First-pass and equilibrium radionuclide angiocardiography for evaluating ventricular performance. In: Simoons ML, Reiber JHC, editors. Nuclear imaging in clinical cardiology. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 1983. pp. 125-51. [DOI: 10.1007/978-94-009-6744-1_7]

Assessment of cardiac function by three-dimensional echocardiography compared with conventional noninvasive methods

BACKGROUND

Reliable, serial, noninvasive quantitative estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction is essential for selecting and timing therapeutic interventions in patients with heart disease. Equilibrium radionuclide angiography is widely used for this purpose but has well-recognized limitations. Advantages of echocardiography over equilibrium radionuclide angiography include assessment of wall motion, valvular pathology, and cardiac hemodynamics, in addition to portability, lack of radiation exposure, and substantially lower cost. However, conventional echocardiographic techniques are limited by geometric assumptions, image positioning errors, and use of subjective visual methods. To overcome these limitations, a three-dimensional echocardiographic method was developed. This study compares ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography, quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography, and subjective two-dimensional echocardiographic visual estimation with that by equilibrium radionuclide angiography.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Fifty-one unselected patients with suspected heart disease underwent left ventricular ejection fraction determination by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and three-dimensional echocardiography using an interactive line-of-intersection display and a new algorithm, ventricular surface reconstruction, for volume computation. In 44 patients, ejection fractions were also estimated visually by experienced observers from two-dimensional echocardiography and by quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography using an apical biplane summation-of-disks algorithm. An excellent correlation was obtained between three-dimensional echocardiography and equilibrium radionuclide angiography (r = .94 to .97, SEE = 3.64% to 5.35%; limits of agreement, 10.3% to 13.3%) without significant underestimation or overestimation. SEE values and limits of agreement were twofold to threefold lower than corresponding values for all two-dimensional echocardiographic techniques. In addition, interobserver variability was significantly lower for the three-dimensional echocardiographic method (10.2%) than for the apical biplane summation-of-disks method (26.1%) and subjective visual estimation (33.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

Determination of ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography yields results comparable to those obtained by equilibrium radionuclide angiography and is substantially superior to all two-dimensional echocardiographic methods. Therefore, three-dimensional echocardiography may be used for accurate serial quantification of left ventricular function as an alternative to equilibrium radionuclide angiography.

Early prognosis after thrombolysis: value of exercise radionuclide ventriculography performed on anti-ischaemic medication

We examined the prognostic value of exercise radionuclide ventriculography (RNV) performed on anti-ischaemic medication following thrombolysis. Within 3 months of thrombolysis for first myocardial infarction, 31 medically treated patients with revascularisable but non-critical and minimally symptomatic coronary disease had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) measured by first-pass exercise RNV. This was first performed off treatment and then repeated within 4 weeks on patients' regular medication. Follow-up at 12 months post-thrombolysis showed that 5 patients (Group I) had suffered significant recurrent symptoms (worsening angina requiring revascularisation in 3, unstable angina in 1, reinfarction in 1), but 26 remained well (Group II). Both groups were similar in age, post-thrombolytic severity of coronary disease, exercise LVEF whether off (39% vs 43%) or on medication (43% vs 44%), and change in LVEF with exercise ([symbol: see text]LVEF) off medication (-11% vs - 3%). However, on medication, there was a significant difference in mean [symbol: see text]LVEF between Groups I and II (-11% vs + 5%, P = 0.0008, 99% confidence interval = 4 to 26%). Thus, following thrombolysis, an abnormal [symbol: see text]LVEF despite anti-ischaemic medication may identify patients at risk of significant early recurrent ischaemia. Post-thrombolysis prognostic testing by exercise RNV may therefore be of greater value when performed on rather than off medication.