TY - JOUR
T1 - How should left atrial size be reported? Comparative assessment with use of multiple echocardiographic methods
AU - Khankirawatana, Banthit
AU - Khankirawatana, Suwanee
AU - Porter, Thomas
PY - 2004/2
Y1 - 2004/2
N2 - Background: Determination of left atrial (LA) size is important in clinical decision-making. The LA anteroposterior dimension (APD) has been routinely reported as LA size assessment. Early studies indicated that the APD may have limited accuracy in quantification. Conventional 3-dimensional reconstruction (C3DR) of the LA has been validated. However, its process is time-consuming and not applicable for daily practice. To explore an accurate and practical approach, we compared different echocardiographic measurements with C3DR in 141 patients with different LA sizes. Methods and Results: LA size was measured with (1) the cubic equation with APD (Cub); (2) the ellipsoidal formula (Ellp); (3) biplane modified Simpson rule (biplane); and (4) simplified 3-dimensional reconstruction from 3 standard apical views with B spline interpolation (S3VR). All four methods were compared with C3DR. S3VR and biplane methods provided a close agreement to C3DR (y = 0.94x + 3.6, r = 0.95, SEE = 7.6 mL, mean difference = -1.3% for S3VR; y = 0.87x + 2.9, r = 0.91, SEE = 9.0 mL, mean difference = -9.4% for biplane). The Cub and Ellp calculations were less accurate, with significant volume underestimation (P < .001). Conclusions: LA single dimension is not accurate for LA size measurement. Among four different methods of LA size measurement, biplane and S3VR provide the closest agreement to C3DR. The biplane, which is readily applicable with current echocardiographic equipment, should be routinely applied in clinical practice.
AB - Background: Determination of left atrial (LA) size is important in clinical decision-making. The LA anteroposterior dimension (APD) has been routinely reported as LA size assessment. Early studies indicated that the APD may have limited accuracy in quantification. Conventional 3-dimensional reconstruction (C3DR) of the LA has been validated. However, its process is time-consuming and not applicable for daily practice. To explore an accurate and practical approach, we compared different echocardiographic measurements with C3DR in 141 patients with different LA sizes. Methods and Results: LA size was measured with (1) the cubic equation with APD (Cub); (2) the ellipsoidal formula (Ellp); (3) biplane modified Simpson rule (biplane); and (4) simplified 3-dimensional reconstruction from 3 standard apical views with B spline interpolation (S3VR). All four methods were compared with C3DR. S3VR and biplane methods provided a close agreement to C3DR (y = 0.94x + 3.6, r = 0.95, SEE = 7.6 mL, mean difference = -1.3% for S3VR; y = 0.87x + 2.9, r = 0.91, SEE = 9.0 mL, mean difference = -9.4% for biplane). The Cub and Ellp calculations were less accurate, with significant volume underestimation (P < .001). Conclusions: LA single dimension is not accurate for LA size measurement. Among four different methods of LA size measurement, biplane and S3VR provide the closest agreement to C3DR. The biplane, which is readily applicable with current echocardiographic equipment, should be routinely applied in clinical practice.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0842347583&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0842347583&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.03.001
DO - 10.1016/j.ahj.2003.03.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 14760338
AN - SCOPUS:0842347583
SN - 0002-8703
VL - 147
SP - 369
EP - 374
JO - American Heart Journal
JF - American Heart Journal
IS - 2
ER -