UNASSIGNED: Whether the association between post-therapeutic left ventricular volume change and long-term outcomes in ischaemic cardiomyopathy is influenced by the performance of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains unclear. We sought to perform a post-hoc analysis of the Surgical Treatment of Ischaemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial to investigate this association in patients treated with medical therapy (MED) with or without CABG.
UNASSIGNED: From July 24, 2002, to May 5, 2007, 1212 patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy were enrolled in the STICH trial (NCT00023595) from 99 sites in 22 countries, and were randomly assigned to undergo CABG plus MED or MED alone. We completed a post-hoc analysis of this trial. Patients with paired left ventricular end-systolic volume index (ESVI) measured at baseline and 4-months were included in our analysis. The association between change in ESVI from baseline to 4-months and cardiovascular mortality or all-cause mortality was assessed in MED arm and CABG plus MED arm.
UNASSIGNED: 523 patients were included, with 291 (55.6%) assigned to MED arm and 232 (44.4%) to CABG plus MED arm. At a 4-month follow-up, ESVI reduction was more likely to occur among patients undergoing CABG plus MED. After a median follow-up of 10.3 years, for each 26% (1- standard deviation) decrement in ESVI, it was associated with a 22% lower risk of cardiovascular mortality (HR 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.94) and 19% lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95) in MED arm, whereas this association was not shown in CABG plus MED arm (cardiovascular mortality: HR 0.90; 95%CI, 0.74-1.10; all-cause mortality: HR 0.93; 95%CI, 0.79-1.09). A 16% reduction in ESVI was determined to be the most appropriate threshold of change in ESVI in the MED arm.
UNASSIGNED: In patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy, left ventricular volume change was associated with long-term prognosis after medical therapy alone, whereas was likely not an optimal benchmark for evaluating the survival benefits associated with CABG. A more than 16% reduction in ESVI might assist in therapeutic efficacy assessment and prognostic evaluation in medically treated patients.
UNASSIGNED: National Natural Science Foundation of China; Natural Science Funds of Guangdong Province.

BACKGROUND: HeartModel (HM) is a fully automated adaptive quantification software that can quickly quantify left heart volume and left ventricular function. This study used HM to quantify the left ventricular end-diastolic (LVEDV) and end-systolic volumes (LVESV) of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), coronary artery heart disease with segmental wall motion abnormality, and hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) to determine whether there were differences in the feasibility, accuracy, and repeatability of measuring the LVEDV, LVESV, LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and left atrial end-systolic volume (LAESV) and to compare these measurements with those obtained with traditional two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) methods.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the application value of HM in quantifying left heart chamber volume and LVEF in clinical patients.
METHODS: A total of 150 subjects who underwent 2D and 3D echocardiography were divided into 4 groups: (1) 42 patients with normal heart shape and function (control group, Group A); (2) 35 patients with DCM (Group B); (3) 41 patients with LV remodeling after acute myocardial infarction (Group C); and (4) 32 patients with HCM (Group D). The LVEDV, LVESV, LVEF and LAESV obtained by HM with (HM-RE) and without regional endocardial border editing (HM-NE) were compared with those measured by traditional 2D/3D echocardiographic methods to assess the correlation, consistency, and repeatability of all methods.
RESULTS: (1) The parameters measured by HM were significantly different among the groups (P < 0.05 for all). Compared with Groups A, C, and D, Group B had higher LVEDV and LVESV (P < 0.05 for all) and lower LVEF (P < 0.05 for all); (2) HM-NE overestimated LVEDV, LVESV, and LAESV with wide biases and underestimated LVEF with a small bias; contour adjustment reduced the biases and limits of agreement (bias: LVEDV, 28.17 mL, LVESV, 14.92 mL, LAESV, 8.18 mL, LVEF, -0.04%). The correlations between HM-RE and advanced cardiac 3D quantification (3DQA) (r s = 0.91-0.95, P < 0.05 for all) were higher than those between HM-NE (r s = 0.85-0.93, P < 0.05 for all) and the traditional 2D methods. The correlations between HM-RE and 3DQA were good for Groups A, B, and C but remained weak for Group D (LVEDV and LVESV, r s = 0.48-0.54, P < 0.05 for all); and (3) The intraobserver and interobserver variability for the HM-RE measurements were low.
CONCLUSIONS: HM can be used to quantify the LV volume and LVEF in patients with common heart diseases and sufficient image quality. HM with contour editing is highly reproducible and accurate and may be recommended for clinical practice.

