High-definition blood flow imaging in the assessment of left ventricular function: Initial experience and comparison with contrast echocardiography

Geru Wu, Tianrong Xie, Meneleo M. Dimaano, Mohammad I. Alghrouz, Masood Ahmad

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Objectives: The study aimed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of the high-definition blood flow imaging (HD-Flow) in evaluation of left ventricular (LV) function by comparison with contrast echocardiography (Contrast). Background: Contrast improves endocardial border visualization and assists in precise assessment of LV function. HD-Flow, a novel ultrasound technique that enhances blood flow discrimination in LV, could possibly be used for improving endocardial border definition without contrast. Methods: Eighty patients with technically limited transthoracic echocardiograms had HD-Flow, and contrast performed sequentially. LV endocardial visualization, image acquisition time, wall motion, volumes, ejection fraction (EF), stroke volume (SV), and stroke volume index (SVI) were compared. Inter- and intra-observer agreements were examined in a randomly selected subgroup. Results: Both HD-Flow and contrast significantly improved the percentage of the well-defined endocardial border segments (71% at baseline vs 94.1% by HD-Flow vs 94.9% by contrast, X 2  = 401, P < 0.001). The acquisition time for HD-Flow was significantly less when compared to contrast (2.13 ± 1.18 minutes vs 10.96 ± 3.51 minutes, P < 0.001). LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), EF, SV, and SVI measured by the two methods correlated well (EDVr = 0.97, ESVr = 0.96, EFr = 0.90, SVr = 0.77, SVIr = 0.74, all P < 0.001). In comparison, HD-Flow was neither significantly different in detecting LV wall motion abnormality nor in EF, SV, and SVI measurements, but slightly underestimated LV volumes. Conclusions: HD-Flow imaging is feasible and user-friendly in enhancing LV endocardial definition. This technique is useful in both qualitative and quantitative assessment of LV function.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalEchocardiography
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Left Ventricular Function
Echocardiography
Stroke Volume

Keywords

  • contrast echocardiography
  • endocardial border definition
  • HD-Flow echocardiography
  • left ventricular function

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

High-definition blood flow imaging in the assessment of left ventricular function : Initial experience and comparison with contrast echocardiography. / Wu, Geru; Xie, Tianrong; Dimaano, Meneleo M.; Alghrouz, Mohammad I.; Ahmad, Masood.

In: Echocardiography, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c69096fefe4b46a58caf64ba39a2ef7d,
title = "High-definition blood flow imaging in the assessment of left ventricular function: Initial experience and comparison with contrast echocardiography",
abstract = "Objectives: The study aimed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of the high-definition blood flow imaging (HD-Flow) in evaluation of left ventricular (LV) function by comparison with contrast echocardiography (Contrast). Background: Contrast improves endocardial border visualization and assists in precise assessment of LV function. HD-Flow, a novel ultrasound technique that enhances blood flow discrimination in LV, could possibly be used for improving endocardial border definition without contrast. Methods: Eighty patients with technically limited transthoracic echocardiograms had HD-Flow, and contrast performed sequentially. LV endocardial visualization, image acquisition time, wall motion, volumes, ejection fraction (EF), stroke volume (SV), and stroke volume index (SVI) were compared. Inter- and intra-observer agreements were examined in a randomly selected subgroup. Results: Both HD-Flow and contrast significantly improved the percentage of the well-defined endocardial border segments (71{\%} at baseline vs 94.1{\%} by HD-Flow vs 94.9{\%} by contrast, X 2  = 401, P < 0.001). The acquisition time for HD-Flow was significantly less when compared to contrast (2.13 ± 1.18 minutes vs 10.96 ± 3.51 minutes, P < 0.001). LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), EF, SV, and SVI measured by the two methods correlated well (EDVr = 0.97, ESVr = 0.96, EFr = 0.90, SVr = 0.77, SVIr = 0.74, all P < 0.001). In comparison, HD-Flow was neither significantly different in detecting LV wall motion abnormality nor in EF, SV, and SVI measurements, but slightly underestimated LV volumes. Conclusions: HD-Flow imaging is feasible and user-friendly in enhancing LV endocardial definition. This technique is useful in both qualitative and quantitative assessment of LV function.",
keywords = "contrast echocardiography, endocardial border definition, HD-Flow echocardiography, left ventricular function",
author = "Geru Wu and Tianrong Xie and Dimaano, {Meneleo M.} and Alghrouz, {Mohammad I.} and Masood Ahmad",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/echo.14282",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Echocardiography",
issn = "0742-2822",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - High-definition blood flow imaging in the assessment of left ventricular function

T2 - Initial experience and comparison with contrast echocardiography

AU - Wu, Geru

AU - Xie, Tianrong

AU - Dimaano, Meneleo M.

