A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1034
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3152
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Assessment of right ventricular function by real-time three-dimensional echocardiography improves accuracy and decreases interobserver variability compared with conventional two-dimensional views. | LitMetric

Aims: Two-dimensional echocardiographic (2DE) assessment of right ventricular (RV) function is difficult, often resulting in inconsistent RV evaluation. Real-time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) allows the RV to be viewed in multiple planes, which can potentially improve RV assessment and limit interobserver variability when compared with 2DE.

Methods And Results: Twenty-five patients underwent 2DE and RT3DE. Views of 2DE (RV inflow, RV short axis, and apical four-chamber) were compared with RT3DE views by four readers. RT3DE data sets were sliced from anterior-posterior (apical view) and from base to apex (short axis) to obtain six standardized planes. Readers recorded the RV ejection fraction (RVEF) from 2DE and RT3DE images. RVEF recorded by RT3DE (RVEF(3D)) and 2D (RVEF(2D)) were compared with RVEF by disc summation (RVEF(DS)), which was used as a reference. Interobserver variability among readers of RVEF(3D) and RVEF(2D) was then compared. Overall, mean RVEF(DS), RVEF(3D), and RVEF(2D) were 37 +/- 11%, 38 +/- 10%, 41 +/- 10%, respectively. The mean difference of RVEF(3D)-RVEF(DS) was significantly less than RVEF(2D)-RVEF(DS) (3.7 +/- 4% vs. 7.1 +/- 5%, P = 0.0066, F-test). RVEF(3D) correlated better with RVEF(DS) (r = 0.875 vs. r = 0.69, P = 0.028, t-test). RVEF(3D) was associated with a 39% decrease in interobserver variability when compared with RVEF(2D) [standard deviation of mean difference: 3.7 vs. 5.1, (RT3DE vs. 2DE), P = 0.018, t-test].

Conclusions: RT3DE provides improved accuracy of RV function assessment and decreases interobserver variability when compared with 2D views.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3003552PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejechocard/jep013DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

interobserver variability
20
variability compared
16
rvef3d rvef2d
12
assessment ventricular
8
ventricular function
8
real-time three-dimensional
8
three-dimensional echocardiography
8
decreases interobserver
8
rt3de
8
2de rt3de
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!