SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Angiology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Pontillo, D.
Right arrow Articles by Scabbia, E. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Pontillo, D.
Right arrow Articles by Scabbia, E. V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Comparison of Two Different Methods for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease

Daniele Pontillo

Division of Cardiology, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo

Nicolino Patruno

S. Giuseppe Hospital, Albano Laziale, Italy

Aldo Capezzuto

Division of Cardiology, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo

Francesco Serra

Division of Cardiology, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo

Massimo Sassara

Division of Cardiology, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo

Enrico Vittorio Scabbia

Division of Cardiology, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo

The evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) may be troublesome in difficult clinical settings in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). The aim of this study was to compare 2 simple geometrical and nongeometrical methods of LVEF evaluation that could overcome the typical technical limitations of ultrasound examination. The authors studied 26 patients with proven CAD (63 ± 10 years) who underwent left ventricular (LV) catheterization and coronary angiography during the hospital stay. A complete 2D-Doppler echocardiography was performed and LVEF was evaluated with the formula by Wyatt (W-LVEF), which relates the left ventricle to a biplane ellipsoidal figure, and by the myocardial performance index (MPI) formula (MPI-LVEF), MPI being an index of systodiastolic function. Mean MPI-LVEF was 41 ±8% and was significantly lower with respect to contrast angiography (52 ± 14%, p = 0.0003) and to W-LVEF (49 ± 13%, p = 0.0009). There was no statistically significant correlation between MPI-LVEF and geometric (either angiographic or ultrasound) LVEF. Bland-Altman analysis showed lack of agreement between MPI-LVEF and any other method evaluated in the study. MPI-LVEF may not be reliable and accurate for the evaluation of systolic function in patients with CAD. Nonetheless, the evaluation of global LV function by means of MPI may represent a valuable and affordable alternative to expensive and time-consuming methods, especially in the presence of difficult technical settings.

Angiology, Vol. 53, No. 6, 693-698 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/000331970205300610
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement