European Journal of Echocardiography

European Journal of Echocardiography 2006 7(2):79-108; doi:10.1016/j.euje.2005.12.014

This Article Abstract FREE Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to citation manager Request Permissions Disclaimer Google Scholar Articles by Lang, R. M. Articles by Stewart, W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lang, R. M. Articles by Stewart, W. Social Bookmarking          What's this?

Copyright © 2006, The European Society of Cardiology

Recommendations for chamber quantification^*

Roberto M. Lang, Michelle Bierig, Richard B. Devereux, Frank A. Flachskampf^*, Elyse Foster, Patricia A. Pellikka, Michael H. Picard, Mary J. Roman, James Seward, Jack Shanewise, Scott Solomon, Kirk T. Spencer, Martin St. John Sutton and William Stewart

Med. Klinik 2, Erlangen University, Ulmenweg 18, 91054 Erlangen, Germany

Received 7 November 2005; accepted after revision 23 December 2005.

^* Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 9131 853 5301; fax: +49 9131 853 5303. frank.flachskampf{at}rzmail.uni-erlangen.de

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
Quantification of cardiac chamber size, ventricular mass and function ranks among the most clinically important and most frequently requested tasks of echocardiography. Over the last decades, echocardiographic methods and techniques have improved and expanded dramatically, due to the introduction of higher frequency transducers, harmonic imaging, fully digital machines, left-sided contrast agents, and other technological advancements. Furthermore, echocardiography due to its portability and versatility is now used in emergency rooms, operating rooms, and intensive care units. Standardization of measurements in echocardiography has been inconsistent and less successful, compared to other imaging techniques and consequently, echocardiographic measurements are sometimes perceived as less reliable. Therefore, the American Society of Echocardiography, working together with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology, has critically reviewed the literature and updated the recommendations for quantifying cardiac chambers using echocardiography. This document reviews the technical aspects on how to perform quantitative chamber measurements of morphology and function, which is a component of every complete echocardiographic examination.

Keywords: LV; left ventricle; LA; left atrium; RA; right atrium; RV; right ventricle; LVID; left ventricular internal dimension; LVIDd; left ventricular internal dimension at end diastole; LVIDs; left ventricular internal dimension at end systole; SWTd; septal wall thickness at end-diastole; PWTd; posterior wall thickness at end-diastole; EBD; endocardial border delineation; TEE; transesophageal echocardiography; MI; myocardial infarction

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
Quantification of cardiac chamber size, ventricular mass and function ranks among the most clinically important and most frequently requested tasks of echocardiography. Standardization of chamber quantification has been an early concern in echocardiography and recommendations on how to measure such fundamental parameters are among the most often cited papers in the field.^1,2 Over the last decades, echocardiographic methods and techniques have improved and expanded dramatically. Improvements in image quality have been significant, due to the introduction of higher frequency transducers, harmonic imaging, fully digital machines, left-sided contrast agents, and other technological advancements.

Furthermore, echocardiography has become the dominant cardiac imaging technique, which due to its portability and versatility is now used in emergency rooms, operating rooms, and intensive care units. Standardization of measurements in echocardiography has been inconsistent and less successful, compared to other imaging techniques and consequently, echocardiographic measurements are sometimes perceived as less reliable. Therefore, the American Society of Echocardiography, working together with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology, has critically reviewed the literature and updated the recommendations for quantifying cardiac chambers using echocardiography. Not all the measurements described in this document can be performed in all patients due to technical limitations. In addition, specific measurements may be clinically pertinent or conversely irrelevant in different clinic scenarios. This document reviews the technical aspects on how to perform quantitative chamber measurements and is not intended to describe the standard of care of which measurements should be performed in individual clinical studies. However, evaluation of chamber size and function is a component of every complete echocardiographic examination and these measurements may have an impact on clinical management.

	General overview

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
Enhancements in imaging have followed technological improvements such as broadband transducers, harmonic imaging and left-sided contrast agents. Nonetheless, image optimization still requires considerable expertise and attention to certain details that are specific to each view (Table 1). In general, images optimized for quantitation of one chamber may not necessarily be optimal for visualization or measurement of other cardiac structures. The position of the patient during image acquisition is important. Optimal views are usually obtained with the patient in the steep left-lateral decubitus position using a cut-out mattress to permit visualization of the true apex while avoiding LV foreshortening. The patient's left arm should be raised to spread the ribs. Excessive translational motion can be avoided by acquiring images during quiet respiration. If images are obtained during held end-expiration, care must be taken to avoid a Valsalva maneuver, which can degrade image quality.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 1 Elements of image acquisition and measurement for two-dimensional quantitation

 
Digital capture and display of images on the echocardiographic system or on a workstation should optimally display images at a rate of at least 30 frames/second. In routine clinical practice a representative cardiac cycle can be used for measurement as long as the patient is in sinus rhythm. In atrial fibrillation, particularly when there is marked RR variation, multiple beats should be used for measurements. Averaging measurements from additional cycles may be particularly useful when R-R intervals are highly irregular. When premature atrial or ventricular contractions are present, measurements should be avoided in the post-ectopic beat since the length of the preceding cardiac cycle can influence ventricular volume and fiber shortening.

Harmonic imaging is now widely employed in clinical laboratories to enhance the images especially in patients with poor acoustic windows. While this technology reduces the "drop-out" of endocardial borders, the literature suggests that there is a systemic tendency for higher measurements of LV wall thickness and mass and smaller measurements of internal dimensions and volumes.^3,4 When analyzing serial studies on a given patient, differences in chamber dimension potentially attributable to imaging changes from the fundamental to the harmonic modality are probably smaller than the inter and intra-observer variability of these measurements. The best technique for comparing serial changes in quantitation is to display similar serial images side-by-side and make the same measurement on both images by the same person, at the same time.⁵ It is important to note that most measurements presented in this manuscript are derived from fundamental imaging as normative values have not been established using harmonic imaging.

Left-sided contrast agents used for endocardial border delineation (EBD) are helpful and improve measurement reproducibility for suboptimal studies and correlation with other imaging techniques. While the use of contrast agents has been reviewed elsewhere in detail,⁶ a few caveats regarding their use deserve mention. The mechanical index should be lowered to decrease the acoustic power of the ultrasound beam, which reduces bubble destruction. The image should be "focused" on the structure of interest. Excessive shadowing may be present during the initial phase of bubble transit and often the best image can be recorded several cardiac cycles following the appearance of contrast in the left ventricle. When less than 80% of the endocardial border is adequately visualized, the use of contrast agents for EBD is strongly recommended.⁷ By improving visualization of the LV apex, the problem of ventricular foreshortening is reduced and correlation with other techniques improved. Contrast enhanced images should be labeled to facilitate the reader identification of the imaging planes.

Quantitation using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has advantages and disadvantages compared to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Although visualization of many cardiac structures is improved with TEE some differences in measurements have been found between TEE and TTE. These differences are primarily attributable to the inability to obtain from the transesophageal approach the standardized imaging planes/views used when quantifying chamber dimensions transthoracically.^8,9 It is the recommendation of this writing group that the same range of normal values for chamber dimensions and volumes apply for both TEE and TTE. In this manuscript, recommendations for quantification using TEE will primarily focus on acquisition of images that allow measurement of cardiac structures along imaging planes that are analogous to TTE.

In addition to describing a parameter as normal or abnormal (reference values), clinical echocardiographers most often qualify the degree of abnormality with terms such as "mildly", "moderately" or "severely" abnormal. Such a description allows the clinician to not only understand that the parameter is abnormal but also the degree to which their patient's measurements deviate from normal. In addition to providing normative data it would be beneficial to standardize cutoffs for severity of abnormality across echocardiographic laboratories, such that moderately abnormal had the same implication in all laboratories. However, multiple statistical techniques exist for determining thresholds values, all of which have significant limitations.¹⁰

The first approach would be to define cutoffs empirically for mild, moderate and severe abnormalities based on standard deviations above/below the reference limit derived from a group of normal subjects. The advantage of this method is that this data readily exists for most echocardiographic parameters. However, this approach has several disadvantages. Firstly, not all echocardiographic parameters are normally distributed, or Gaussian in nature, making the use of standard deviation questionable. Secondly, even if a particular parameter is normally distributed in control subjects, most echocardiographic parameters when measured in the general population have a significant asymmetric distribution in one direction (abnormally large for size or abnormally low for function parameters). Using the standard deviation derived from normal subjects leads to abnormally low cutoff values which are inconsistent with clinical experience, as the standard deviation inadequately represents the magnitude of asymmetry (or range of values) towards abnormality. This is the case with LV ejection fraction (EF) where 4 standard deviations below the mean (64±6.5) results in a cutoff for severely abnormal of 38%.

An alternative method would be to define abnormalities based on percentile values (95th, 99th, etc.) of measurements derived from a population that includes both normal subjects and those with disease states.¹¹ Although this data may still not be Gaussian, it accounts for the asymmetric distribution and range of abnormality present within the general population. The major limitation of this approach is that large enough population data sets simply do not exist for most echocardiographic variables.

Ideally, an approach that would predict outcomes or prognosis would be preferred. That is defining a variable as moderately deviated from normal would imply that there is a moderate risk of a particular adverse outcome for that patient. Although sufficient data linking risk and cardiac chamber sizes exist for several parameters (i.e., EF, LV size, LA volume); risk data are lacking for many other parameters. Unfortunately, this approach continues to have several limitations. The first obstacle is how to best define "risk". The cutoffs suggested for a single parameter vary broadly for the risk of death, myocardial infarction (MI), atrial fibrillation etc. In addition, much of the risk literature applies to specific populations (post-MI, elderly), and not general cardiovascular risk readily applicable to consecutive patients studied in an echocardiography laboratory. Lastly, although having data specifically related to risk is ideal, it is not clear that this is necessary. Perhaps cardiac risk rises inherently as echocardiographic parameters become more abnormal. This has been shown for several echocardiographic parameters (LA dimension, wall thickness, LV size and LV mass) which, when partitioned based on population estimates, demonstrated graduated risk, which is often non-linear.¹¹

Lastly cutoffs values may be determined from expert opinion. Although scientifically least rigorous, this method takes into account the collective experience of having read and measured tens of thousands of echocardiograms.

No single methodology could be used for all parameters. The tables of cutoffs represent a consensus of a panel of experts using a combination of the methods described above (Table 2). The consensus values are more robust for some parameters than others and future research may redefine the cutoff values. Despite the limitations, these partition values represent a leap forward towards the standardization of clinical echocardiography.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 2 Methods used to establish cutoff values of different echocardiographic parameters

 

	Quantification of the left ventricle

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
Left ventricular dimensions, volumes and wall thicknesses are echocardiographic measurements widely used in clinical practice and research.^12,13 LV size and performance are still frequently visually estimated. However, qualitative assessment of LV size and function may have significant inter-observer variability and is a function of interpreter skill. Therefore, it should regularly be compared to quantitative measurements, especially when different views qualitatively suggest different degrees of LV dysfunction. Similarly, it is also important to cross-check quantitative data using the "eye-ball" method, to avoid overemphasis on process-related measurements, which at times may depend on structures seen in a single still-frame. It is important to account for the integration over time of moving structures seen in one plane, and the integration of three-dimensional space obtained from viewing a structure in multiple orthogonal planes. Methods for quantitation of LV size, mass and function using two-dimensional imaging have been validated.^14–17

There are distinct advantages and disadvantages to each of the accepted quantitative methods (Table 3). For example, linear LV measurements have been widely validated in the management of valvular heart disease, but may misrepresent dilatation and dysfunction in patients with regional wall motion abnormalities due to coronary artery disease. Thus, laboratories should be familiar with all available techniques and peer review literature and should apply them on a selective basis.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 3 LV quantification methods: utility, advantages and limitations

 
General principles for linear and volumetric LV measurements
To obtain accurate linear measurements of interventricular septal and posterior wall thicknesses and LV internal dimension, recordings should be made from the parasternal long-axis acoustic window. It is recommended that LV internal diameters (LVIDd and LVIDs, respectively) and wall thicknesses be measured at the level of the LV minor axis, approximately at the mitral valve leaflet tips. These linear measurements can be made directly from 2D images or using 2D-targeted M-mode echocardiography.

By virtue of their high pulse rate, M-mode recordings have excellent temporal resolution and may complement 2-D images in separating structures such as trabeculae adjacent to the posterior wall, false tendons on the left side of the septum, and tricuspid apparatus or moderator band on the right side of the septum from the adjacent endocardium. However, it should be recognized that even with 2D guidance, it may not be possible to align the M-mode cursor perpendicular to the long axis of the ventricle which is mandatory to obtain a true minor axis dimension measurement. Alternatively, chamber dimension and wall thicknesses can be acquired from the parasternal short-axis view using direct 2D measurements or targeted M-mode echocardiography provided that the M-mode cursor can be positioned perpendicular to the septum and LV posterior wall.

A 2D method, useful for assessing patients with coronary artery disease has been proposed. When using this method, it is recommended that LV internal diameters (LVIDd and LVIDs, respectively) and wall thicknesses be measured at the level of the LV minor dimension, at the mitral chordae level. These linear measurements can also be made directly from 2D images or using 2D-targeted M-mode echocardiography. Direct 2D minor axis measurements at the chordae level intersect the interventricular septum below the left ventricular outflow tract,^2,5,18 and thus provides a global assessment in a symmetrically contracting LV, and also evaluates basal regional function in a chamber with regional wall motion abnormalities. The direct 2D minor axis dimensions are smaller than the M-mode measurements with the upper limits of normal of LVIDd being 5.2cm vs 5.5cm and the lower limits of normal for fractional shortening being 0.18 vs 0.25. Normal systolic and diastolic measurements reported for this parameter are 4.7±0.4cm and 3.3±0.5cm, respectively.^2,18

LVID and septal and posterior wall thicknesses (SWT and PWT, respectively) are measured at end-diastole (d) and end-systole (s) from 2-D or M-mode recordings,^1,2 preferably on several cardiac cycles (Fig. 1).^1,2 Refinements in image processing have allowed improved resolution of cardiac structures. Consequently, it is now possible to measure the actual visualized thickness of the ventricular septum and other chamber dimensions as defined by the actual tissue–blood interface, rather than the distance between the leading edge echoes which had previously been recommended.⁵ Use of 2-D echo-derived linear dimensions overcomes the common problem of oblique parasternal images resulting in overestimation of cavity and wall dimensions from M mode. If manual calibration of images is required, 6 cm or larger distances should be used to minimize errors due to imprecise placement of calibration points.

View larger version (73K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 1 Measurement of left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (EDD) and end-systolic diameter (ESD) from M-mode, guided by a parasternal short axis image (upper left) to optimize medial-lateral beam orientation.

 
In order to obtain volumetric measurements the most important views for 2-D quantitation are the mid-papillary short-axis view and the apical four- and two-chamber views. Volumetric measurements require manual tracing of the endocardial border. The papillary muscles should be excluded from the cavity in the tracing. Accurate measurements require optimal visualization of the endocardial border in order to minimize the need for extrapolation. It is recommended that the basal border of the LV cavity area be delineated by a straight line connecting the mitral valve insertions at the lateral and septal borders of the annulus on the four-chamber view and the anterior and inferior annular borders on the two-chamber view.

End-diastole can be defined at the onset of the QRS, but is preferably defined as the frame following mitral valve closure or the frame in the cardiac cycle in which the cardiac dimension is largest. In sinus rhythm, this follows atrial contraction. End-systole is best defined as the frame preceding mitral valve opening or the time in the cardiac cycle in which the cardiac dimension is smallest in a normal heart. In the two-chamber view, mitral valve motion is not always clearly discernible and the frames with the largest and smallest volumes should be identified as end-diastole and end-systole, respectively.

The recommended TEE views for measurement of LV diameters are the mid esophageal two-chamber view (Fig. 2) and the transgastric (TG) two- chamber views (Fig. 3). LV diameters are measured from the endocardium of the anterior wall to the endocardium of the inferior wall in a line perpendicular to the long-axis of the ventricle at the junction of the basal and middle thirds of the long-axis. The recommended TEE view for measurement of LV wall thicknesses is the TG mid short-axis view (Fig. 4). With TEE, the long-axis dimension of the LV is often foreshortened in the mid-esophageal four-chamber and long-axis views; therefore the mid-esophageal two-chamber view is preferred for this measurement. Care must be made to avoid foreshortening TEE views, by recording the image plane which shows the maximum obtainable chamber size, finding the angle for diameter measurement which is perpendicular to the long-axis of that chamber, then measuring the maximum obtainable short-axis diameter.

View larger version (45K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 2 Transesophageal measurements of left ventricular length (L) and minor diameter (LVD) from the mid-esophageal two-chamber view, usually best imaged at a multiplane angle of approximately 60–90 degrees.

 

View larger version (36K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 3 Transesophageal echo measurements of left ventricular minor axis diameter (LVD) from the trans-gastric two-chamber view of the left ventricle, usually best imaged at an angle of approximately 90–110 degrees after optimizing the maximum obtainable LV size by adjustment of medial-lateral rotation.

 

View larger version (36K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 4 Transesophageal echo measurements of wall thickness of the left ventricular septal wall (SWT) and the posterior wall (PWT), from the trans-gastric short axis view of the left ventricle, at the papillary muscle level, usually best imaged at angle of approximately 0–30 degrees.

 
Calculation of left ventricular mass
In clinical practice, LV chamber dimensions are commonly used to derive measures of LV systolic function, whereas in epidemiologic studies and treatment trials, the single largest application of echocardiography has been the estimation of LV mass in populations and its change with antihypertensive therapy.^13,19 All LV mass algorithms, whether utilizing M-mode, 2-D or 3-D echocardiographic measurements, are based upon subtraction of the LV cavity volume from the volume enclosed by the LV epicardium to obtain LV muscle or "shell" volume. This shell volume is then converted to mass by multiplying by myocardial density. Hence, quantitation of LV mass requires accurate identification of interfaces between the cardiac blood pool and endocardium and between epicardium and pericardium.

To date, most LV mass calculations have been made using linear measurements derived from 2-D-targeted M-mode or, more recently, from 2-D linear LV measurements.²⁰ The ASE recommended formula for estimation of LV mass from LV linear dimensions (validated with necropsy r=0.90, p<0.001²¹) is based on modeling the LV as a prolate ellipse of revolution:

This formula is appropriate for evaluating patients without major distortions of LV geometry, e.g., patients with hypertension. Since this formula requires cubing primary measurements, even small errors in these measurements are magnified. Calculation of relative wall thickness (RWT) by the formula, (2xPWTd)/LVIDd, permits categorization of an increase in LV mass as either concentric (RWT0.42) or eccentric (RWT0.42) hypertrophy and allows identification of concentric remodeling (normal LV mass with increased RWT) (Fig. 5).²²

View larger version (42K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 5 Comparison of relative wall thickness (RWT). Patients with normal LV mass can have either concentric remodeling (normal LV mass with increased RWT>0.42) or normal (RWT0.42) and normal LV mass. Patients with increased LV mass can have either concentric (RWT>0.42) or eccentric (RWT0.42) hypertrophy. These LV mass measurements are based on linear measurements.

 
The most commonly employed 2-D methods for measuring LV mass are based on the area–length formula and the truncated ellipsoid model, as described in detail in the 1989 ASE document on LV quantitation.² Both methods were validated in the early 1980s in animal models and by comparing pre-morbid echocardiograms with measured LV weight at autopsy in humans. Both methods rely on measurements of myocardial area at the mid-papillary muscle level. The epicardium is traced to obtain the total area (A₁) and the endocardium is traced to obtain the cavity area (A₂). Myocardial area (A_m) is computed as the difference: A_m=A₁–A₂. Assuming a circular area, the radius is computed (b=A₂/) and a mean wall thickness (t) derived (Fig. 6). Left ventricular mass can be calculated by one of the two formulae shown in Fig. 6. In the presence of extensive regional wall motion abnormalities (e.g. myocardial infarction), the biplane Simpson's method may be used, although this method is dependent on adequate endocardial and epicardial definition of the LV which often is challenging from this window. Most laboratories obtain the measurement at end-diastole and exclude the papillary muscles in tracing the myocardial area.

View larger version (41K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 6 Two methods for estimating LV mass based on the area–length (AL) formula and the truncated ellipsoid (TE) formula, from short axis (left) and apical four-chamber (right) 2-D echo views. A1=total LV area; A2=LV cavity area; Am=myocardial area, a is the long or semi-major axis from widest minor axis radius to apex, b is the short-axis radius (back calculated from the short-axis cavity area) and d is the truncated semi-major axis from widest short-axis diameter to mitral anulus plane. Assuming a circular area, the radius (b) is computed and mean wall thickness (t) derived from the short-axis epicardial and cavity areas. See text for explanation.

 
TEE evaluation of LV mass is also highly accurate, but has minor systematic differences in LV posterior wall thickness. In particular LV mass derived from TEE wall thickness measurements is higher by an average of 6g/m².⁸

Left ventricular systolic function: linear and volumetric measurement
Many echocardiographic laboratories rely on M-mode measurements or linear dimensions derived from the two-dimensional image for quantification. Linear measurements from M-mode and 2-D images have proven to be reproducible with low intra- and inter-observer variability.^20,23–26 Although linear measures of LV function are problematic when there is a marked regional difference in function, in patients with uncomplicated hypertension, obesity or valvular diseases, such regional differences are rare in the absence of clinically recognized myocardial infarction. Hence fractional shortening and its relationship to end-systolic stress often provide useful information in clinical studies.²⁷ The previously used Teichholz or Quinones methods of calculating LV ejection fraction from LV linear dimensions may result in inaccuracies due to the geometric assumptions required to convert a linear measurement to a 3-D volume.^28,29 Accordingly, the use of linear measurements to calculate LV EF is not recommended for clinic practice.

Contraction of muscle fibers in the LV midwall may better reflect intrinsic contractility than contraction of fibers at the endocardium. Calculation of midwall, rather than endocardial fractional shortening is particularly useful in revealing underlying systolic dysfunction in the setting of concentric hypertrophy.³⁰ Mid-wall fractional shortening (MWFS) may be computed from linear measures of diastolic and systolic cavity sizes and wall thicknesses based on mathematical models,^30,31 according to the following formulas:

The most commonly used 2-D measurement for volume measurements is the biplane method of discs (modified Simpson's rule) and is the currently recommended method of choice by consensus of this committee (Fig. 7). The principle underlying this method is that the total LV volume is calculated from the summation of a stack of elliptical discs. The height of each disc is calculated as a fraction (usually one-twentieth) of the LV long axis based on the longer of the two lengths from the two- and four-chamber views. The cross-sectional area of the disk is based on the two diameters obtained from the two- and four-chamber views. When two adequate orthogonal views are not available, a single plane can be used and the area of the disc is then assumed to be circular. The limitations of using a single plane are greatest when extensive wall motion abnormalities are present.

View larger version (92K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 7 2-D measurements for volume calculations using the biplane method of discs (modified Simpson's rule), in the apical four-chamber (A4C) and apical two-chamber (A2C) views at end diastole (LV EDD) and at end-systole (LV ESD). The papillary muscles should be excluded from the cavity in the tracing.

 
An alternative method to calculate LV volumes when apical endocardial definition precludes accurate tracing is the area–length method where the LV is assumed to be bullet-shaped (Fig. 6). The mid LV cross-sectional area is computed by planimetry in the parasternal short-axis view and the length of the ventricle taken from the mid point of the annulus to the apex in the apical four-chamber view. These measurements are repeated at end-diastole and end-systole and the volume is computed according to the formula: volume=[5(area)(length)]÷6. The most widely used parameter for indexing volumes is the body surface area (BSA) in m².

The end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes (EDV, ESV) are calculated by either of the two methods described above and the ejection fraction is calculated as follows:

Partition values for recognizing depressed LV systolic function in Table 6 follow the conventional practice of using the same cut-offs in women and men; however, emerging echocardiographic and MRI data suggests that LV ejection fraction and other indices are somewhat higher in apparently normal women than in men.^32,33 Quantitation of LV volumes using TEE is challenging due to difficulties in obtaining a non-foreshortened LV cavity from the esophageal approach. However when carefully acquired, direct comparisons between TEE and TTE volumes and ejection fraction have shown minor or no significant differences.^8,9

Reference values for left ventricular measurements (Tables 4–6)
Reference values for LV linear dimensions have been obtained from an ethnically diverse population of 510 normal-weight, normotensive, non-diabetic white, African-American and American-Indian adults without recognized cardiovascular disease (unpublished data). The populations from which these data has been derived have been described in detail previously.^20,34–36 Reference values for volumetric measurements have also been obtained in a normal adult population.³⁷

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 4 Reference limits and partition values of left ventricular mass and geometry

 

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 5 Reference limits and partition values of left ventricular size

 

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 6 Reference limits and values and partition values of left ventricular function

 
Normal values for LV mass differ between men and women even when indexed for body surface area (Table 4). The best method for normalizing LV mass measurements in adults is still debated. While body surface area (BSA) has been most often employed in clinical trials, this method will underestimate the prevalence of LV hypertrophy in overweight and obese individuals. The ability to detect LV hypertrophy related to obesity as well as to cardiovascular diseases is enhanced by indexing LV mass for the power of its allometric or growth relation with height (height^2.7). Data are inconclusive as to whether such indexing of LV mass may improve or attenuate prediction of cardiovascular events. Of note, the reference limits for LV mass in Table 4 are lower than those published in some previous echocardiographic studies, yet are virtually identical to those based on direct necropsy measurement and cutoff values used in clinical trials.^{19,20,36,38,39} Although some prior studies have suggested racial differences in LV mass measurement, the consensus of the literature available indicates that no significant differences exist between clinically normal black and white subjects. In contrast, a recent study has shown racial-ethnic differences in left ventricular structure in hypertensive adults.⁴⁰ Although the sensitivity, specificity and predictive value of LV wall thickness measurements for detection of LV hypertrophy are lower than for calculated LV mass, it is sometimes easiest in clinical practice to identify LV hypertrophy by measuring an increased LV posterior and septal thickness.⁴¹

The use of LV mass in children is complicated by the need for indexing the measurement relative to patient body size. The intent of indexing is to account for normal childhood growth of lean body mass without discounting the pathologic effects of overweight and obesity. In this way, an indexed LV mass measurement in early childhood can be directly compared to a subsequent measurement during adolescence and adulthood. Dividing LV mass by height raised to a power of 2.5–3.0 is the most widely accepted indexing method in older children and adolescents since it correlates best to indexing LV mass to lean body mass.⁴² Currently an intermediate value of 2.7 is generally used.^43,44 In younger children (<8years), the most ideal indexing factor remains an area of research, but height raised to a power of 2.0 appears to be the most appropriate.⁴⁵

Three-dimensional assessment of volume and mass
Three-dimensional chamber volume and mass are incompletely characterized by one-dimensional or two-dimensional approaches, which are based on geometric assumptions. While these inaccuracies have been considered inevitable and of minor clinical importance in the past, in most situations accurate measurements are required, particularly when following the course of a disease with serial examinations. Over the last decade, several three-dimensional echocardiographic techniques became available to measure LV volumes and mass.^46–59 These can be conceptually divided into techniques, which are based on off-line reconstruction from a set of 2-D cross-sections, or on-line data acquisition using a matrix array transducer, also known as real-time 3-D echocardiography. After acquisition of the raw data, calculation of LV volumes and mass requires identification of endocardial borders (and for mass epicardial border) using manual or semi-automated algorithms. These borders are then processed to calculate the cavity or myocardial volume by summation of discs^54,56 or other methods.^46–48

Regardless of which acquisition or analysis method is used, 3-D echocardiography does not rely on geometric assumptions for volume/mass calculations and is not subject to plane positioning errors, which can lead to chamber foreshortening. Studies comparing 3-D echocardiographic LV volumes or mass to other gold-standards such as magnetic resonance imaging, have confirmed 3-D echocardiography to be accurate. Compared to magnetic resonance data, LV and RV volumes calculated from 3-D echocardiography showed significantly better agreement (smaller bias), lower scatter and lower intra- and inter-observer variability than 2-D echocardiography.^46,54,57,60 The superiority of 3-D echocardiographic LV mass calculations over values calculated from M-mode derived or 2-D echocardiography has been convincingly shown.^55,57,59 Right ventricular volume and mass have also been measured by 3-D echocardiography with good agreement with magnetic resonance data.^58,61 Current limitations include the requirement of regular rhythm, relative inferior image quality of real-time 3-D echocardiography compared to 2-D images, and the time necessary for off-line data analysis. However, the greater number of acquired data points, the lack of geometric assumptions, increasingly sophisticated 3-D image and measurements solutions offset these limitations.

Regional left ventricular function
In 1989, the American Society of Echocardiography recommended a 16 segment model for LV segmentation.² This model consists of six segments at both basal and mid-ventricular levels and four segments at the apex (Fig. 8). The attachment of the right ventricular wall to the left ventricle defines the septum, which is divided at basal and mid LV levels into anteroseptum and inferoseptum. Continuing counterclockwise, the remaining segments at both basal and mid ventricular levels are labeled as inferior, inferolateral, anterolateral and anterior. The apex includes septal, inferior, lateral, and anterior segments. This model has become widely utilized in echocardiography. In contrast, nuclear perfusion imaging, cardiovascular magnetic resonance and cardiac computed tomography have commonly used a larger number of segments.

View larger version (40K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 8 Segmental analysis of LV walls based on schematic views, in a parasternal short and long axis orientation, at three different levels. The "apex segments" are usually visualized from apical four-chamber, apical two- and three-chamber views. The apical cap can only be appreciated on some contrast studies. A 16 segment model can be used, without the apical cap, as described in an ASE 1989 document.2 A 17 segment model, including the apical cap, has been suggested by the American Heart Association Writing Group on Myocardial Segmentation and Registration for Cardiac Imaging.62

 
In 2002, the American Heart Association Writing Group on Myocardial Segmentation and Registration for Cardiac Imaging, in an attempt to establish segmentation standards applicable to all types of imaging, recommended a 17-segment model (Fig. 8).⁶² This differs from the previous 16-segment model predominantly by the addition of a 17th segment, the "apical cap." The apical cap is the segment beyond the end of the LV cavity. Refinements in echocardiographic imaging, including harmonics and contrast imaging are believed to permit improved imaging of the apex. Either model is practical for clinical application yet sufficiently detailed for semi-quantitative analysis. The 17-segment model should be predominantly used for myocardial perfusion studies or anytime efforts are made to compare between imaging modalities. The 16-segment model is appropriate for studies assessing wall motion abnormalities as the tip of the normal apex (segment 17) does not move.

