Joanne Eng-Frost, Rohanti Ravikulan, Jasmine Chan, Kate Kim, Scott Lorensini, Kate George, Emilie Rasheed, Sam Lehman, Majo Joseph, Carmine G De Pasquale
{"title":"A tale of two echoes: ultraportable versus standard echocardiography in patients with left ventricular dysfunction.","authors":"Joanne Eng-Frost, Rohanti Ravikulan, Jasmine Chan, Kate Kim, Scott Lorensini, Kate George, Emilie Rasheed, Sam Lehman, Majo Joseph, Carmine G De Pasquale","doi":"10.1111/imj.70156","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Handheld echocardiography (HHE) is an emerging tool offering portability and convenience for cardiac imaging. However, its validity in hospitalised patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is unclear.</p><p><strong>Aims: </strong>To determine the concordance of key LV and right ventricular (RV) echocardiographic parameters obtained by HHE and standard echocardiography (SE) in hospitalised patients with LV dysfunction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective study evaluated hospitalised patients with an echocardiogram during admission demonstrating LV ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. Key LV and right ventricular (RV) echocardiographic parameters were measured using both standard echocardiography (SE) and HHE. Concordance and differences between both imaging modalities were evaluated using Pearson correlation and paired Student t test, with significance defined as P < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 156 patients were included. No significant differences were observed between SE and HH for LV end-diastolic diameter (5.23 ± 0.87 vs. 5.28 ± 0.72 cm respectively, P = 0.348), LVEF (33.36 ± 9.2 vs. 33.17 ± 9.09, P = 0.521), LV outflow tract velocity time integral (15.83 ± 4.95 vs. 15.80 ± 5.05, P = 0.856) and inferior vena cava diameter (1.96 ± 0.48 vs. 1.92 ± 0.44, P = 0.122). Significant differences were noted for RV basal diameter (3.87 ± 0.63 cm vs. 3.76 ± 0.68 cm, P < 0.001) and tricuspid annular systolic excursion (1.76 ± 0.46 cm vs. 1.83 ± 0.47 cm, P = 0.025).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>HHE demonstrates strong concordance with SE for LV parameters. Discrepancies were observed for RV parameters, although the clinical implications of these differences are unclear. These findings highlight the evolving role of HHE as a reliable and accessible tool for experienced users, particularly for monitoring hospitalised patients such as those with acute heart failure, where the use of serial SE may enhance clinical decision-making but is limited by logistical barriers.</p>","PeriodicalId":13625,"journal":{"name":"Internal Medicine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internal Medicine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/imj.70156","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Handheld echocardiography (HHE) is an emerging tool offering portability and convenience for cardiac imaging. However, its validity in hospitalised patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction is unclear.
Aims: To determine the concordance of key LV and right ventricular (RV) echocardiographic parameters obtained by HHE and standard echocardiography (SE) in hospitalised patients with LV dysfunction.
Methods: This prospective study evaluated hospitalised patients with an echocardiogram during admission demonstrating LV ejection fraction (LVEF) <50%. Key LV and right ventricular (RV) echocardiographic parameters were measured using both standard echocardiography (SE) and HHE. Concordance and differences between both imaging modalities were evaluated using Pearson correlation and paired Student t test, with significance defined as P < 0.05.
Results: A total of 156 patients were included. No significant differences were observed between SE and HH for LV end-diastolic diameter (5.23 ± 0.87 vs. 5.28 ± 0.72 cm respectively, P = 0.348), LVEF (33.36 ± 9.2 vs. 33.17 ± 9.09, P = 0.521), LV outflow tract velocity time integral (15.83 ± 4.95 vs. 15.80 ± 5.05, P = 0.856) and inferior vena cava diameter (1.96 ± 0.48 vs. 1.92 ± 0.44, P = 0.122). Significant differences were noted for RV basal diameter (3.87 ± 0.63 cm vs. 3.76 ± 0.68 cm, P < 0.001) and tricuspid annular systolic excursion (1.76 ± 0.46 cm vs. 1.83 ± 0.47 cm, P = 0.025).
Conclusions: HHE demonstrates strong concordance with SE for LV parameters. Discrepancies were observed for RV parameters, although the clinical implications of these differences are unclear. These findings highlight the evolving role of HHE as a reliable and accessible tool for experienced users, particularly for monitoring hospitalised patients such as those with acute heart failure, where the use of serial SE may enhance clinical decision-making but is limited by logistical barriers.
期刊介绍：
The Internal Medicine Journal is the official journal of the Adult Medicine Division of The Royal Australasian College of Physicians (RACP). Its purpose is to publish high-quality internationally competitive peer-reviewed original medical research, both laboratory and clinical, relating to the study and research of human disease. Papers will be considered from all areas of medical practice and science. The Journal also has a major role in continuing medical education and publishes review articles relevant to physician education.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
