Sian Botley, Emily Challinor, Tom E Ingram, Eveline Lee, V. Pakala
{"title":"有效的回声筛查和多模态一致性评估胸主动脉升主动脉径","authors":"Sian Botley, Emily Challinor, Tom E Ingram, Eveline Lee, V. Pakala","doi":"10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.60","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Accurate measurement and interval monitoring of the ascending aorta for at risk individuals are crucial for prevention of life-threatening complications. Echocardiography (echo) is the first line screening test. Positive results are referred for computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), both are considered gold standard methods for imaging the whole aorta. These tests involve radiation (CT) and contrast (CT & MRI) exposure. An effective screening echo streamlines subsequent referrals to CT and MRI. Several published references (1,2,3) are in clinical use. Measurements are normalised to body surface area (1,3), height (2), gender (2,3) and age (3). The aims of this study were: Assess the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements between echo and CT. Compare the rate of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing references (1,2,3). Methods Between Sep 2018 and Sep 2019, 107 patients underwent gated CT thoracic aorta at our institute as per clinically indicated. We retrospectively examined these records. We used Bland Altman plot to assess inter-modality agreement (echo & CT) of ascending aorta measurements. We reported inter and intra-observer variability for echo measurements as coefficient of variation. Echo aorta measurements were coded into ‘dilated’ or ‘normal’ after normalising for age, sex, height and weight as per the existing references (1,2,3). The rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the three reference methods (1,2,3) were compared using Chi-squared test with Bonferroni adjustment. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25 (IBM). Results Data were excluded from analysis due to incomplete biometrics (9), poor echo images (27). 71 subjects were included for analysis (age 68 ± 14 years, BSA 1.9 ± 0.2 m2, 52.1% male). 16 had bicuspid aortic valves. Intra- and inter-observer variability for echo measurements were 1.2% and 1.4% respectively. Figure 1 shows the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements. Echo underestimated ascending aorta dimensions by a mean of 1.4 ± 2.7 mm (95% CI 0.7-2.0 mm). There was a significant difference in the rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing reference ranges (1,2,3): 59% (1), 27% (3) and 59% (2) of subjects had ‘dilated aorta’, χ2 = 15.3, p=0.00. Conclusion Echo is an effective screening test for detecting ascending aorta dilatation. In our department, it has excellent intra- and inter- observer variability and good measurement agreement with CT. Normalising aortic dimension (3) resulted in the fewest ‘positive test’ requiring further imaging; potentially improving clinical efficacy of the service and avoiding contrast and radiation exposure for the patients. References Evangelista A, Flachskampf FA, Erbel R, et al. Echocardiography in aortic diseases: EAE recommendations for clinical practice. European Journal of Echocardiography 2010;11(8):645–658. Pham MH, Ballegaard C, de Knegt MC, et al. Normal values of aortic dimensions assessed by multidetector computed tomography in the Copenhagen General Population Study. European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging 2019;20(8):939–948. Turkbey EB, Jain A, Johnson C, et al. Determinants and normal values of ascending aortic diameter by age, gender, and race/ethnicity in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2014;39(2):360–368. Conflict of Interest N/A","PeriodicalId":193598,"journal":{"name":"Allied health professionals/Nursing/Health scientists","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"60 Effective echo screening and inter modality agreement in the assessment of ascending thoracic aorta dimension\",\"authors\":\"Sian Botley, Emily Challinor, Tom E Ingram, Eveline Lee, V. Pakala\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.60\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction Accurate measurement and interval monitoring of the ascending aorta for at risk individuals are crucial for