The mass and size of the myocardium as assessed at autopsy is the basis for determining the distribution of segments. Sectioned into basal, mid ventricular and apical thirds, perpendicular to the LV long-axis, with the mid ventricular third defined by the papillary muscles, the measured myocardial mass in adults without cardiac disease was 43% for the base, 36% for the mid cavity and 21% for the apex.⁶³ The 16-segment model closely approximates this, creating a distribution of 37.5% for both the basal and mid portions and 25% for the apical portion. The 17-segment model creates a distribution of 35.3%, 35.3% and 29.4% for the basal, mid and apical portions (including the apical cap) of the heart, respectively.

Variability exists in the coronary artery blood supply to myocardial segments. Nevertheless, the segments are usually attributed to the three major coronary arteries are shown in the TTE±distributions of Fig. 9.⁶²

View larger version (39K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 9 Artist's diagram showing the position of three long axis views and one short axis view of the left ventricle, showing the typical distributions of the right coronary artery (RCA), the left anterior descending (LAD), and the circumflex (Cx) coronary arteries. The arterial distribution varies between patients. Some segments have variable coronary perfusion.

 
Since the 1970s, echocardiography has been used for the evaluation of LV regional wall motion during infarction and ischemia.^64–66 It is recognized that regional myocardial blood flow and regional LV systolic function are related over a wide range of blood flows.⁶⁷ Although regional wall motion abnormalities at rest may not be seen until the luminal diameter stenosis exceeds 85%, with exercise, a coronary lesion of 50% can result in regional dysfunction. It is recognized that echocardiography can overestimate the amount of ischemic or infarcted myocardium, as wall motion of adjacent regions may be affected by tethering, disturbance of regional loading conditions and stunning.⁶⁸ Therefore, wall thickening as well as motion should be considered. Moreover, it should be remembered that regional wall motion abnormalities may occur in the absence of coronary artery disease.

It is recommended that each segment be analyzed individually and scored on the basis of its motion and systolic thickening. Ideally, the function of each segment should be confirmed in multiple views. A segment which is normal or hyperkinetic is assigned a score of 1, hypokinesis=2, akinesis (negligible thickening)=3, dyskinesis (paradoxical systolic motion)=4, and aneurysmal (diastolic deformation)=5.¹ Wall motion score index can be derived as a sum of all scores divided by the number of segments visualized.

Assessment of LV remodeling and the use of echocardiography in clinical trials
Left ventricular remodeling describes the process by which the heart changes its size, geometry and function over time. Quantitative 2-D transthoracic echocardiography enables characterization of LV remodeling that occurs in normal subjects and in a variety of heart diseases. LV remodeling may be physiological when the heart increases in size but maintains normal function during growth, physical training and pregnancy. Several studies have demonstrated that both isometric and isotonic exercise cause remodeling of the left and right ventricular chamber sizes and wall thicknesses.^69–73 These changes in the highly-trained, elite "athlete hearts" are directly related to the type and duration of exercise and have been characterized echocardiographically. With isometric exercise, a disproportionate increase occurs in LV mass compared to the increase in LV diastolic volume resulting in significantly greater wall thickness to cavity size ratio (h/R ratio) than take place in normal non-athletic subjects with no change in ejection phase indices of LV contractile function.^69–73 This physiologic hypertrophic remodeling of the athlete heart is reversible with cessation of endurance training and is related to the total increase in lean body weight⁷⁰ and triggered by enhanced cardiac sympathetic activity.⁷⁴ Remodeling may be compensatory in chronic pressure overload due to systemic hypertension or aortic stenosis resulting in concentric hypertrophy (increased wall thickness, normal cavity volume and preserved ejection fraction) (Fig. 5). Compensatory LV remodeling also occurs in chronic volume overload associated with mitral or aortic regurgitation, which induces a ventricular architecture characterized by eccentric hypertrophy, LV chamber dilatation and initially normal contractile function. Pressure and volume overload may remain compensated by appropriate hypertrophy which normalizes wall stress such that hemodynamics and ejection fraction remain stable long term. However, in some patients chronically increased afterload cannot be normalized indefinitely and the remodeling process becomes pathologic.

Transition to pathologic remodeling is heralded by progressive ventricular dilatation, distortion of cavity shape and disruption of the normal geometry of the mitral annulus and subvalvular apparatus resulting in mitral regurgitation. The additional volume load from mitral regurgitation escalates the deterioration in systolic function and development of heart failure. LV dilatation begets mitral regurgitation and mitral regurgitation begets further LV dilatation, progressive remodeling and contractile dysfunction.

Changes in LV size and geometry due to hypertension (Fig. 5) reflect the dominant underlying hemodynamic alterations associated with blood pressure elevation.^22,75 The pressure-overload pattern of concentric hypertrophy is uncommon in otherwise healthy hypertensive individuals and is associated with high systolic blood pressure and high peripheral resistance. In contrast, eccentric LV hypertrophy is associated with normal peripheral resistance but high cardiac index consistent with excess circulating blood volume. Concentric remodeling (normal LV mass with increased relative wall thickness) is characterized by high peripheral resistance, low cardiac index, and increased arterial stiffness.^76,77

A unique form of remodeling occurs following myocardial infarction due to the abrupt loss of contracting myocytes.^22,78 Early expansion of the infarct zone is associated with early LV dilatation as the increased regional wall stress is redistributed to preserve stroke volume. The extent of early and late post-infarction remodeling is determined by a number of factors, including size and location of infarction, activation of the sympathetic nervous system, and up-regulation of the renin/angiotensin/aldosterone system and natriuretic peptides. Between one-half and one-third of post-infarction patients experience progressive dilatation^79,80 with distortion of ventricular geometry and secondary mitral regurgitation. Mitral regurgitation further increases the propensity for deterioration in LV function and development of congestive heart failure. Pathologic LV remodeling is the final common pathway to heart failure, whether the initial stimulus is chronic pressure or chronic volume overload, genetically determined cardiomyopathy or myocardial infarction. The etiology of LV dysfunction in approximately two thirds of the 4.9 million patients with heart failure in the USA is coronary artery disease.⁸¹

While LV remodeling in patients with chronic systemic hypertension, chronic valvular regurgitation and primary cardiomyopathies has been described, the transition to heart failure is less well known because the time course is so prolonged. By contrast, the time course from myocardial infarction to heart failure is shorter and has been clearly documented.

The traditional quantitative echocardiographic measurements recommended to evaluate LV remodeling included estimates of LV volumes either from biplane or single plane images as advocated by the American Society of Echocardiography. Although biplane and single-plane volume estimations are not interchangeable, both estimates are equally sensitive for detecting time-dependent LV remodeling and deteriorating contractile function.⁷⁷ LV volumes and derived ejection fraction have been demonstrated to predict adverse cardiovascular events at follow-up, including death, recurrent infarction, heart failure, ventricular arrhythmias and mitral regurgitation in numerous post-infarction and heart failure trials.^78–81 This committee recommends the use of quantitative estimation of LV volumes, LVEF, LV mass and shape as (described in the respective sections above) to follow LV remodeling induced by physiologic and pathologic stimuli. In addition, these measurements provide prognostic information incremental to that of baseline clinical demographics.

	Quantification of the RV and RVOT

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
The normal right ventricle (RV) is a complex crescent-shaped structure wrapped around the left ventricle and is incompletely visualized in any single 2-D echocardiographic view. Thus, accurate assessment of RV morphology and function requires integration of multiple echocardiographic views, including the parasternal long and short-axis views, the RV inflow view, the apical four-chamber and the subcostal views. While multiple methods for quantitative echocardiographic RV assessment have been described, in clinical practice assessment of RV structure and function remains mostly qualitative. Nevertheless, numerous studies have recently emphasized the importance of RV function in the prognosis of a variety of cardio-pulmonary diseases suggesting that more routine quantification of RV function is warranted under most clinical circumstances.

Compared to the left ventricle, the right ventricle is a thin-walled structure under normal conditions. The normal right ventricle is accustomed to a low pulmonary resistance and hence low afterload; thus, normal RV pressure is low and right ventricular compliance high. The right ventricle is therefore sensitive to changes in afterload, and alterations in RV size and function are indicators of increased pulmonary vascular resistance and load transmitted from the left-sided chambers. Elevations in RV afterload in adults are manifested acutely by RV dilatation and chronically by concentric RV hypertrophy. In addition, intrinsic RV abnormalities, such as infarction or RV dysplasia⁸² can cause RV dilatation or reduced RV wall thickness. Thus, assessment of RV size and wall thickness is integral to the assessment of RV function.

Right ventricular free wall thickness, normally less than 0.5cm, is measured using either M-mode or 2-D imaging. Although RV free wall thickness can be assessed from the apical and parasternal long-axis views, the subcostal view measured at the peak of the R wave at the level of the tricuspid valve chordae tendinae provides less variation and closely correlates with RV peak systolic pressure (Fig. 10).⁷⁵ Care must be taken to avoid over measurement due to the presence of epicardial fat deposition as well as coarse trabeculations within the right ventricle.

View larger version (61K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 10 Methods of measuring right ventricular wall thickness (arrows) from an M-mode echo (left) and a subcostal transthoracic echo (right).

 
Qualitative assessment of RV size is easily accomplished from the apical four-chamber view (Fig. 11). In this view, RV area or mid cavity diameter should be smaller than that of the left ventricle. In cases of moderate enlargement, the RV cavity area is similar to that of the LV and it may share the apex of the heart. As RV dilation progresses, the cavity area will exceed that of the LV and the RV will be "apex forming". Quantitative assessment of RV size is also best performed in the apical four-chamber view. Care must be taken to obtain a true non-foreshortened apical four-chamber view, oriented to obtain the maximum RV dimension, prior to making these measurements. Measurement of the mid-cavity and basal RV diameter in the apical four-chamber view at end-diastole is a simple method to quantify RV size (Fig. 11). In addition, RV longitudinal diameter can be measured from this view. Table 7 provides normal RV dimensions from the apical four-chamber view.^76,80,83

View larger version (37K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 11 Mid right-ventricular diameter measured in the apical four-chamber view at level of left ventricular papillary muscles.

 

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 7 Reference limits and partition values of right ventricular and pulmonary artery size76

 
Right ventricular size may be assessed may be assessed with TEE in the mid-esophageal four- chamber view (Fig. 12). The mid-esophageal four- chamber view, which generally parallels what is obtainable from the apical four-chamber view, should originate at the mid-left atrial level and pass through the LV apex with the multiplane angle adjusted to maximize the tricuspid annulus diameter, usually between 10 and 20 degrees.

View larger version (38K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 12 Transesophageal echo measurements of right ventricular diameters from the mid-esophageal four-chamber view, best imaged after optimizing the maximum obtainable RV size by varying angles from approximately 0–20 degrees.

 
Right ventricular systolic function is generally estimated qualitatively in clinical practice. When the evaluation is based on a qualitative assessment, the displacement of the tricuspid annulus should be observed. In systole, the tricuspid annulus will normally descend toward the apex 1.5–2.0cm. Tricuspid annular excursion of less than 1.5cm has been associated with poor prognosis in a variety of cardiovascular diseases.⁸⁴ Although a number of techniques exist for accurate quantitation, direct calculation of RV volumes and ejection fraction remains problematic given the complex geometry of the right ventricle and the lack of standard methods for assessing RV volumes. Nevertheless, a number of echocardiographic techniques may be used to assess RV function. Right ventricular fractional area change (FAC) measured in the apical four-chamber view is a simple method for assessment of RV function that has correlated with RV ejection fractions measured by MRI (r=0.88) and has been related to outcome in a number of disease states.^81,85 Normal RV areas and fractional area changes are shown in Table 8. Additional assessment of the RV systolic function includes tissue imaging of tricuspid annular velocity or right ventricular index of myocardial performance (Tei Index).⁸⁶

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 8 Reference limits and partition values of right ventricular size and function as measured in the apical four-chamber view 80

 
The RV outflow tract (RVOT) extends from the anterosuperior aspect of the right ventricle to the pulmonary artery, and includes the pulmonary valve. It is best imaged from the parasternal long-axis view angled superiorly, and the parasternal short-axis at the base of the heart. It can additionally be imaged from the subcostal long and transverse windows as well as the apical window. Measurement of the RV outflow tract is most accurate from the parasternal short-axis (Fig. 13) just proximal to the pulmonary valve. Mean RVOT measurements are shown in Table 7.⁷⁵ With TEE, the mid-esophageal RV inflow-outflow view usually provides the best image of the RVOT just proximal to the pulmonary valve (Fig. 14).

View larger version (57K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 13 Measurement of the right ventricular outflow tract diameter at the subpulmonary region (RVOT1) and at the pulmonic valve annulus (RVOT2), in the mid-esophageal aortic valve short axis view, using a multiplane angle of approximately 45–70 degrees.

 

View larger version (29K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 14 Measurement of the right ventricular outflow tract at the pulmonic valve annulus (RVOT2), and at and main pulmonary artery from the midesophageal RV inflow-outflow view.

 

	Quantification of LA/RA size

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
The left atrium (LA) fulfills three major physiologic roles that impact on LV filling and performance. The left atrium acts as a contractile pump that delivers 15–30% of the LV filling, as a reservoir that collects pulmonary venous return during ventricular systole and as a conduit for the passage of stored blood from the LA to the LV during early ventricular diastole.⁸⁷ Increased left atrial size is associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes.^88–90 An increase in atrial size most commonly is related to increased wall tension due to increased filling pressure.^91,92 Although increased filling volumes can cause an increase in LA size, the adverse outcomes associated with increased dimension and volume are more strongly associated with increased filling pressure. Relationships exist between increased left atrial size and the incidence of atrial fibrillation and stroke,^93–101 risk of overall mortality after MI,^102,103 and the risk of death and hospitalization in subjects with dilated cardiomyopathy.^104–108 LA enlargement is a marker of both the severity and chronicity of diastolic dysfunction and magnitude of LA pressure elevation.^88,91,92

The LA size is measured at the end-ventricular systole when the LA chamber is at its greatest dimension. While recording images for computing LA volume, care should be taken to avoid foreshortening of the LA. The base of the LA should be at its largest size indicating that the imaging plane passes through the maximal short-axis area. The LA length should also be maximized ensuring alignment along the true long-axis of the LA. When performing planimetry the LA, the confluences of the pulmonary veins and LA appendage should be excluded.

With TEE, the LA frequently cannot fit in its entirety into the image sector. Measurements of LA volume from this approach cannot be reliably performed however; LA dimension can be estimated combining measurements from different imaging planes.

LA linear dimension
The LA can be visualized from multiple echocardiographic views from which several potential LA dimensions can be measured. However, the large volume of prior clinical and research work used the M-mode or 2-D derived anteroposterior (AP) linear dimension obtained from the parasternal long-axis view making this the standard for linear LA measurement (Fig. 15).^{93,95,96,98,104,105} The convention for M-mode measurement is to measure from the leading edge of the posterior aortic wall to the leading edge of the posterior LA wall. However, to avoid the variable extent of space between the LA and aortic root, the trailing edge of the posterior aortic is recommended.

View larger version (43K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 15 Measurement of left atrial diameter (LAD) from M-mode, guided by a parasternal short axis image (upper right) at the level of the aortic valve. This linear method is not recommended.

 
Although these linear measurements have been shown to correlate with angiographic measurements and have been widely used in clinical practice and research, they inaccurately represent true LA size.^109,110 Evaluation of the LA in the AP dimension assumes that a consistent relationship is maintained between the AP dimension and all other LA dimensions as the atrium enlarges, which is often not the case.^111,112 Expansion of the left atrium in the AP dimension may be constrained by the thoracic cavity between the sternum and the spine. Predominant enlargement in the superior-inferior and medial-lateral dimensions will alter LA geometry such that the AP dimension may not be representative of LA size. For these reasons, AP linear dimensions of the left atrium as the sole measure of left atrial size may be misleading and should be accompanied by left atrial volume determination in both clinical practice and research.

LA volume measurements
When LA size is measured in clinical practice, volume determinations are preferred over linear dimensions because they allow accurate assessment of the asymmetric remodeling of the LA chamber.¹¹¹ In addition, the strength of the relationship between cardiovascular disease is stronger for LA volume than for LA linear dimensions.^97,113 Echocardiographic measures of LA volume have been compared with cine-computed tomography, biplane contrast ventriculography and MRI.^{109,114–116} These studies have shown either good agreement or a tendency for echocardiographic measurements to underestimate comparative LA volumes.

The simplest method for estimating LA volume is the cube formula, which assumes that the LA volume is that of a sphere with a diameter equal to the LA antero-posterior dimension. However, this method has proven to be inferior to other volume techniques.^109,111,117 Left atrial volumes are best calculated using either an ellipsoid model or Simpson's rule.^{88,89,97,101,102,109–111,115–117}

The ellipsoid model assumes that the LA can be adequately represented as a prolate ellipse with a volume of 4/3(L/2)(D₁/2)(D₂/2), where L is the long-axis (ellipsoid) and D₁ and D₂ are orthogonal short-axis dimensions. LA volume can be estimated using this biplane dimension-length formula by substituting the LA antero-posterior diameter acquired from the parasternal long-axis as D₁, LA medial-lateral dimension from the parasternal short-axis as D₂ and the LA long-axis from the apical four-chamber for L.^117–119 Simplified methods using non-orthogonal linear measurements for estimation of LA volume have been proposed.¹¹³ Volume determined using linear dimensions is very dependent on careful selection of the location and direction of the minor axis dimensions and has been shown to significantly underestimate LA volume.¹¹⁷

In order to estimate the LA minor axis dimension of the ellipsoid more reliably, the long-axis LA areas can be traced and a composite dimension derived. This dimension takes into account the entire LA border, rather than a single linear measurement. When long-axis-area is substituted for minor axis dimension, the biplane area–length formula is used: 8(A₁)(A₂)/3(L), where A₁ and A₂ represent the maximal planimetered LA area acquired from the apical four- and two-chamber-views, respectively. The length (L) remains the LA long-axis length determined as the distance of the perpendicular line measured from the middle of the plane of the mitral annulus to the superior aspect of the left atrium (Fig. 16). In the area–length formula the length (L) is measured in both the four- and two-chamber views and the shortest of these two L measurements is used in the formula.

View larger version (64K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 16 Measurement of left atrial volume from the area–length method using the apical four-chamber (A4C) and apical two-chamber (A2C) views at ventricular end-systole (maximum LA size). The length (L) is measured from the back wall to the line across the hinge points of the mitral valve. The shorter (L) from either the A4C or A2C is used in the equation.

 
The area–length formula can be computed from a single plane, typically the apical four-chamber, by assuming A₁=A_2, such that volume=8(A₁)²/3(L).¹²⁰ However, this method makes geometric assumptions that may be inaccurate. In older subjects the diaphragm lifts the cardiac apex upward which increases the angle between ventricle and atrium. Thus the apical four-chamber view will commonly intersect the atria tangentially in older subjects and result in underestimation of volume using a single plane technique. Since the majority of prior research and clinical studies have used the biplane area–length formula, it is the recommended ellipsoid method (Figs. 15 and 16).

LA volume may also be measured using Simpson's rule, similar to its application for LV measurements, which states that the volume of a geometrical figure can be calculated from the sum of the volumes of smaller figures of similar shape. Most commonly, Simpson's algorithm divides the LA into a series of stacked oval disks whose height is h and whose orthogonal minor and major axes are D₁ and D₂ (method of disks). The volume of the entire left atrium can be derived from the sum of the volume of the individual disks. Volume=/4(h)(D₁)(D₂). The formula is integrated with the aid of a computer and the calculated volume provided by the software package online (Fig. 17).

View larger version (73K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 17 Measurement of left atrial volume from the biplane method of discs (modified Simpson's rule), using the apical four-chamber (A4C) and apical two-chamber (A2C) views at ventricular end-systole (maximum LA size).

 
The use of the Simpson's method in this way requires the input of biplane LA planimetry to derive the diameters. Optimal contours should be obtained orthogonally around the long-axis of the left atrium using TTE apical views. Care should be taken to exclude the pulmonary veins from the LA tracing. The inferior border should be represented by the plane of the mitral annulus. A single plane method of disks could be used to estimate LA volume by assuming the stacked disks are circular V=/4(h)(D₁).² However, as noted above, this makes the assumption that the LA width in the apical two- and four-chamber are identical, which is often not the case and therefore this formula is not preferred.

