This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Thomson, H. L. Articles by Enriquez-Sarano, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Thomson, H. L. Articles by Enriquez-Sarano, M.

Contrast echocardiography improves the accuracy and reproducibility of left ventricular remodeling measurements

A prospective, randomly assigned, blinded study

Helen L. Thomson, MD, PhD^*, Arsene-Joseph Basmadjian, MD^*, Andrew J. Rainbird, MD^*, Mehdi Razavi, MD^*, Jean-Francois Avierinos, MD^*, Patricia A. Pellikka, MD, FACC^*, Kent R. Bailey, PhD, Jerome F. Breen, MD^* and Maurice Enriquez-Sarano, MD, FACC^*

^* Division of Cardiovascular Diseases and Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
Section of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota, USA

View larger version (23K): [in a new window]   Figure 1 The impact of contrast injection on the assessment of left ventricular remodeling. (A) Scatterplot of end-diastolic volume (EDV) measured with electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) (x axis) and echocardiography (Echo) (y axis) with (solid circles) and without (open triangles) contrast injection. The solid lines represent the regression lines between each echocardiographic modality and EBCT. The dashed line represents the identity line. (B) Scatterplot of the differences (y axis) in EDV between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection (solid circle) and between EBCT and echocardiography without contrast injection (open triangles). The thick solid line and the two thin lines indicate the mean value and 95% confidence interval of the difference between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection. Note the wide scatter of differences without contrast injection.

View larger version (22K): [in a new window]   Figure 2 The impact of contrast injection on the assessment of left ventricular remodeling. (A) Scatterplot of end-systolic volume (ESV) measured with electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) (x axis) and echocardiography (Echo) (y axis) with (solid circles) and without (open triangles) contrast injection. The solid lines represent the regression lines between each echocardiographic modality and EBCT. The dashed line represents the identity line. (B) Scatterplot of differences (y axis) in ESV between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection (solid circles) and between EBCT and echocardiography without contrast injection (open triangles). The thick solid line and the two thin lines indicate the mean value and 95% confidence interval of the difference between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection.

View larger version (21K): [in a new window]   Figure 3 The impact of contrast injection on the assessment of left ventricular remodeling. (A) Scatterplot of stroke volume (SV) measured with electron beam computed tomography (EBCT) (x axis) and echocardiography (Echo) (y axis) with (solid circles) and without (open triangles) contrast injection. The solid lines represent the regression lines between each echocardiographic modality and EBCT. The dashed line represents the identity line. (B) Scatterplot of differences (y axis) in SV between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection (solid circles) and between EBCT and echocardiography without contrast injection (open triangles). The thick solid line and the two thin lines indicate the mean value and 95% confidence interval of the difference between EBCT and echocardiography with contrast injection. Note the wide scatter of differences without contrast injection.