Dataset Information

Reference Values of Right Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction by Three-Dimensional Echocardiography in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

ABSTRACT: Objective: This study was conducted in order to determine the reference values for right ventricular (RV) volumes and ejection fraction (EF) using three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) and to identify sources of variance through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods: This systematic review was preregistered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/) (CRD42020211002). Relevant studies were identified by searches of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases through October 12, 2020. Pooled reference values were calculated using the random-effects model weighted by inverse variance. Meta-regression analysis and Egger's test were used to determine the source of heterogeneity. A subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate the reference values across different conditions. Results: The search identified 25 studies of 2,165 subjects. The mean reference values were as follows: RV end-diastolic volume, 100.71 ml [95% confidence interval (CI), 90.92-110.51 ml); RV end-systolic volume, 44.19 ml (95% CI, 39.05-49.33 ml); RV end-diastolic volume indexed, 57.01 ml/m² (95% CI, 51.93-62.08 ml/m²); RV end-systolic volume indexed, 25.41 ml/m² (95% CI, 22.58-28.24 ml/m²); and RVEF, 56.20% (95% CI, 54.59-57.82%). The sex- and age-specific reference values were assessed according to the studies reporting the values of different sexes and age distributions, respectively. In addition, the vendor- and software-specific reference values were analyzed. The meta-regression analysis revealed that sex, frame rate, pulmonary artery systolic pressure, and software packages were associated with variations in RV volumes (P < 0.05). Inter-vendor and inter-software discrepancies may explain the variability of RVEF. Conclusions: The reference values for RV volumes and RVEF using 3DE were assessed. The confounders that impacted the variability in RV volumes or RVEF contained the sex, frame rate, pulmonary artery systolic pressure, inter-vendor discrepancies, and inter-software discrepancies.

SUBMITTER: Wang S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8495027 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background: RVEF (right ventricular ejection fraction) measured by three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) has been used in evaluating right ventricular (RV) function and can provide useful prognostic information in other various cardiovascular diseases. However, the prognostic value of 3D-RVEF in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) remains unknown. We aimed to investigate whether 3D-RVEF can predict the mortality of COVID-19 patients. Methods: A cohort of 128 COVID-19-confirmed patients who had undergone echocardiography were studied. Thirty-one healthy volunteers were also enrolled as controls. COVID-19 patients were divided into three subgroups (general, severe, and critical) according to COVID-19 severity-of-illness. Conventional RV structure and function parameters, RV free wall longitudinal strain (FWLS) and 3D-RVEF were acquired. RVFWLS was measured by two-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography. RVEF was acquired by 3DE. Results: Compared with controls, 2D-RVFWLS and 3D-RVEF were both significantly decreased in COVID-19 patients (-27.2 ± 4.4% vs. -22.9 ± 4.8%, P < 0.001; 53.7 ± 4.5% vs. 48.5 ± 5.8%, P < 0.001). Critical patients were more likely to have a higher incidence of acute cardiac injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and worse prognosis than general and severe patients. The critical patients exhibited larger right-heart chambers, worse RV fractional area change (RVFAC), 2D-RVFWLS, and 3D-RVEF and higher proportion of pulmonary hypertension than general and severe patients. Eighteen patients died during a median follow-up of 91 days. The multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed the acute cardiac injury, ARDS, RVFAC, RVFWLS, and 3D-RVEF were independent predictors of death. 3D-RVEF (chi-square to improve 18.3; P < 0.001), RVFAC (chi-square to improve 4.5; P = 0.034) and 2D-RVFWLS (chi-square to improve 5.1; P = 0.024) all provided additional prognostic value of higher mortality over clinical risk factors. Moreover, the incremental predictive value of 3D-RVEF was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than RVFAC and RVFWLS. Conclusion: 3D-RVEF was the most robust independent predictor of mortality in COVID-19 patients and provided a higher predictive value over conventional RV function parameters and RVFWLS, which may be helpful to identify COVID-19 patients at a higher risk of death.

Dataset Information

Reference Values of Right Ventricular Volumes and Ejection Fraction by Three-Dimensional Echocardiography in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets