Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/8937
Full metadata record
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Esenboğa, Kerim | - |
dc.contributor.author | Tulunay Kaya, Cansın | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kılıçkap, Mustafa | - |
dc.contributor.author | Koca, Çiğdem | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kozluca, Volkan | - |
dc.contributor.author | Dinçer, İrem | - |
dc.contributor.author | Peker, Elif | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-11-30T19:23:57Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2022-11-30T19:23:57Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2149-2263 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2149-2271 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.367 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://search.trdizin.gov.tr/yayin/detay/520916 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11851/8937 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: Visual estimation of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is still used in routine clinical practice. However, most of the studies evaluating the agreement between the visually estimated LVEF (ve-LVEF) and quantitatively measured LVEF (qm-LVEF) either have not used appropriate statistical methods or gold standard imaging modality. In this study, we aimed to assess the agreement between the ve-LVEF and qm-LVEF using contemporary statistical methods and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMRI). Methods: In 54 subjects who underwent 1.5-T CMRI, echocardiographic images were recorded after the CMRI procedure on the same day. Two independent observers estimated ve-LVEFs on echocardiographic records in a random and blinded fashion, and qm-LVEF was obtained by CMRI. Agreement between the ve-LVEF and qm-LVEF values and intra/ interobserver ve-LVEF estimations were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Bland-Altman analysis, and kappa statistics. Results: There was a high agreement between the ve-LVEF and qm-LVEF (ICC 0.93, 95% confidence interval 0.88–0.96). Bland-Altman analysis also demonstrated a good agreement between ve-LVEF and qm-LVEF with ve-LVEF, on average, being 0.6% lower than that obtained by CMRI (mean ?0.6, limits of agreement ?10.5 and +9.3). A good agreement was also observed for LVEF categories ?35%, 36%–54%, and ?55% (unweighted kappa 0.71, linearly weighted kappa 0.76); and LVEF of <55% and ?55% (kappa 0.80). Intra/inter observer agreement was good for ve-LVEFs (ICC value 0.96 and 0.91, respectively). Conclusion: Visual approach for LVEF assessment may be used for rapid assessment of left ventricular systolic function in clinical practice, particularly in patients with good image quality. | en_US |
dc.language.iso | en | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | The Anatolian Journal of Cardiology | en_US |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | en_US |
dc.title | Agreement Between Visually Estimated Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on Echocardiography and Quantitative Measurements Using Cardiac Magnetic Resonance | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.identifier.volume | 26 | en_US |
dc.identifier.issue | 2 | en_US |
dc.identifier.startpage | 127 | en_US |
dc.identifier.endpage | 132 | en_US |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.5152/AnatolJCardiol.2021.367 | - |
dc.relation.publicationcategory | Makale - Ulusal Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanı | en_US |
dc.identifier.scopusquality | Q3 | - |
dc.identifier.trdizinid | 520916 | en_US |
dc.ozel | 2022v3_Edit | en_US |
item.openairetype | Article | - |
item.languageiso639-1 | en | - |
item.grantfulltext | none | - |
item.fulltext | No Fulltext | - |
item.openairecristype | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf | - |
item.cerifentitytype | Publications | - |
Appears in Collections: | TR Dizin İndeksli Yayınlar / TR Dizin Indexed Publications Collection |
CORE Recommender
Items in GCRIS Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.