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction
AU - Baldea, Sorina Mihaila
AU - Velcea, Andreea Elena
AU - Rimbas, Roxana Cristina
AU - Andronic, Anca
AU - Matei, Lavinia
AU - Calin, Simona Ionela
AU - Muraru, Denisa
AU - Badano, Luigi Paolo
AU - Vinereanu, Dragos
N1 - Funding Information:
The work described here was supported by Mobility Grant PFE_23/2018 from the University of Medicine and Pharmacy Carol Davila and by two grants for young research teams, TE 49/2018 and TE 137/2020, from the Executive Agency for Higher Education, Research, Development and Innovation Funding (UEFISCDI).
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors
PY - 2021/3
Y1 - 2021/3
N2 - Left ventricular volumes (LVVs) and ejection fraction (LVEF) are key elements in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Therefore, a feasible and reproducible imaging method to be used by both experienced and in-training echocardiographers is mandatory. Our aim was to establish if, in a large echo lab, echocardiographers in-training provide feasible and more reproducible results for the evaluation of patients with HFrEF when using 3-dimensional echocardiography (3-DE) versus 2-dimensional echocardiography (2-DE). Sixty patients with HFrEF (46 males, age: 58 ± 17 y) underwent standard transthoracic 2-D acquisitions and 3-D multibeat full volumes of the left ventricle. One expert user in echocardiography (expert) and three echocardiographers with different levels of training in 2-DE (beginner, medium and advanced) measured the 2-D LVVs and LVEFs on the same consecutive images of patients with HFrEF. Afterward, the expert performed a 1-mo training in 3-DE analysis of the users, and both the expert and trainees measured the 3-D LVVs and LVEF of the same patients. Measurements provided by the expert and all trainees in echo were compared. Six patients were excluded from the study because of poor image quality. The mean end-diastolic LVV of the remaining 54 patients was 214 ± 75 mL with 2-DE and 233 ± 77 mL with 3-DE. Mean LVEF was 35 ± 10% with 2-DE and 33 ± 10% with 3-DE. Our analysis revealed that, compared with the expert user, the trainees had acceptable reproducibility for the 2-DE measurements, according to their level of expertise in 2-DE (intra-class coefficients [ICCs] ranging from 0.75 to 0.94). However, after the short training in 3-DE, they provided feasible and more reproducible measurements of the 3-D LVVs and LVEF (ICCs ranging from 0.89–0.97) than they had with 2-DE. 3-DE is a feasible, rapidly learned and more reproducible method for the assessment of LVVs and LVEF than 2-DE, regardless of the basic level of expertise in 2-DE of the trainees in echocardiography. In echo labs with a wide range of staff experience, 3-DE might be a more accurate method for the follow-up of patients with HFrEF.
AB - Left ventricular volumes (LVVs) and ejection fraction (LVEF) are key elements in the evaluation and follow-up of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Therefore, a feasible and reproducible imaging method to be used by both experienced and in-training echocardiographers is mandatory. Our aim was to establish if, in a large echo lab, echocardiographers in-training provide feasible and more reproducible results for the evaluation of patients with HFrEF when using 3-dimensional echocardiography (3-DE) versus 2-dimensional echocardiography (2-DE). Sixty patients with HFrEF (46 males, age: 58 ± 17 y) underwent standard transthoracic 2-D acquisitions and 3-D multibeat full volumes of the left ventricle. One expert user in echocardiography (expert) and three echocardiographers with different levels of training in 2-DE (beginner, medium and advanced) measured the 2-D LVVs and LVEFs on the same consecutive images of patients with HFrEF. Afterward, the expert performed a 1-mo training in 3-DE analysis of the users, and both the expert and trainees measured the 3-D LVVs and LVEF of the same patients. Measurements provided by the expert and all trainees in echo were compared. Six patients were excluded from the study because of poor image quality. The mean end-diastolic LVV of the remaining 54 patients was 214 ± 75 mL with 2-DE and 233 ± 77 mL with 3-DE. Mean LVEF was 35 ± 10% with 2-DE and 33 ± 10% with 3-DE. Our analysis revealed that, compared with the expert user, the trainees had acceptable reproducibility for the 2-DE measurements, according to their level of expertise in 2-DE (intra-class coefficients [ICCs] ranging from 0.75 to 0.94). However, after the short training in 3-DE, they provided feasible and more reproducible measurements of the 3-D LVVs and LVEF (ICCs ranging from 0.89–0.97) than they had with 2-DE. 3-DE is a feasible, rapidly learned and more reproducible method for the assessment of LVVs and LVEF than 2-DE, regardless of the basic level of expertise in 2-DE of the trainees in echocardiography. In echo labs with a wide range of staff experience, 3-DE might be a more accurate method for the follow-up of patients with HFrEF.
KW - 3-D echocardiography
KW - Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
KW - Left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction
KW - Reproducibility
KW - Trainees in echocardiography
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85097045837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85097045837&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2020.10.022
DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2020.10.022
M3 - Article
C2 - 33267962
AN - SCOPUS:85097045837
SN - 0301-5629
VL - 47
SP - 499
EP - 510
JO - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
JF - Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
IS - 3
ER -