UNASSIGNED: Recently, a new automated software (Heart Model) was developed to obtain three-dimensional (3D) left heart chamber volumes. The aim of this study was to verify the feasibility and accuracy of the automated 3D echocardiographic algorithm in heart transplant (HTx) patients. Conventional manual 3D transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) tracings and cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) images were used as a reference for comparison.
UNASSIGNED: This study enrolled 103 healthy HTx patients prospectively. In protocol 1, left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), LV end-systolic volume (LVESV), left atrial max volume (LAVmax), LA minimum volume (LAVmin) and LV ejection fraction (LVEF) were obtained using the automated 3D echocardiography (3DE) and compared with corresponding values obtained through the manual 3DE. In protocol 2, 28 patients\' automated 3DE measurements were compared with CMR reference values. The impacts of contour edit and surgical technique were also tested.
UNASSIGNED: Heart Model was feasible in 97.1% of the data sets. In protocol 1, there was strong correlation between 3DE and manual 3DE for all the parameters (r = 0.77 to 0.96, p<0.01). Compared to values obtained through manual measurements, LV volumes and LVEF were overestimated by the automated algorithm and LA volumes were underestimated. All the biases were small except for that of LAVmin. After contour adjustment, the biases reduced and all the limits of agreement were clinically acceptable. In protocol 2, the correlations for LV and LA volumes were strong between automated 3DE with contour edit and CMR (r = 0.74 to 0.93, p<0.01) but correlation for LVEF remained moderate (r = 0.65, p < 0.01). Automated 3DE overestimated LV volumes but underestimated LVEF and LA volumes compared with CMR. The limits of agreement were clinically acceptable only for LVEDV and LAVmax.
UNASSIGNED: Simultaneous quantification of left heart volumes and LVEF with the automated Heart Model program is rapid, feasible and to a great degree it is accurate in HTx recipients. Nevertheless, only LVEDV and LAVmax measured by automated 3DE with contour edit seem applicable for clinical practice when compared with CMR. Automated 3DE for HTx recipients is a worthy attempt, though further verification and optimization are needed.

Accurate, reproducible, noninvasive determination of left ventricular (LV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) is important for clinical assessment, selection of therapy, and serial monitoring of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Current clinical Two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) may cause inaccurate measurements in patients with HCM because of their asymmetric ventricles and limitations of 2DE technology. Three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) have demonstrated significantly greater accuracy. However, the time-consuming workflow limits the clinical utility of 3DE.
We aim to compare the performance of a novel automated 3DE system (HeartModel, Philips Healthcare) with 2DE in a group of patients with HCM. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was reference standard.
Fifty-three patients with HCM were examined by automated 3DE (3DEA), two-dimensional biplane Simpson\'s method (2DBP), manual 3DE method, and CMR, respectively. For patients with poor automated quantification, manual correction was performed. The Pearson correlation coefficient and Bland-Altman analysis and paired Student t tests were used to assess inter-technique agreement.
3DEA measurements with contour editing correlate well with CMR and manual 2DE and 3DE measurements (r = .80-.96). The analysis time of 3DEA was shorter than that of 2DBP (3DEA, 141 ± 15s; 2DBP, 174 ± 17 s). Inter-observer variability was reduced significantly with use of 3DEA.
Compared with current clinical 2DBP method, the analysis time of automated 3DE was much shorter with the added benefit of enhanced accuracy and reproducibility. Patients with asymmetric chamber may rely more on the timesaving automated 3DE quantification in the future.

UNASSIGNED: This study aims to explore the feasibility of HeartModel A.I. (HM) three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) to assess left ventricular function and discover suitable border parameter settings.
UNASSIGNED: A total of 113 patients that underwent echocardiography in our hospital were eligible for inclusion. The HM 3DE (HM method) and conventional 3DE (3D method) were used to analyze echocardiography images. The HM was set to different border settings (end-diastolic [ED] and end-systolic [ES] settings) to assess different left ventricular systolic function parameters including left ventricular end diastolic volume (LVEDV), left ventricular end systolic volume (LVESV), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and left ventricular diastolic function parameters including maximal left atrium volume (LAVMAX). All of these parameters were evaluated using the HM method and then compared with the 3D method.
UNASSIGNED: The differences in LVEDV, LVESV, and LVEF measured with different HM border settings were statistically significant (P<0.05) and were strongly correlated with the 3D method. For LVEF, the reading using the HM method with ED and ES = 70 and 30 showed the best agreement with the 3D method, and the difference in the readings was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). For LVEDV and LVESV, the reading using the HM method with ED and ES = 40 and 20 showed the best agreement with the 3D method, but the difference in the readings was statistically significant (P < 0.05). The measurements taken using the HM method were more reproducible than those taken using the 3D method (P<0.05). The measurement time when using the HM method was significantly less than the 3D method (P<0.05). In terms of LAVMAX, the correlation between the HM and 3D methods was strong, but the requirements for agreement were not satisfied.
UNASSIGNED: Evaluation of the left ventricular function using HM 3DE is feasible, saves time, and is reproducible. To assess the left ventricular function, the border parameter setting of ED and ES = 70 and 30 provided the best fit for the Chinese population.