Three-dimensional echocardiography should provide the most accurate evaluation of LA volume and has shown promise, however to date no consensus exists on the specific method that should be used for data acquisition and there is no comparison with established normal values.^121–123

Normal values of LA measurements
The non-indexed LA linear measurements are taken from a Framingham Heart Study cohort of 1099 subjects between the ages of 20 and 45years old who were not obese, were of average height and were without cardiovascular disease (Table 9).¹¹ Slightly higher values have been reported in a cohort of 767 subjects without cardiovascular disease in which obesity and height were not exclusion criteria.¹¹³ Both body size and aging have been noted to influence LA size.^10,87,113 There are also gender differences in LA size, however, these are nearly completely accounted for by variation in body size.^{87,113,120,124} The influence of subject size on LA size is typically corrected by indexing to some measure of body size. In fact, from childhood onward the indexed atrial volume changes very little.¹²⁵ Several indexing methods have been proposed, such as height, weight, estimated lean body mass and body surface area.^10,113 The most commonly used convention, and that recommended by this committee, is indexing LA size by dividing by body surface area.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   Table 9 Reference limits and partition values for left atrial dimensions/volumes

 
Normal indexed LA volume has been determined using the preferred biplane techniques (area–length or method of disks) in a number of studies involving several hundred patients to be 22±6ml/m².^{88,120,126,127} Absolute LA volume has also been reported however in clinical practice indexing to body surface area accounts for variations in body size and should therefore be used. As cardiac risk and LA size are closely linked, more importantly than simply characterizing the degree of LA enlargement, normal reference values for LA volume allow prediction of cardiac risk. There are now multiple peer reviewed articles which validate the progressive increase in risk associated with having LA volumes greater than these normative values.^{89,97,99–103,106–108,128} Consequently, indexed LA volume measurements should become a routine laboratory measure since it reflects the burden and chronicity of elevated LV filling pressure and is a strong predictor of outcome.

Right atrium
Much less research and clinical data are available on quantifying right atrial size. Although the RA can be assessed from many different views, quantification of RA size is most commonly performed from the apical four-chamber view. The minor axis dimension should be taken in a plane perpendicular to the long-axis of the RA and extends from the lateral border of the RA to the interatrial septum. Normative values for the RA minor axis are shown in Table 9.^80,129 Although RA dimension may vary by gender, no separate reference values for male and females can be recommended at this time.

Although, limited data are available for RA volumes, assessment of RA volumes would be more robust and accurate for determination of RA size than linear dimensions. As there are no standard orthogonal RA views to use an apical biplane calculation, the single plane area–length and method of discs formulae have been applied to RA volume determination in several small studies.^120,130,131 We believe there is too little peer reviewed validated literature to recommend normal RA volumetric values at this time. However, limited data on small number of normal subjects revealed that indexed RA volumes are similar to LA normal values in men (21ml/m²) but appear to be slightly smaller in women.¹²⁰

	Quantification of the aorta and IVC

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
Aortic measurements
Recordings should be made from the parasternal long-axis acoustic window to visualize the aortic root and proximal ascending aorta. Two-dimensional images should be used to visualize the LV outflow tract and the aortic root should be recorded in different views in varying intercostal spaces and at different distances from the left sternal border. Right parasternal views, recorded with the patient in a right lateral decubitus position are also useful. Measurements are usually taken at: (1) aortic valve annulus (hinge point of aortic leaflets); (2) the maximal diameter in the sinuses of Valsalva; and (3) sinotubular junction (transition between the sinuses of Valsalva and the tubular portion of the ascending aorta).

Views used for measurement should be those that show the largest diameter of the aortic root. When measuring the aortic diameter, it is particularly important, to use the maximum obtainable short-axis diameter measured perpendicular to the long-axis of the vessel in that view. Some experts favor inner edge-to-inner edge techniques to match those used by other methods of imaging the aorta, such as MRI and CT scanning. However the normative data for echocardiography were obtained using the leading edge technique (Fig. 18). Advances in ultrasound instrumentation which have resulted in improved image resolution should minimize the difference between these measurement methods.

View larger version (32K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 18 Measurement of aortic root diameters at the aortic valve annulus (AV ann) level, the sinuses of Valsalva (Sinus Val), and the Sino-tubular junction (ST Jxn) from the mid-esophageal long axis view of the aortic valve, usually at an angle of approximately 110–150 degrees. The annulus is measured by convention at the base of the aortic leaflets. Although leading edge to leading edge technique is demonstrated for the sinuses of Valsalva and sinotubular junction, some prefer the inner edge to inner edge method (see text for further discussion).

 
Reliability of aortic root measurements by this method yielded an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.79 (p<0.001) in a study of 183 hypertensive patients (unpublished data). Two-dimensional aortic diameter measurements are preferable to M-mode measurements, as cyclic motion of the heart and resultant changes in M-mode cursor location relative to the maximum diameter of the sinuses of Valsalva result in systematic underestimation (by 2mm) of aortic diameter by M-mode in comparison to the 2-D aortic diameter.¹³² The aortic annular diameter is measured between the hinge points of the aortic valve leaflets (inner edge–inner edge) in the parasternal or apical long-axis views that reveal the largest aortic annular diameter with color flow mapping to clarify tissue–blood interfaces if necessary.¹³²

The thoracic aorta can be better imaged using TEE than, as most of it is in the near field of the transducer. The ascending aorta can be seen in long-axis, using the mid-esophageal aortic valve long-axis view at about 130 degrees and the mid-esophageal ascending aorta long-axis view. The short-axis view of the ascending aorta is obtained using the mid-esophageal views at about 45 degrees. For measurements of the descending aorta, short-axis views at about 0 degrees, and long-axis views at about 90 degrees, can be recorded from the level of the diaphragm up to the aortic arch (Fig. 19). The arch itself and origins of two of the great vessels can be seen in most patients. There is a "blind spot" in the upper ascending aorta and the proximal arch that is not seen by TEE due to the interposed tracheal bifurcation.

View larger version (53K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 19 Measurement of aortic root diameter at the sinuses of Valsava from 2-D parasternal long-axis image. Although leading edge to leading edge technique is shown, some prefer the inner edge to inner edge method (see text for further discussion).

 
Identification of aortic root dilatation
Aortic root diameter at the sinuses of Valsalva is related most strongly to body surface area and age. Therefore, body surface area may be used to predict aortic root diameter in three age-strata: <20years, 20–40 and >40years, by published equations.¹³² Aortic root dilatation at the sinuses of Valsalva is defined as an aortic root diameter above the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of the distribution in a large reference population.¹³² Aortic dilatation can be easily detected by plotting observed aortic root diameter versus body surface area on previously-published nomograms (Fig. 20).¹³² Aortic dilatation is strongly associated with the presence and progression of aortic regurgitation¹³³ and with the occurrence of aortic dissection.¹³⁴ The presence of hypertension appears to have minimal impact on aortic root diameter at the sinuses of Valsalva^133,135 but is associated with enlargement of more distal aortic segments.¹³⁵

View larger version (21K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PowerPoint slide]   Figure 20 95% confidence intervals for aortic root diameter at the sinuses of Valsalva based on body surface area in: children and adolescents (A), adults aged 20–39years (B), and adults aged 40years or more (C).132

 
Evaluation of the inferior vena cava
Examination of the inferior vena cava (IVC) from the subcostal view should be included as part of the routine TTE examination. It is generally agreed that the diameter of the inferior vena cava should be measured with the patient in the left decubitus position at 1.0–2.0cm from the junction with the right atrium, using the long-axis view. For accuracy, this measurement should be made perpendicular to the IVC long-axis. The diameter of the inferior vena cava decreases in response to inspiration when the negative intrathoracic pressure leads to an increase in right ventricular filling from the systemic veins. The diameter of the IVC and the percent decrease in the diameter during inspiration correlate with right atrial pressure. The relationship has been called the "collapsibility index".¹³⁶ Evaluation of the inspiratory response often requires a brief "sniff" as normal inspiration may not elicit this response.

The normal IVC diameter is <1.7cm. There is a 50% decrease in the diameter when the right atrial pressure is normal (0–5mmHg). A dilated IVC (>1.7cm) with normal inspiratory collapse (50%) is suggestive of a mildly elevated RA pressure (6–10mmHg). When the inspiratory collapse is <50%, the RA pressure is usually between 10 and 15mmHg. Finally, a dilated IVC without any collapse suggests a markedly increased RA pressure of >15mmHg. In contrast, a small IVC (usually <1.2cm) with spontaneous collapse often is seen in the presence of intravascular volume depletion.¹³⁷

There are several additional conditions to be considered in evaluating the inferior vena cava. Athletes have been shown to have dilated inferior vena cavae with normal collapsibility index. Studies^137,138 have found that the mean IVC diameter in athletes was 2.31±0.46 compared to 1.14±0.13 in aged-matched normals. The highest diameters were seen in highly trained swimmers.

One study showed that a dilated IVC in the mechanically ventilated patient did not always indicate a high right atrial pressure. However, a small IVC (<1.2cm) had a 100% specificity for a RA pressure of less than 10mmHg with a low sensitivity.¹³⁹ A more recent study suggested that there was a better correlation when the IVC diameter was measured at end-expiration and end-diastole using M-mode echocardiography.¹⁴⁰

The use of the inferior vena cava size and dynamics is encouraged for estimation of the right atrial pressure. This estimate should be used in estimation of the pulmonary artery pressure based on the tricuspid regurgitant jet velocity.

	Acknowledgments

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
The authors wish to thank Harvey Feigenbaum, MD, and Nelson B. Schiller for their careful review and thoughtful comments.