prevention of life-threatening complications. Echocardiography (echo) is the first line screening test. Positive results are referred for computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), both are considered gold standard methods for imaging the whole aorta. These tests involve radiation (CT) and contrast (CT & MRI) exposure. An effective screening echo streamlines subsequent referrals to CT and MRI. Several published references (1,2,3) are in clinical use. Measurements are normalised to body surface area (1,3), height (2), gender (2,3) and age (3). The aims of this study were: Assess the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements between echo and CT. Compare the rate of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing references (1,2,3). Methods Between Sep 2018 and Sep 2019, 107 patients underwent gated CT thoracic aorta at our institute as per clinically indicated. We retrospectively examined these records. We used Bland Altman plot to assess inter-modality agreement (echo & CT) of ascending aorta measurements. We reported inter and intra-observer variability for echo measurements as coefficient of variation. Echo aorta measurements were coded into ‘dilated’ or ‘normal’ after normalising for age, sex, height and weight as per the existing references (1,2,3). The rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the three reference methods (1,2,3) were compared using Chi-squared test with Bonferroni adjustment. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25 (IBM). Results Data were excluded from analysis due to incomplete biometrics (9), poor echo images (27). 71 subjects were included for analysis (age 68 ± 14 years, BSA 1.9 ± 0.2 m2, 52.1% male). 16 had bicuspid aortic valves. Intra- and inter-observer variability for echo measurements were 1.2% and 1.4% respectively. Figure 1 shows the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements. Echo underestimated ascending aorta dimensions by a mean of 1.4 ± 2.7 mm (95% CI 0.7-2.0 mm). There was a significant difference in the rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing reference ranges (1,2,3): 59% (1), 27% (3) and 59% (2) of subjects had ‘dilated aorta’, χ2 = 15.3, p=0.00. Conclusion Echo is an effective screening test for detecting ascending aorta dilatation. In our department, it has excellent intra- and inter- observer variability and good measurement agreement with CT. Normalising aortic dimension (3) resulted in the fewest ‘positive test’ requiring further imaging; potentially improving clinical efficacy of the service and avoiding contrast and radiation exposure for the patients. References Evangelista A, Flachskampf FA, Erbel R, et al. Echocardiography in aortic diseases: EAE recommendations for clinical practice. European Journal of Echocardiography 2010;11(8):645–658. Pham MH, Ballegaard C, de Knegt MC, et al. Normal values of aortic dimensions assessed by multidetector computed tomography in the Copenhagen General Population Study. European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging 2019;20(8):939–948. Turkbey EB, Jain A, Johnson C, et al. Determinants and normal values of ascending aortic diameter by age, gender, and race/ethnicity in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2014;39(2):360–368. Conflict of Interest N/A\",\"PeriodicalId\":193598,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Allied health professionals/Nursing/Health scientists\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Allied health professionals/Nursing/Health scientists\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.60\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allied health professionals/Nursing/Health scientists","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/HEARTJNL-2020-BCS.60","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
高危人群升主动脉的准确测量和间隔监测对于预防危及生命的并发症至关重要。超声心动图(echo)是一线筛查试验。阳性结果可用于计算机断层扫描(CT)或磁共振成像(MRI),两者都被认为是整个主动脉成像的金标准方法。这些测试包括辐射(CT)和对比(CT和MRI)暴露。有效的筛查回声简化了后续的CT和MRI转诊。一些已发表的参考文献(1,2,3)正在临床应用中。测量归一化为体表面积(1,3)、身高(2)、性别(2,3)和年龄(3)。本研究的目的是:评估超声和CT之间升主动脉测量的模态一致性。使用现有文献比较“主动脉扩张”的比率(1,2,3)。方法2018年9月至2019年9月,我院根据临床表现对107例患者行门控胸主动脉CT检查。我们回顾性地检查了这些记录。我们使用Bland Altman图来评估升主动脉测量的多模态一致性(回声和CT)。我们报告了回波测量的观察者间和观察者内部的变异系数。根据现有参考文献(1,2,3),将年龄、性别、身高和体重归一化后,将回声主动脉测量值编码为“扩张”或“正常”。三种参考方法(1、2、3)的“主动脉扩张”率采用卡方检验并进行Bonferroni校正。采用SPSS 25 (IBM)进行统计学分析。结果由于生物特征不完整(9),回声图像差(27),数据被排除在分析之外。纳入71例分析对象(年龄68±14岁,BSA 1.9±0.2 m2,男性52.1%)。16例有二尖瓣主动脉瓣。回声测量的观察者内部和观察者之间的变异率分别为1.2%和1.4%。图1显示升主动脉测量的模态一致性。回声平均低估升主动脉尺寸1.4±2.7 mm (95% CI 0.7 ~ 2.0 mm)。使用现有参考范围(1,2,3),“主动脉扩张”的发生率有显著差异:59%(1)、27%(3)和59%(2)的受试者存在“主动脉扩张”,χ2 = 15.3, p=0.00。结论超声是一种有效的检测升主动脉扩张的筛查方法。在我科,它具有出色的观察者内部和观察者之间的可变性,并且与CT的测量结果很好地吻合。主动脉尺寸正常化(3)导致需要进一步影像学检查的“阳性试验”最少;可能提高该服务的临床疗效,避免患者的对比和辐射暴露。参考文献Evangelista A, Flachskampf FA, Erbel R,等。主动脉疾病的超声心动图:EAE对临床实践的建议。超声心动图杂志2010;11(8):645-658。Pham MH, Ballegaard C, de knnett MC,等。哥本哈根普通人群研究中多探测器计算机断层扫描评估主动脉尺寸的正常值。中华心血管病杂志;2019;20(8):939-948。李建军,李建军,李建军,等。在多民族动脉粥样硬化研究(MESA)中,升主动脉直径的决定因素和正常值与年龄、性别和种族/民族有关。磁共振成像学报,2014;39(2):360-368。利益冲突:无
60 Effective echo screening and inter modality agreement in the assessment of ascending thoracic aorta dimension
Introduction Accurate measurement and interval monitoring of the ascending aorta for at risk individuals are crucial for prevention of life-threatening complications. Echocardiography (echo) is the first line screening test. Positive results are referred for computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), both are considered gold standard methods for imaging the whole aorta. These tests involve radiation (CT) and contrast (CT & MRI) exposure. An effective screening echo streamlines subsequent referrals to CT and MRI. Several published references (1,2,3) are in clinical use. Measurements are normalised to body surface area (1,3), height (2), gender (2,3) and age (3). The aims of this study were: Assess the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements between echo and CT. Compare the rate of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing references (1,2,3). Methods Between Sep 2018 and Sep 2019, 107 patients underwent gated CT thoracic aorta at our institute as per clinically indicated. We retrospectively examined these records. We used Bland Altman plot to assess inter-modality agreement (echo & CT) of ascending aorta measurements. We reported inter and intra-observer variability for echo measurements as coefficient of variation. Echo aorta measurements were coded into ‘dilated’ or ‘normal’ after normalising for age, sex, height and weight as per the existing references (1,2,3). The rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the three reference methods (1,2,3) were compared using Chi-squared test with Bonferroni adjustment. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 25 (IBM). Results Data were excluded from analysis due to incomplete biometrics (9), poor echo images (27). 71 subjects were included for analysis (age 68 ± 14 years, BSA 1.9 ± 0.2 m2, 52.1% male). 16 had bicuspid aortic valves. Intra- and inter-observer variability for echo measurements were 1.2% and 1.4% respectively. Figure 1 shows the inter-modality agreement of ascending aorta measurements. Echo underestimated ascending aorta dimensions by a mean of 1.4 ± 2.7 mm (95% CI 0.7-2.0 mm). There was a significant difference in the rates of ‘dilated aorta’ using the existing reference ranges (1,2,3): 59% (1), 27% (3) and 59% (2) of subjects had ‘dilated aorta’, χ2 = 15.3, p=0.00. Conclusion Echo is an effective screening test for detecting ascending aorta dilatation. In our department, it has excellent intra- and inter- observer variability and good measurement agreement with CT. Normalising aortic dimension (3) resulted in the fewest ‘positive test’ requiring further imaging; potentially improving clinical efficacy of the service and avoiding contrast and radiation exposure for the patients. References Evangelista A, Flachskampf FA, Erbel R, et al. Echocardiography in aortic diseases: EAE recommendations for clinical practice. European Journal of Echocardiography 2010;11(8):645–658. Pham MH, Ballegaard C, de Knegt MC, et al. Normal values of aortic dimensions assessed by multidetector computed tomography in the Copenhagen General Population Study. European Heart Journal-Cardiovascular Imaging 2019;20(8):939–948. Turkbey EB, Jain A, Johnson C, et al. Determinants and normal values of ascending aortic diameter by age, gender, and race/ethnicity in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). Journal of Magnetic Resonance Imaging 2014;39(2):360–368. Conflict of Interest N/A