两个回声的故事:超便携与标准超声心动图在左心室功能障碍患者。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Joanne Eng-Frost, Rohanti Ravikulan, Jasmine Chan, Kate Kim, Scott Lorensini, Kate George, Emilie Rasheed, Sam Lehman, Majo Joseph, Carmine G De Pasquale
{"title":"两个回声的故事:超便携与标准超声心动图在左心室功能障碍患者。","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":"{\"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}","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

摘要

背景:手持式超声心动图(HHE)是一种新兴的工具,为心脏成像提供了便携性和便利性。然而,其在左心室功能障碍住院患者中的有效性尚不清楚。目的:探讨HHE与标准超声心动图(SE)对住院左室功能障碍患者左室、右室关键超声心动图参数的一致性。方法:本前瞻性研究评估入院时超声心动图显示左室射血分数(LVEF)的住院患者。结果:共纳入156例患者。SE组与HH组左室舒张末期内径(分别为5.23±0.87比5.28±0.72 cm, P = 0.348)、LVEF(分别为33.36±9.2比33.17±9.09,P = 0.521)、左室流出道流速时间积分(分别为15.83±4.95比15.80±5.05,P = 0.856)、下腔静脉内径(分别为1.96±0.48比1.92±0.44,P = 0.122)差异无统计学意义。左心室基底直径(3.87±0.63 cm)与左心室基底直径(3.76±0.68 cm)差异有统计学意义(P)。结论:HHE与SE在左心室参数上具有很强的一致性。尽管这些差异的临床意义尚不清楚,但仍观察到RV参数的差异。这些发现强调了HHE作为经验丰富的用户可靠和可获得的工具的不断发展的作用,特别是用于监测住院患者,如急性心力衰竭患者,在这些患者中,系列SE的使用可能会增强临床决策,但受到后勤障碍的限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A tale of two echoes: ultraportable versus standard echocardiography in patients with left ventricular dysfunction.

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.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Internal Medicine Journal
Internal Medicine Journal 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
4.80%
发文量
600
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信