AU - Alghrouz, Mohammad I.

AU - Ahmad, Masood

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Objectives: The study aimed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of the high-definition blood flow imaging (HD-Flow) in evaluation of left ventricular (LV) function by comparison with contrast echocardiography (Contrast). Background: Contrast improves endocardial border visualization and assists in precise assessment of LV function. HD-Flow, a novel ultrasound technique that enhances blood flow discrimination in LV, could possibly be used for improving endocardial border definition without contrast. Methods: Eighty patients with technically limited transthoracic echocardiograms had HD-Flow, and contrast performed sequentially. LV endocardial visualization, image acquisition time, wall motion, volumes, ejection fraction (EF), stroke volume (SV), and stroke volume index (SVI) were compared. Inter- and intra-observer agreements were examined in a randomly selected subgroup. Results: Both HD-Flow and contrast significantly improved the percentage of the well-defined endocardial border segments (71% at baseline vs 94.1% by HD-Flow vs 94.9% by contrast, X 2  = 401, P < 0.001). The acquisition time for HD-Flow was significantly less when compared to contrast (2.13 ± 1.18 minutes vs 10.96 ± 3.51 minutes, P < 0.001). LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), EF, SV, and SVI measured by the two methods correlated well (EDVr = 0.97, ESVr = 0.96, EFr = 0.90, SVr = 0.77, SVIr = 0.74, all P < 0.001). In comparison, HD-Flow was neither significantly different in detecting LV wall motion abnormality nor in EF, SV, and SVI measurements, but slightly underestimated LV volumes. Conclusions: HD-Flow imaging is feasible and user-friendly in enhancing LV endocardial definition. This technique is useful in both qualitative and quantitative assessment of LV function.

AB - Objectives: The study aimed to assess the accuracy and reproducibility of the high-definition blood flow imaging (HD-Flow) in evaluation of left ventricular (LV) function by comparison with contrast echocardiography (Contrast). Background: Contrast improves endocardial border visualization and assists in precise assessment of LV function. HD-Flow, a novel ultrasound technique that enhances blood flow discrimination in LV, could possibly be used for improving endocardial border definition without contrast. Methods: Eighty patients with technically limited transthoracic echocardiograms had HD-Flow, and contrast performed sequentially. LV endocardial visualization, image acquisition time, wall motion, volumes, ejection fraction (EF), stroke volume (SV), and stroke volume index (SVI) were compared. Inter- and intra-observer agreements were examined in a randomly selected subgroup. Results: Both HD-Flow and contrast significantly improved the percentage of the well-defined endocardial border segments (71% at baseline vs 94.1% by HD-Flow vs 94.9% by contrast, X 2  = 401, P < 0.001). The acquisition time for HD-Flow was significantly less when compared to contrast (2.13 ± 1.18 minutes vs 10.96 ± 3.51 minutes, P < 0.001). LV end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), EF, SV, and SVI measured by the two methods correlated well (EDVr = 0.97, ESVr = 0.96, EFr = 0.90, SVr = 0.77, SVIr = 0.74, all P < 0.001). In comparison, HD-Flow was neither significantly different in detecting LV wall motion abnormality nor in EF, SV, and SVI measurements, but slightly underestimated LV volumes. Conclusions: HD-Flow imaging is feasible and user-friendly in enhancing LV endocardial definition. This technique is useful in both qualitative and quantitative assessment of LV function.

KW - contrast echocardiography

KW - endocardial border definition

KW - HD-Flow echocardiography

KW - left ventricular function

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85061773990&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85061773990&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/echo.14282

DO - 10.1111/echo.14282

M3 - Article

C2 - 30786059

AN - SCOPUS:85061773990

JO - Echocardiography

JF - Echocardiography

SN - 0742-2822

ER -