Objective: To investigate the clinical value of left ventricular function assessment in patients with cardiovascular disease by fully automatic quantified three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography. Methods: One hundred and ninety-seven patients with cardiac diseases were examined by three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography from September 2017 to May 2019. Data from 61 patients with grade 1 echocardiographic image quality were used to determine the default boundary values of endocardial end-diastolic and end-systolic phases. Clinical features were analyzed based on electronic medical records. The accuracy and repeatability of this strategy was evaluated by comparing left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), end-systolic volume (LVESV) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured by automated quantitative three-dimensional echocardiography and those measured by conventional manual transthoracic echocardiography, the latter served as gold standard. Results: The levels of LVEDV, LVESV and LVEF measured by automatic three-dimensional echocardiography were positively correlated with values obtained by manual measurement（r=0.97，0.97, 0.98, 0.97, 0.97, 0.96；P<0.05). The levels of LVEDV and LVESV measured by full-automatic three-dimensional echocardiography were significantly higher than those obtained by manual three-dimensional echocardiography（all P<0.05）. The classification and correlation of systolic dysfunction in patients with abnormal ventricular wall motion by automatic three-dimensional echocardiography were significantly improved after manual calibration (κ=0.74, P=0.00) as compared to without manual calibration (κ=0.63, P=0.00). The inter-observer and intra-observer variability of fully automated three-dimensional echocardiography were significantly smaller than manual three-dimensional echocardiography（both P<0.05）. Conclusion: Fully automatic quantified three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography possesses excellent accuracy and repeatability in measuring left ventricular volume and function， and it is feasible for clinical application.
目的： 探讨全自动量化经胸三维超声心动图（简称为全自动三维超声心动图）评估心血管病患者左心功能的准确性与可重复性。 方法： 回顾性纳入2017年9月至2019年5月厦门大学附属心血管病医院收治的心血管病患者197例，均行经胸三维超声心动图检查，其中心脏模型超声图像质量1级共61例被用于确定心内膜舒张末期和收缩末期默认边界值。通过电子病例系统收集入选者的一般临床资料。以常规手动经胸三维超声心动图（简称为手动三维超声心动图）测量值作为标准，评价全自动三维超声心动图测量左心室舒张末期容积（LVEDV）、左心室收缩末期容积（LVESV）和左心室射血分数（LVEF）的准确性及可重复性。 结果： 全自动三维超声心动图测量的LVEDV、LVESV和LVEF与手动测量值均呈正相关（P均<0.05）。但是，全自动三维超声心动图测量的LVEDV和LVESV均明显大于手动测量值（P均<0.05）。全自动与手动三维超声心动图评价心室壁运动异常患者收缩功能损伤程度的一致性，经手动校准后（κ=0.74，P=0.00）优于手工校正前（κ=0.63，P=0.00）。全自动三维超声心动图检测LVEDV、LVESV和LVEF的观察者间和观察者内变异度均小于手动三维超声心动图（P均<0.05）。 结论： 采用全自动三维超声心动图测量心血管病患者左心室功能的准确性和重复性均良好，临床应用具有可行性。.

BACKGROUND: Real time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) provides a reliable analysis of left ventricular (LV) volume. Despite a wide spectrum of tracking algorithms presently available, which software is most suitable for evaluating functional single left ventricle (FLSV) is unknown. Herein, we compared two of the most commonly used 3DE algorithms for quantification of LV volumes in the pediatric population with FLSV.
METHODS: Thirty-six children with FLSV were prospectively enrolled. The LV volume analysis was performed on QLAB 8.1 (semiautomated border tracking) and TomTec 4D LV 3.0 (manual dominant border tracking) and compared with MRI as the reference standard.
RESULTS: 3DE volume quantification was achieved for 32 children with QLAB and 34 children with TomTec. Analysis time was much shorter for QLAB than TomTec (4.8 ± 1.2 vs. 6.3 ± 1.8 minutes, P < 0.05). Ejection fraction (EF) by either 3DE modality was significantly lower than the published normal values (P < 0.01 for each). End-diastolic volume (EDV), end-systolic volume (ESV), stroke volume, and EF calculated by both 3DE modalities underestimated MRI values. Compared to QLAB, TomTec showed better correlation and smaller intertechnique differences with MRI (the 95% limits of agreement, EDV: -20.84 to 5.18 mL in QLAB, -10.66 to 1.84 mL in TomTec; ESV: -8.94 to 3.07 mL in QLAB, -2.45 to 0.98 mL in TomTec; SV: -13.31 to 3.45 mL in QLAB, -9.34 to 2.0 mL in TomTec; EF: -12.07 to 7.76% in QLAB, -9.64 to 1.52% in TomTec), TomTec was more reproducible with better intraclass correlation coefficients and variation coefficients.
CONCLUSIONS: Both 3DE modalities tend to underestimate LV volumes, but the correlation of LV volumes and EF between 3DE and MRI still holds well. Despite a longer operating time, TomTec analysis is more accurate and reproducible.

暂无摘要。