• 1. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:139.e14.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. LeBlanc N, Scollan K, Sisson D. Quantitative evaluation of left atrial volume and function by one-dimensional, two-dimensional, and three-dimensional echocardiography in a population of normal dogs. J Vet Cardiol 2016;18:336349.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3. Höllmer M, Willesen JL, Tolver A, et al. Comparison of four echocardiographic methods to determine left atrial size in dogs. J Vet Cardiol 2016;18:137145.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4. Wesselowski S, Borgarelli M, Bello NM, et al. Discrepancies in identification of left atrial enlargement using left atrial volume versus left atrial-to-aortic root ratio in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2014;28:15271533.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Kataoka A, Funabashi N, Takahashi A, et al. Quantitative evaluation of left atrial volumes and ejection fraction by 320-slice computed-tomography in comparison with three- and two-dimensional echocardiography: a single-center retrospective-study in 22 subjects. Int J Cardiol 2011;153:4754.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6. Miyasaka Y, Tsujimoto S, Maeba H, et al. Left atrial volume by real-time three dimensional echocardiography: validation by 64-slice multidectector computed tomography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2011;24:680686.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. Keller AM, Gopal AS, King DL. Left and right atrial volume by freehand three-dimensional echocardiography: in vivo validation using magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Echocardiogr 2000;1:5565.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Suh IW, Song JM, Lee EY, et al. Left atrial volume measured by real-time 3-dimensional echocardiography predicts clinical outcomes in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and in sinus rhythm. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2008;21:439445.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Gentile-Solomon JM, Abbott JA. Conventional echocardiographic assessment of the canine right heart: reference intervals and repeatability. J Vet Cardiol 2016;18:234247.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Tadic M. The right atrium, a forgotten cardiac chamber: an updated review of multimodality imaging. J Clin Ultrasound 2015;43:335345.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. Ramanathan R, Anumandla AK, Haramati LB, et al. Evaluation of the cardiac chambers on axial CT: comparison with echocardiography. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2014;38:5360.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Takahashi A, Funabashi N, Kataoka A, et al. Quantitative evaluation of right atrial volume and right atrial emptying fraction by 320-slice computed tomography compared with three-dimensional echocardiography. Int J Cardiol 2011;146:9699.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Rudski LG, Lai WW, Afilalo J, et al. Guidelines for the echocardiographic assessment of the right heart in adults: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography endorsed by the European Association of Echocardiography, a registered branch of the European Society of Cardiology, and the Canadian Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2010;23:685713.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Aune E, Baekkevar M, Roislien J, et al. Normal reference ranges for left and right atrial volume indexes and ejection fractions obtained with real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiogr 2009;10:738744.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. Peluso D, Badano LP, Muraru D, et al. Right atrial size and function assessed with three-dimensional and speckle-tracking echocardiography in 200 healthy volunteers. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;14:11061114.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Grech V, Calleja N. WASP (write a scientific paper): parametric vs. non-parametric tests. Early Hum Dev 2018;123:4849.

  • 17. LeBlanc NL, Scollan KF. Quantification of right ventricular volume measured by use of real-time three-dimensional echocardiography and electrocardiography-gated 64-slice multidetector computed tomography in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2018;79:404410.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. LeBlanc NL, Scollan KF, Stieger-Vanegas SM. Cardiac output measured by use of electrocardiogram-gated 64-slice multidector computed tomography, echocardiography, and thermodilution in healthy dogs. Am J Vet Res 2017;78:818827.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. Scollan KF, Stieger-Vanegas SM, Sisson DD. Assessment of left ventricular volume and function in healthy dogs by use of one-, two-, and three-dimensional echocardiography versus multidetector computed tomography. Am J Vet Res 2016;77:12111219.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20. Sieslack AK, Dziallas P, Nolte I, et al. Quantification of right ventricular volume in dogs: a comparative study between three-dimensional echocardiography and computed tomography with the reference method magnetic resonance imaging. BMC Vet Res 2014;10:242.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21. Fries RC, Gordon SG, Saunders AB, et al. Quantitative assessment of two- and three-dimensional transthoracic and two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging in normal canine hearts. J Vet Cardiol 2019;21:7992.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22. Whitlock M, Garg A, Gelow J, et al. Comparison of left and right atrial volume by echocardiography versus cardiac magnetic resonance imaging using the area-length method. Am J Cardiol 2010;106:13451350.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Budoff MJ, Pagali SR, Hamirani YS, et al. Sex-specific biatrial volumetric measurements obtained with use of multidetector computed tomography in subjects with and without coronary artery disease. Tex Heart Inst J 2014;41:286292.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. Mor-Avi V, Jenkins C, Kühl HP, et al. Real-time 3-dimensional echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular volumes: multicenter study for validation with magnetic resonance imaging and investigation of sources of error. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2008;1:413423.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Comparison of left and right atrial volumes determined by two- and three-dimensional echocardiography with those determined by multidetector computed tomography for healthy dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 1Department of Clinical Sciences, Carlson College of Veterinary Medicine, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare left atrial volume (LAV) and right atrial volume (RAV) determined by 2-D and 3-D echocardiographic methods with the LAV and RAV determined by ECG-gated multidetector CT (MDCT) for healthy dogs.

ANIMALS

11 healthy purpose-bred young adult hound-type dogs.

PROCEDURES

Each dog was anesthetized and underwent MDCT and a complete echocardiographic examination. Modality-specific software was used to measure the respective atrial volumes at ventricular end systole, and LAV and RAV measurements were subsequently indexed to body weight and compared among imaging modalities.

RESULTS

The LAV determined by echocardiographic methods did not differ significantly from the LAV determined by MDCT. However, the RAV determined by 3-D echocardiography and 2-D echocardiography via the left apical and left cranial windows differed significantly from the RAV determined by MDCT. Bland-Altman analyses indicated that the indexed LAV and RAV determined by echocardiographic methods were systematically underestimated, compared with MDCT measurements, but the bias was much smaller for LAV than for RAV.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that, for dogs, echocardiography might be an acceptable alternative to MDCT for measurement of LAV but not for measurement of RAV. However, the study population was small and homogenous in terms of breed, age, and weight. These findings need to be validated in a larger, more varied population of dogs with and without cardiac disease.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To compare left atrial volume (LAV) and right atrial volume (RAV) determined by 2-D and 3-D echocardiographic methods with the LAV and RAV determined by ECG-gated multidetector CT (MDCT) for healthy dogs.

ANIMALS

11 healthy purpose-bred young adult hound-type dogs.

PROCEDURES

Each dog was anesthetized and underwent MDCT and a complete echocardiographic examination. Modality-specific software was used to measure the respective atrial volumes at ventricular end systole, and LAV and RAV measurements were subsequently indexed to body weight and compared among imaging modalities.

RESULTS

The LAV determined by echocardiographic methods did not differ significantly from the LAV determined by MDCT. However, the RAV determined by 3-D echocardiography and 2-D echocardiography via the left apical and left cranial windows differed significantly from the RAV determined by MDCT. Bland-Altman analyses indicated that the indexed LAV and RAV determined by echocardiographic methods were systematically underestimated, compared with MDCT measurements, but the bias was much smaller for LAV than for RAV.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Results suggested that, for dogs, echocardiography might be an acceptable alternative to MDCT for measurement of LAV but not for measurement of RAV. However, the study population was small and homogenous in terms of breed, age, and weight. These findings need to be validated in a larger, more varied population of dogs with and without cardiac disease.

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to Dr. Owens (owenser@oregonstate.edu).