Assessment of Left Ventricular Volume

by Volume Imaging Ultrasound System and

Full-automated Volumetric Analysis Software

compared to Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Department of Cardiology, Sakakibara Heart Institute

Hirotsugu Mihara, Hiroyuki Watanabe, Masaru Aikawa,

Tetsuya Tobaru, Nobuo Iguchi, Masatoshi Nagayama,

Ryuta Asano, Morimasa Takayama, Jun Umemura,

Tetsuya Sumiyoshi

Background

Left ventricular (LV) volume measurement by 3D

echocardiography (3DE) is more accurate than 2D

echocardiographyGopal AS, et al. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 1992;5:115–24

Hozumi T, et al. Am J Cardiol 1996;78:1077–80

Semiautomated volumetric analysis by 3DE is feasible

and allows fast measurement of LV volumeJacobs LD, et al. Eur Heart J 2006;27:460–8

Corsi C, et al. Circulation 2005;112:1161–70

90 degrees x 90 degrees full-volume data

acquisition in a single heart beat

This system contains full-automated

volumetric analysis software

Volume Imaging Ultrasound System

Auto Auto Autoautomatic

standard planesborder detection 3D analysis

Objectives

The aim of this study was to validate

full-automated LV volume measurements

compared to cardiac magnetic resonance

(CMR) measurements

Subject

We enrolled 31 consecutive patients with coronary

and valvular heart diseases who performed 3DE

and CMR in several days at Sakakibara Heart

Institute

31 patients were analyzed

age 61±14 years

sex male 20pts , female 11pts

LV volume measurement by 3DE

Equipment: Siemens ACUSON SC2000

Probe: 4Z1c

Analysis software: Siemens Syngo SC2000 workplace

15 volume/sec

Method

LV volume measurement by CMR

Equipment: Siemens MAGNETOM Sonata 1.5T

Analysis software: Siemens Syngo Console VA 30 Argus

20 frame/beat

Method

Result

Disease

n=31

Rythme

Sinus rythme

Atrial fibrillation

97%

3%

Coronary heart disease

Cardiomyopathy

Vulvular heart disease

Others

29%

16%48%

6% n=31

EF

Full-automated

correlation difference

Y=0.45X+27, r=0.60 Mean difference (3DE - MRI)

= -0.8±11 %

MRI

3D

E

+2SD

-2SD

mean

(%)

Mean (3DE,MRI)

Dif

fere

nce

(3D

E -

MR

I)

(%)

(%) (%)

EF

Manual modified

Y=0.76X+19, r=0.89

correlation

Mean difference (3DE - MRI)

= 2.2±6.6 %

MRI

3D

E

(%)

Mean (3DE,MRI)

Dif

fere

nce

(3D

E -

MR

I)

+2SD

-2SD

mean

(%)

(%) (%)

difference

LV volume by 3DE vs MRI

Full-automated

Y=0.64X+24, r=0.83

Y=0.52X+19, r=0.78

-18Mean difference (3DE - MRI)

= -14±23ml

correlation

MRI

3D

E

Mean (3DE,MRI)

Dif

fere

nce

(3D

E -

MR

I) +2SD

-2SD

mean

(ml)

(ml) (ml)

(ml)difference

LV volume by 3DE vs MRI

Manual modified

Y=0.96X+3.5, r=0.96

Y=0.85X+5.1, r=0.95

Mean difference (3DE - MRI)

= -3.1±11 ml

correlation

MRI

3D

E

Mean (3DE,MRI)

Dif

fere

nce

(3D

E -

MR

I)

+2SD

-2SD

mean

(ml)

(ml) (ml)

(ml)difference

Conclusions

Automated LV volume measurement system

using single-beat full-volume acquisition of

real- time echocardiography provides quick

and accurate measurement

It is a new objective solution for noninvasive

LV volume analysis