We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Validation Studies
Diagnostic performance of handheld echocardiography for the assessment of basic cardiac morphology and function: a validation study in routine cardiac patients.
Echocardiography 2012 September
AIMS: To investigate the intra- and interrater variability of expert users in the interpretation of handheld echocardiographic studies (HAND).
METHODS: We scanned 320 consecutive patients with both HAND and high-end (HIGH) scanners. Images were interpreted independently by two blinded level III echocardiographers. Readings from the HIGH scanner served as the gold standard. Segmental endocardial-border delineation was scored to describe image quality. Assessment of left ventricular (LV) dimensions and regional/global LV function, and grading of valve disease were compared.
RESULTS: We obtained correlations of r > 0.8 (P < 0.01) for intrarater variability for both expert readers when they analyzed HAND and HIGH images in relation to image quality, wall-motion abnormalities, and LV measurements. For intrarater variability of LVEF assessment, the correlations were at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). Interrater variability for HIGH images was r = 0.9 (P < 0.01) for all parameters. Interrater variability for HAND images was less favorable for all parameters, but was at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). All cases of pericardial effusion were detected. The agreement for the detection and grading of mitral and aortic regurgitation was at least moderate (κ > 0.6, P < 0.01). Detection of tricuspid regurgitation was less favorable, but only cases of mild regurgitation were missed. All cases of aortic stenosis were detected by both echocardiographers.
CONCLUSIONS: In relation to the basic assessment of cardiac morphology and function, the interpretation by experienced echocardiographers of images obtained using handheld echocardiographic devices showed a moderate to very good correlation with standard echocardiography.
METHODS: We scanned 320 consecutive patients with both HAND and high-end (HIGH) scanners. Images were interpreted independently by two blinded level III echocardiographers. Readings from the HIGH scanner served as the gold standard. Segmental endocardial-border delineation was scored to describe image quality. Assessment of left ventricular (LV) dimensions and regional/global LV function, and grading of valve disease were compared.
RESULTS: We obtained correlations of r > 0.8 (P < 0.01) for intrarater variability for both expert readers when they analyzed HAND and HIGH images in relation to image quality, wall-motion abnormalities, and LV measurements. For intrarater variability of LVEF assessment, the correlations were at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). Interrater variability for HIGH images was r = 0.9 (P < 0.01) for all parameters. Interrater variability for HAND images was less favorable for all parameters, but was at least moderate (r > 0.6, P < 0.01). All cases of pericardial effusion were detected. The agreement for the detection and grading of mitral and aortic regurgitation was at least moderate (κ > 0.6, P < 0.01). Detection of tricuspid regurgitation was less favorable, but only cases of mild regurgitation were missed. All cases of aortic stenosis were detected by both echocardiographers.
CONCLUSIONS: In relation to the basic assessment of cardiac morphology and function, the interpretation by experienced echocardiographers of images obtained using handheld echocardiographic devices showed a moderate to very good correlation with standard echocardiography.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app