Copyright © 2006, The European Society of Cardiology
3D Echocardiography: Is CMR better?
Department of Cardiology, Universitaire Ziekenhuizen Leuven, 3000 Leuven, Belgium
Received 30 May 2006; accepted after revision 30 May 2006.
* Tel.: +32 16 34 49 30; fax: +32 16 34 49 20. frank.rademakers@uz.kuleuven.ac.be
| The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below. |
The question, as put in this way, cannot be answered in a simple manner since the answer depends on many variables, i.e. type of patient, pathology, circumstances, clinical question, etc. In the setting of a regular operating theater or an intensive care unit, CMR is totally irrelevant since the patient cannot be moved to the MR machine; if the patient has received a pacemaker or an ICD, CMR is relatively contraindicated; if the patient is so overweight that he/she does not fit into the magnet, CMR is impossible, although echocardiographic image quality probably will not be superior either.
The most significant difference is not so much the step from echocardiography to CMR as the one from 2D to 3D. This is true for the appreciation of anatomy but even more so for the
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. Grapsa, D. P. O'Regan, H. Pavlopoulos, G. Durighel, D. Dawson, and P. Nihoyannopoulos Right ventricular remodelling in pulmonary arterial hypertension with three-dimensional echocardiography: comparison with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging Eur J Echocardiogr, November 24, 2009; (2009) jep169v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|