• J Am Soc Echocardiogr · Nov 1996

    Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial

    A prospective, randomized, blinded comparison of multiplane and biplane transesophageal echocardiographic techniques.

    • J G Warner, A M Nomeir, M Salim, and D W Kitzman.
    • Department of Internal Medicine, Bowman Gray School of Medicine of Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1045, USA.
    • J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 1996 Nov 1;9(6):865-73.

    AbstractAlthough multiplane transesophageal echocardiography has become an accepted diagnostic technique, there is a paucity of literature directly comparing the diagnostic yield of multiplane and biplane transesophageal examinations. This study was designed to compare the ability of multiplane and biplane transesophageal echocardiographic techniques to visualize intracardiac structures. Complete multiplane and biplane transesophageal studies were performed on each of 50 patients (100 total studies) referred to the echocardiography laboratory for elective transesophageal echocardiography. The biplane examinations were performed with a multiplane probe with angles only at 0 and 90 degrees. Images of 29 prospectively selected cardiac structures and valvular function parameters were scored as follows: 0 = not visualized, 1 = visualized well enough to identify structure, 2 = diagnostic quality, and 3 = exceptional quality. The scores for the individual structures were combined to identify total structure visualization quality scores for each of the imaging techniques. A separate subjective score was also determined to assess the overall adequacy of each study for addressing the clinical indication. The total structure visualization quality score was significantly higher for multiplane transesophageal echocardiography than for biplane transesophageal echocardiography (49 +/- 7 versus 45 +/- 7; p = 0.0001). Several individual structures were visualized significantly better (p < 0.05) by the multiplane technique, including the left upper pulmonary vein, fossa ovalis, left main coronary artery, and proximal ascending aorta. The subjective score of overall adequacy of the study for addressing the clinical indication showed a strong trend (p < 0.06) in favor of the multiplane technique, with higher scores in 11 of 50 multiplane studies versus three of 50 biplane studies when the two techniques were compared in individual patients. Therefore multiplane transesophageal echocardiography provides superior overall visualization of intracardiac structures compared with biplane studies, particularly for the left upper pulmonary vein, fossa ovalis, left main coronary artery, and ascending aorta.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…