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 Malm, S. Articles by Skjaerpe, T. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Malm, S. Articles by Skjaerpe, T.

Accurate and reproducible measurement of left ventricular volume and ejection fraction by contrast echocardiography

A comparison with magnetic resonance imaging

Siri Malm, MD^*,*, Sigmund Frigstad, MSc, Einar Sagberg, Henrik Larsson, MD, PhD^* and Terje Skjaerpe, MD, PhD^*

^* Department of Circulation and Medical Imaging
Medical Student, Faculty of Medicine, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway
GE Vingmed Ultrasound, Trondheim, Norway

View larger version (140K): [in a new window]   Figure 1 Echocardiographic end-diastolic (top) and end-systolic (bottom) images of the apical four-chamber view from a patient before (left) and after (right) intravenous contrast.

View larger version (34K): [in a new window]   Figure 2 Bland-Altman diagrams of end-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), and ejection fraction (EF), demonstrating mean difference (solid lines) and limits of agreement (dashed lines) between baseline echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) (left column), and contrast echocardiography and MRI (right column). (Bottom panels) closed circles = poor baseline image quality (n = 36); open circles = good baseline image quality (n = 51).

View larger version (27K): [in a new window]   Figure 3 Bland-Altman analysis of the interobserver (upper panels) and intraobserver (lower panels) variability of ejection fraction (EF) measurements by baseline (left) compared to contrast echocardiography (right) (n = 30).