• Ellen Ostenfeld, Kambiz Shahgaldi, Reidar Winter, Ronnie Willenheimer, and Johan Holm.
• Department of Cardiology, Malmö University Hospital, Lund University, Malmäo, Sweden. ellen.ostenfeld@med.lu.se
• Clin Physiol Funct Imaging. 2008 Nov 1;28(6):409-16.

AbstractStudies seeking to validate real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) with regard to cardiac function and dimensions have almost exclusively used apical views. However, it has never been examined whether apical views are preferable to parasternal or subcostal views. In the present study, we compared the feasibility of 3DE volumetric measurements of the four heart chambers in three different views. We included 40 patients planned for a routine two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography examination (2DE). All patients were scanned with both 2DE and 3DE (Sonos 7500; Philips Medical Systems Andover, MA, USA). Parasternal, apical and subcostal views were used for 3DE. Volumes were calculated using manual tracing in 16 planes. 2DE was performed in parasternal longaxis, subcostal and apical four- and two-chamber views. Manual tracing was used for area calculations. To be judged fully traceable, 5/6 (85%) or more of the ventricular and atrial walls had to be adequately visualized in each plane. The left ventricle and left atrium were adequately visualized in the 3DE apical view in 34 (85%) and 40 (100%) patients, respectively. Visualization of the right atrium was adequate in 31 (78%) patients, whereas the right ventricle was adequately visualized in only 12 (30%) patients. The apical view of 3DE provided superior visualization of all four heart chambers compared with the parasternal and subcostal views, when applying a slight off-axis approach for both ventricles when needed. Thus, in the present study, there was no incremental value of assessment of chamber volumes in the parasternal and subcostal views.

18 keywords...

hide…