Publications

Submitted by ctuttle on
Go back to Resources

Best method for right atrial volume assessment by two-dimensional echocardiography: validation with magnetic resonance imaging.

2015 May

Journal Article

Authors:

Ebtia, M.
Murphy, D.
Gin, K.
Lee, P.K.
Jue, J.
Nair, P.
Mayo, J.
Barnes, M.E.
Thompson, D.J.S.
Tsang, T.S.M.

Secondary:
Echocardiography

Volume:
32

Pagination:
734-9

Issue:
5

PMID:
25231096

DOI:
10.1111/echo.12735

Keywords:
echocardiography; Female; Heart Atria; Humans; magnetic resonance imaging; Male; Middle Aged; Observer Variation; Reproducibility of Results; Sensitivity and Specificity; Stroke Volume

Abstract:
<p>AIM: Echocardiographic methods for estimating right atrial (RA) volume have not been standardized. Our aim was to evaluate two-dimensional (2D) echocardiographic methods of RA volume assessment, using RA volume by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as the reference.METHODS AND RESULTS: Right atrial volume was assessed in 51 patients (mean age 63 ± 14 years, 33 female) who underwent comprehensive 2D echocardiography and cardiac MRI for clinically indicated reasons. Echocardiographic RA volume methods included (1) biplane area length, using four-chamber view twice (biplane 4C-4C); (2) biplane area length, using four-chamber and subcostal views (biplane 4C-subcostal); and (3) single plane Simpson&#039;s method of disks (Simpson&#039;s). Echocardiographic RA volumes as well as linear RA major and minor dimensions were compared to RA volume by MRI using correlation and Bland-Altman methods, and evaluated for inter-observer reproducibility and accuracy in discriminating RA enlargement. All echocardiography volumetric methods performed well compared to MRI, with Pearson&#039;s correlation of 0.98 and concordance correlation ≥0.91 for each. For bias and limits of agreement, biplane 4C-4C (bias -4.81 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±9.8 mL/m(2) ) and Simpson&#039;s (bias -5.15 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±10.1 mL/m(2) ) outperformed biplane 4C-subcostal (bias -8.36 mL/m(2) , limits of agreement ±12.5 mL/m(2) ). Accuracy for discriminating RA enlargement was higher for all volumetric methods than for linear measurements. Inter-observer variability was satisfactory across all methods.CONCLUSIONS: Compared to MRI, biplane 4C-4C and single plane Simpson&#039;s are highly accurate and reproducible 2D echocardiography methods for estimating RA volume. Linear dimensions are inaccurate and should be abandoned.</p>

Go back to Resources