Abstract
Funding Acknowledgements
WASE Normal Values Study is sponsored by American Society Echocardiography Foundation.
OnBehalf
the WASE Investigators
Background
Left ventricular (LV) stroke volume (SV) can be determined by multiple ultrasound methods, including Doppler, two- (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography. However, how methods compare to each other is not well understood. In this report from the WASE study, we aim to examine and compare normal reference ranges for SV and SV index (SVI) obtained from healthy adults by Doppler, 2D Simpson’s and 3D methods.
Methods
WASE Normal Values Study is a multinational, observational, cross-sectional study. Individuals free from known cardiac, lung and renal disease were prospectively enrolled with even distribution among age groups and gender. Doppler, 2D and 3D datasets were acquired at the enrolling centers, following a standardized protocol. LV SV was measured by three methods: Doppler (LV outflow tract diameter and velocity time integral), 2D biplane Simpson’s rule and 3D volume method. SV was indexed by body surface area (SVI). All measurements were analyzed (TOMTEC) in two core laboratories (for 2D and 3D) following ASE Guidelines. Methods were compared by Friedman test and Bland-Altman analysis.
Results
As of May 2019, 646 cases have been analyzed in both 2D and 3D datasets. In this population, age was 45 ± 16 years old (range 18-85) and body surface area was 1.76 ± 0.22 m² (range 0.95-2.44). LV EF by 2D Simpson’s rule and 3D method were 63.2 ± 2.9 and 62.3 ± 5.0 %, respectively (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon test). SVI by Doppler, 2D and 3D were 39.6 ± 7.6, 33.8 ± 6.5 and 41.0 ± 9.4 ml/m², respectively. There were significant differences between the three methods (p < 0.0001, Friedman test). 2D underestimated SVI compared to Doppler by 14.6% (mean of differences 5.8 ml/m², p < 0.0001) and 3D by 17.6% (7.2 ml/m², p < 0.001). The difference between Doppler and 3D was smaller (3.4% lower by Doppler) but still statistically significant (1.4 ml/m², p = 0.0008). The results are shown in the figure.
Conclusions
Comparing 3 modalities in a large population of healthy individuals, SV and SVI are underestimated by 2D Simpson’s method. Given the large differences, combining 2D and Doppler or 3D measurements for hemodynamic calculations (such as regurgitant volumes and fraction) should be done with caution.
Abstract 104 Figure.