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

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

JO - Echocardiography

JF - Echocardiography

SN - 0742-2822

ER -