摘要： 目的 比较2种三维超声心动图(3DE)定量分析软件QLAB和TomTec在不同图像帧频下评价左心室收缩功能和同步性是否存在差异。方法 根据左心室射血分数(LVEF)是否减低,将73例受试者分为LVEF正常组和LVEF减低组。分别采集4个和6个心动周期全容积3DE图像,帧频分别为(17±2)fps和(22±3)fps,比较QLAB和TomTec 2种软件以及同一软件2种帧频下测量的左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)、收缩末期容积(LVESV)、LVEF和收缩不同步指数(SDI)的差异。结果 QLAB和TomTec 2种软件以及同一软件2种帧频下测量的LVEDV、LVESV、LVEF均无统计学差异(P > 0.05),但高帧频图像测量的SDI高于低帧频图像(P <0.05),TomTec测量的SDI大于QLAB(P < 0.01)。2种软件测量的LVEDV、LVESV和LVEF呈高度相关,SDI呈中度相关,一致性均良好。结论 QLAB和TomTec 2种软件以及同一软件不同帧频下测量的左心室容积和收缩功能无显著差异,但同步性参数有显著差异。建议临床工作中采集3DE图像时尽量提高图像帧频,并使用同一软件测量,特别是在测量同步性参数时。

应用2种三维超声心动图定量分析软件在不同图像帧频下评价左心室收缩功能和同步性

孔凡鑫, 李光源, 王永槐, 马春燕, 杨军

中国医科大学附属第一医院心血管超声科, 辽宁省影像医学临床医学研究中心, 沈阳 110001

收稿日期:2022-04-27出版日期:2022-08-30发布日期:2022-07-19
通讯作者:李光源E-mail:604221697@qq.com
作者简介:孔凡鑫（1993-），女，医师，硕士.
基金资助:国家自然科学基金（U21A20387）；沈阳市科学技术计划公共卫生研发专项（20-205-4-014）


关键词: 三维超声心动图, 左心室收缩功能, 同步性, 帧频, 定量分析软件
Abstract: Objective To evaluate the left ventricular systolic function and synchrony parameter at two frame rates using two three-dimensional echocardiography(3DE) quantification applications, QLAB and TomTec. Methods Seventy-three participants were randomly enrolled and divided into two subgroups based on whether left ventricular ejection fraction(LVEF) decreased. They all underwent two-dimensional echocardiography and 3DE that allows for images to be taken at different frame rates(17±2 fps and 22±3 fps). Left ventricular end-diastolic volume(LVEDV),left ventricular end-systolic volume(LVESV), LVEF, and systolic dyssynchrony index(SDI) taken at two frame rates and measured by the two 3DE analysis softwares, QLAB 13.0 and TomTec(Image-Arena 4.6), were compared. Results There was no significant difference in LVEDV, LVESV, and LVEF between the images taken with high and low frame rates and between QLAB and TomTec(P > 0.05). However, the SDI of the image taken at the higher frame rate was significantly higher than that taken at the lower frame rate, and it was significantly higher in TomTec than in QLAB(P < 0.05). The correlation and consistency of LVEDV, LVESV, LVEF, and SDI measurements between the two softwares were good. Conclusion There is no significant difference in left ventricular volume and systolic function measured by QLAB and TomTec at the two frame rates, whereas the systolic synchrony parameter is significantly different. Hence, these results indicate that the machine should be regulated to improve the frame rate of 3DE images during routine work, and the same 3DE quantification application should be used to measure parameters, especially those relating to systolic synchronization.
Key words: three-dimensional echocardiography, left ventricular systolic function, synchronization, frame rate, quantitative analysis software
PDF全文下载地址:

https://journal.cmu.edu.cn/CN/article/downloadArticleFile.do?attachType=PDF&id=3041