	Notes

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 
^* A report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Nomenclature and Standards Committee and the Task Force on Chamber Quantification, developed in conjunction with the American College of Cardiology Echocardiography Committee, the American Heart Association, and the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction General overview Quantification of the left... Quantification of the RV... Quantification of LA/RA size Quantification of the aorta... Notes Acknowledgments References

 

1. Sahn D.J., DeMaria A., Kisslo J., Weyman A. Recommendations regarding quantitation in M-mode echocardiography: results of a survey of echocardiographic measurements. Circulation (1978) 58:1072–1083.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Schiller N.B., Shah P.M., Crawford M., DeMaria A., Devereux R., Feigenbaum H., et al. Recommendations for quantitation of the left ventricle by two-dimensional echocardiography. American Society of Echocardiography Committee on Standards, Subcommittee on Quantitation of Two-Dimensional Echocardiograms. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1989) 2:358–367.[Medline]
3. Hirata K., Watanabe H., Beppu S., Muro T., Teragaki M., Yoshiyama M., et al. Pitfalls of echocardiographic measurement in tissue harmonic imaging: in vitro and in vivo study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2002) 15:1038–1044.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
4. McGavigan A.D., Dunn F.G., Goodfield N.E. Secondary harmonic imaging overestimates left ventricular mass compared to fundamental echocardiography. Eur J Echocardiogr (2003) 4:178–181.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Feigenbaum H., Armstrong W., Ryan T. Feigenbaum's echocardiography. (2005) 6th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott, Williams and Wilkins.
6. Mulvagh S.L., DeMaria A.N., Feinstein S.B., Burns P.N., Kaul S., Miller J.G., et al. Contrast echocardiography: current and future applications. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2000) 13:331–342.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
7. Nahar T., Croft L., Shapiro R., Fruchtman S., Diamond J., Henzlova M., et al. Comparison of four echocardiographic techniques for measuring left ventricular ejection fraction. Am J Cardiol (2000) 86:1358–1362.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
8. Colombo P.C., Municino A., Brofferio A., Kholdarova L., Nanna M., Ilercil A., et al. Cross-sectional multiplane transesophageal echocardiographic measurements: comparison with standard transthoracic values obtained in the same setting. Echocardiography (2002) 19:383–390.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
9. Hozumi T., Shakudo M., Shah P.M. Quantitation of left ventricular volumes and ejection fraction by biplane transesophageal echocardiography. Am J Cardiol (1993) 72:356–359.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
10. Vasan R.S., Levy D., Larson M.G., Benjamin E.J. Interpretation of echocardiographic measurements: a call for standardization. Am Heart J (2000) 139:412–422.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
11. Vasan R.S., Larson M.G., Levy D., Evans J.C., Benjamin E.J. Distribution and categorization of echocardiographic measurements in relation to reference limits: the Framingham Heart Study: formulation of a height- and sex-specific classification and its prospective validation. Circulation (1997) 96:1863–1873.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Devereux R.B., Roman M.J. Evaluation of cardiac and vascular structure by echocardiography and other noninvasive techniques. In: Hypertension: pathophysiolog, diagnosis, treatment—Laragh J.H., Brenner B.M., eds. (1995) 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press. 1969–1985.
13. Gottdiener J.S., Bednarz J., Devereux R., Gardin J., Klein A., Manning W.J., et al. American Society of Echocardiography recommendations for use of echocardiography in clinical trials. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2004) 17:1086–1119.[Web of Science][Medline]
14. Wyatt H.L., Heng M.K., Meerbaum S., Hestenes J.D., Cobo J.M., Davidson R.M., et al. Cross-sectional echocardiography. I. Analysis of mathematic models for quantifying mass of the left ventricle in dogs. Circulation (1979) 60:1104–1113.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Reichek N., Helak J., Plappert T., Sutton M.S., Weber K.T. Anatomic validation of left ventricular mass estimates from clinical two-dimensional echocardiography: initial results. Circulation (1983) 67:348–352.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Helak J.W., Reichek N. Quantitation of human left ventricular mass and volume by two-dimensional echocardiography: in vitro anatomic validation. Circulation (1981) 63:1398–1407.[Free Full Text]
17. Schiller N.B., Skioldebrand C.G., Schiller E.J., Mavroudis C.C., Silverman N.H., Rahimtoola S.H., et al. Canine left ventricular mass estimation by two-dimensional echocardiography. Circulation (1983) 68:210–216.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Triulzi M.O., Gillam L.D., Gentile F., Newell J., Weyman A. Normal adult cross-sectional echocardiographic values: Linear dimensions and chamber areas. Echocardiography (1984) 1:403–426.[CrossRef]
19. Devereux R.B., Wachtell K., Gerdts E., Boman K., Nieminen M.S., Papademetriou V., et al. Prognostic significance of left ventricular mass change during treatment of hypertension. JAMA (2004) 292:1–7.
20. Ilercil A., O'Grady M.J., Roman M.J., Paranicas M., Lee E.T., Welty T.K., et al. Reference values for echocardiographic measurements in urban and rural populations of differing ethnicity: the Strong Heart Study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2001) 14:601–611.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
21. Devereux R.B., Alonso D.R., Lutas E.M., Gottlieb G.J., Campo E., Sachs I., et al. Echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular hypertrophy: comparison to necropsy findings. Am J Cardiol (1986) 57:450–458.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
22. Ganau A., Devereux R.B., Roman M.J., de Simone G., Pickering T.G., Saba P.S., et al. Patterns of left ventricular hypertrophy and geometric remodeling in essential hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol (1992) 19:1550–1558.[Abstract]
23. Devereux R.B., de Simone G., Pickering T.G., Schwartz J.E., Roman M.J. Relation of left ventricular midwall function to cardiovascular risk factors and arterial structure and function. Hypertension (1998) 31:929–936.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Palmieri V., Dahlof B., DeQuattro V., Sharpe N., Bella J.N., de Simone G., et al. Reliability of echocardiographic assessment of left ventricular structure and function: the PRESERVE study: Prospective Randomized Study Evaluating Regression of Ventricular Enlargement. J Am Coll Cardiol (1999) 34:1625–1632.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Nidorf S.M., Picard M.H., Triulzi M.O., Thomas J.D., Newell J., King M.E., et al. New perspectives in the assessment of cardiac chamber dimensions during development and adulthood. J Am Coll Cardiol (1992) 19:983–988.[Abstract]
26. Pearlman J.D., Triulzi M.O., King M.E., Newell J., Weyman A.E. Limits of normal left ventricular dimensions in growth and development: analysis of dimensions and variance in the two-dimensional echocardiograms of 268 normal healthy subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol (1988) 12:1432–1441.[Abstract]
27. Lang R.M., Borow K.M., Neumann A., Janzen D. Systemic vascular resistance: an unreliable index of left ventricular afterload. Circulation (1986) 74:1114–1123.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Quinones M.A., Waggoner A.D., Reduto L.A., Nelson J.G., Young J.B., Winters W.L. Jr., et al. A new, simplified and accurate method for determining ejection fraction with two-dimensional echocardiography. Circulation (1981) 64:744–753.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Teichholz L.E., Kreulen T., Herman M.V., Gorlin R. Problems in echocardiographic volume determinations: echocardiographic-angiographic correlations in the presence of absence of asynergy. Am J Cardiol (1976) 37:7–11.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
30. de Simone G., Devereux R.B., Roman M.J., Ganau A., Saba P.S., Alderman M.H., et al. Assessment of left ventricular function by the midwall fractional shortening/end-systolic stress relation in human hypertension. J Am Coll Cardiol (1994) 23:1444–1451.[Abstract]
31. Shimizu G., Zile M.R., Blaustein A.S., Gaasch W.H. Left ventricular chamber filling and midwall fiber lengthening in patients with left ventricular hypertrophy: overestimation of fiber velocities by conventional midwall measurements. Circulation (1985) 71:266–272.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Celentano A., Palmieri V., Arezzi E., Mureddu G.F., Sabatella M., Di M.G., et al. Gender differences in left ventricular chamber and midwall systolic function in normotensive and hypertensive adults. J Hypertens (2003) 21:1415–1423.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
33. Gerdts E., Zabalgoitia M., Bjornstad H., Svendsen T.L., Devereux R.B. Gender differences in systolic left ventricular function in hypertensive patients with electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy (the LIFE study). Am J Cardiol (2001) 87:980–983.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
34. Devereux R.B., Roman M.J., de Simone G., O'Grady M.J., Paranicas M., Yeh J.L., et al. Relations of left ventricular mass to demographic and hemodynamic variables in American Indians: the Strong Heart Study. Circulation (1997) 96:1416–1423.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Devereux R.B., Bella J.N., Palmieri V., Oberman A., Kitzman D.W., Hopkins P.N., et al. Left ventricular systolic dysfunction in a biracial sample of hypertensive adults: The Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network (HyperGEN) Study. Hypertension (2001) 38:417–423.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Roman M.J., Pickering T.G., Schwartz J.E., Pini R., Devereux R.B. Association of carotid atherosclerosis and left ventricular hypertrophy. J Am Coll Cardiol (1995) 25:83–90.[Abstract]
37. Wahr D.W., Wang Y.S., Schiller N.B. Left ventricular volumes determined by two-dimensional echocardiography in a normal adult population. J Am Coll Cardiol (1983) 1:863–868.[Abstract]
38. de Simone G., Daniels S.R., Devereux R.B., Meyer R.A., Roman M.J., de Divitiis O., et al. Left ventricular mass and body size in normotensive children and adults: assessment of allometric relations and impact of overweight. J Am Coll Cardiol (1992) 20:1251–1260.[Abstract]
39. Devereux R.B., Palmieri V., Sharpe N., De Q.V., Bella J.N., et al. Effects of once-daily angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition and calcium channel blockade-based antihypertensive treatment regimens on left ventricular hypertrophy and diastolic filling in hypertension: the prospective randomized enalapril study evaluating regression of ventricular enlargement (preserve) trial. Circulation (2001) 104:1248–1254.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. Kizer J.R., Arnett D.K., Bella J.N., Paranicas M., Rao D.C., Province M.A., et al. Differences in left ventricular structure between black and white hypertensive adults: the Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network study. Hypertension (2004) 43:1182–1188.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
