Multimodality imaging of the left ventricle: Choosing soundly

Non-Invasive Assessment of Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction: Where Do We Stand?

“…Unlike 2D, 3D methods are less affected by the shape of LV cavity. When compared to other echocardiographic methods, LVEF evaluation using a 3D modality proved to be more accurate and far less variable [8,11]. However, whereas irregular geometry can be addressed by 3D imaging, limited image quality remains a potential issue with 3D echocardiography and the suboptimal spatial resolution may lead to the incorporation of the trabeculae in the myocardial tracing, hence affecting LV volume measurements [12].…”

“…The main disadvantage is the high dose of radiation exposure, which makes such techniques unsuitable in clinical conditions, requiring repeated measures of LVEF and volumes. Moreover, low temporal resolution may lead to an underestimation of LV volumes [11].…”

“…Contrast echocardiography and 3D TTE have been proven to significantly improve the diagnostic accuracy of the standard 2D TTE, providing values for LV volumes and EF that strongly correlate with those of CMR, but their use is frequently limited mainly because of the need for i.v. access, specific ultrasound probes and expertise [1,9,11].…”