41. Devereux R.B., Casale P.N., Kligfield P., Eisenberg R.R., Miller D., Campo E., et al. Performance of primary and derived M-mode echocardiographic measurements for detection of left ventricular hypertrophy in necropsied subjects and in patients with systemic hypertension, mitral regurgitation and dilated cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol (1986) 57:1388–1393.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
42. Malcolm D.D., Burns T.L., Mahoney L.T., Lauer R.M. Factors affecting left ventricular mass in childhood: the Muscatine Study. Pediatrics (1993) 92:703–709.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43. Daniels S.R., Meyer R.A., Liang Y.C., Bove K.E. Echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass index in normal children, adolescents and young adults. J Am Coll Cardiol (1988) 12:703–708.[Abstract]
44. Daniels S.R., Kimball T.R., Morrison J.A., Khoury P., Meyer R.A. Indexing left ventricular mass to account for differences in body size in children and adolescents without cardiovascular disease. Am J Cardiol (1995) 76:699–701.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
45. de S.G., Devereux R.B., Daniels S.R., Koren M.J., Meyer R.A., Laragh J.H. Effect of growth on variability of left ventricular mass: assessment of allometric signals in adults and children and their capacity to predict cardiovascular risk. J Am Coll Cardiol (1995) 25:1056–1062.[Abstract]
46. Gopal A.S., Keller A.M., Rigling R., King D.L. Jr., King D.L. Left ventricular volume and endocardial surface area by three-dimensional echocardiography: comparison with two-dimensional echocardiography and nuclear magnetic resonance imaging in normal subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol (1993) 22:258–270.[Abstract]
47. Handschumacher M.D., Lethor J.P., Siu S.C., Mele D., Rivera J.M., Picard M.H., et al. A new integrated system for three-dimensional echocardiographic reconstruction: development and validation for ventricular volume with application in human subjects. J Am Coll Cardiol (1993) 21:743–753.[Abstract]
48. Jiang L., Vazquez de Prada J.A., Handschumacher M.D., Vuille C., Guererro J.L., Picard M.H., et al. Quantitative three-dimensional reconstruction of aneurysmal left ventricles. In vitro and in vivo validation. Circulation (1995) 91:222–230.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
49. King D.L., Harrison M.R., King D.L. Jr., Gopal A.S., Martin R.P., DeMaria A.N. Improved reproducibility of left atrial and left ventricular measurements by guided three-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol (1992) 20:1238–1245.[Abstract]
50. Kuhl H.P., Franke A., Frielingsdorf J., Flaskamp C., Krebs W., Flachskampf F.A., et al. Determination of left ventricular mass and circumferential wall thickness by three-dimensional reconstruction: in vitro validation of a new method that uses a multiplane transesophageal transducer. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1997) 10:107–119.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
51. Roelandt J.R., Ten Cate F.J., Vletter W.B., Taams M.A. Ultrasonic dynamic three-dimensional visualization of the heart with a multiplane transesophageal imaging transducer. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1994) 7:217–229.[Medline]
52. Sheikh K., Smith S.W., von Ramm O., Kisslo J. Real-time, three-dimensional echocardiography: feasibility and initial use. Echocardiography (1991) 8:119–125.[Web of Science][Medline]
53. Wollschlager H., Zeiher A.M., Geibel A., Kasper W., Just H., Wollschlager S. Transespohogeal echo computer tomography: computational reconstruction of any desired view of the beating heart. In: Cardiovascular imaging by ultrasound—Hanrath P., Uebis R., Krebs W., eds. (1993) Dordrecht: Kluwer.
54. Buck T., Hunold P., Wentz K.U., Tkalec W., Nesser H.J., Erbel R. Tomographic three-dimensional echocardiographic determination of chamber size and systolic function in patients with left ventricular aneurysm: comparison to magnetic resonance imaging, cineventriculography, and two-dimensional echocardiography. Circulation (1997) 96:4286–4297.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
55. Kuhl H.P., Franke A., Merx M., Hoffmann R., Puschmann D., Hanrath P. Rapid quantification of left ventricular function and mass using transoesophageal three-dimensional echocardiography: validation of a method that uses long-axis cutplanes. Eur J Echocardiogr (2000) 1:213–221.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
56. Nosir Y.F., Fioretti P.M., Vletter W.B., Boersma E., Salustri A., Postma J.T., et al. Accurate measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction by three-dimensional echocardiography. A comparison with radionuclide angiography. Circulation (1996) 94:460–466.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
57. Gopal A.S., Schnellbaecher M.J., Shen Z., Boxt L.M., Katz J., King D.L. Freehand three-dimensional echocardiography for determination of left ventricular volume and mass in patients with abnormal ventricles: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1997) 10:853–861.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
58. Shiota T., Jones M., Chikada M., Fleishman C.E., Castellucci J.B., Cotter B., et al. Real-time three-dimensional echocardiography for determining right ventricular stroke volume in an animal model of chronic right ventricular volume overload. Circulation (1998) 97:1897–1900.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
59. Mor-Avi V., Sugeng L., Weinert L., MacEneaney P., Caiani E.G., Koch R., et al. Fast measurement of left ventricular mass with real-time three-dimensional echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Circulation (2004) 110:1814–1818.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
60. Jiang L., Siu S.C., Handschumacher M.D., Luis G.J., Vazquez de Prada J.A., King M.E., et al. Three-dimensional echocardiography. In vivo validation for right ventricular volume and function. Circulation (1994) 89:2342–2350.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
61. Jiang L., Vazquez de Prada J.A., Handschumacher M.D., Guererro J.L., Vlahakes G.J., King M.E., et al. Three-dimensional echocardiography: in vivo validation for right ventricular free wall mass as an index of hypertrophy. J Am Coll Cardiol (1994) 23:1715–1722.[Abstract]
62. Cerqueira M.D., Weissman N.J., Dilsizian V., Jacobs A.K., Kaul S., Laskey W.K., et al. Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart: a statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association. Circulation (2002) 105:539–542.[Free Full Text]
63. Edwards W.D., Tajik A.J., Seward J.B. Standardized nomenclature and anatomic basis for regional tomographic analysis of the heart. Mayo Clin Proc (1981) 56:479–497.[Web of Science][Medline]
64. Heger J.J., Weyman A.E., Wann L.S., Dillon J.C., Feigenbaum H. Cross-sectional echocardiography in acute myocardial infarction: detection and localization of regional left ventricular asynergy. Circulation (1979) 60:531–538.[Free Full Text]
65. Kerber R.E., Abboud F.M. Echocardiographic detection of regional myocardial infarction: an experimental study. Circulation (1973) 47:997–1005.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
66. Weiss J.L., Bulkley B.H., Hutchins G.M., Mason S.J. Two-dimensional echocardiographic recognition of myocardial injury in man: comparison with postmortem studies. Circulation (1981) 63:401–408.[Free Full Text]
67. Ross J. Jr. Myocardial perfusion-contraction matching. Implications for coronary heart disease and hibernation. Circulation (1991) 83:1076–1083.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
68. Lieberman A.N., Weiss J.L., Jugdutt B.I., Becker L.C., Bulkley B.H., Garrison J.G., et al. Two-dimensional echocardiography and infarct size: relationship of regional wall motion and thickening to the extent of myocardial infarction in the dog. Circulation (1981) 63:739–746.[Free Full Text]
69. Fagard R., Aubert A., Lysens R., Staessen J., Vanhees L., Amery A. Noninvasive assessment of seasonal variations in cardiac structure and function in cyclists. Circulation (1983) 67:896–901.[Free Full Text]
70. Fisher A.G., Adams T.D., Yanowitz F.G., Ridges J.D., Orsmond G., Nelson A.G. Noninvasive evaluation of world class athletes engaged in different modes of training. Am J Cardiol (1989) 63:337–341.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
71. Vos M., Hauser A.M., Dressendorfer R.H., Hashimoto T., Dudlets P., Gordon S., et al. Enlargement of the right heart in the endurance athlete: a two-dimensional echocardiographic study. Int J Sports Med (1985) 6:271–275.[Web of Science][Medline]
72. Douglas P.S., O'Toole M.L., Hiller W.D., Reichek N. Left ventricular structure and function by echocardiography in ultraendurance athletes. Am J Cardiol (1986) 58:805–809.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
73. Pelliccia A., Maron B.J., Spataro A., Proschan M.A., Spirito P. The upper limit of physiologic cardiac hypertrophy in highly trained elite athletes. N Engl J Med (1991) 324:295–301.[Abstract]
74. Neri Serneri G.G., Boddi M., Modesti P.A., Cecioni I., Coppo M., Padeletti L., et al. Increased cardiac sympathetic activity and insulin-like growth factor-I formation are associated with physiological hypertrophy in athletes. Circ Res (2001) 89:977–982.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
75. Matsukubo H., Matsuura T., Endo N., Asayama J., Watanabe T. Echocardiographic measurement of right ventricular wall thickness. A new application of subxiphoid echocardiography. Circulation (1977) 56:278–284.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
76. Foale R., Nihoyannopoulos P., McKenna W., Kleinebenne A., Nadazdin A., Rowland E., et al. Echocardiographic measurement of the normal adult right ventricle. Br Heart J (1986) 56:33–44.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
77. Roman M.J., Ganau A., Saba P.S., Pini R., Pickering T.G., Devereux R.B. Impact of arterial stiffening on left ventricular structure. Hypertension (2000) 36:489–494.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
78. Picard M.H., Wilkins G.T., Ray P.A., Weyman A.E. Natural history of left ventricular size and function after acute myocardial infarction. Assessment and prediction by echocardiographic endocardial surface mapping. Circulation (1990) 82:484–494.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
79. St John Sutton M., Pfeffer M.A., Moye L., Plappert T., Rouleau J.L., Lamas G., et al. Cardiovascular death and left ventricular remodeling two years after myocardial infarction: baseline predictors and impact of long-term use of captopril: information from the Survival and Ventricular Enlargement (SAVE) trial. Circulation (1997) 96:3294–3299.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
80. Weyman A. Practices and principles of echocardiography. (1994) 2nd ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
81. Zornoff L.A., Skali H., Pfeffer M.A., St John S.M., Rouleau J.L., Lamas G.A., et al. Right ventricular dysfunction and risk of heart failure and mortality after myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol (2002) 39:1450–1455.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
82. Yoerger D.M., Marcus F., Sherrill D., Calkins H., Towbin J.A., Zareba W., et al. Echocardiographic findings in patients meeting task force criteria for arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia: new insights from the multidisciplinary study of right ventricular dysplasia. J Am Coll Cardiol (2005) 45:860–865.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
83. Schenk P., Globits S., Koller J., Brunner C., Artemiou O., Klepetko W., et al. Accuracy of echocardiographic right ventricular parameters in patients with different end-stage lung diseases prior to lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant (2000) 19:145–154.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
84. Samad B.A., Alam M., Jensen-Urstad K. Prognostic impact of right ventricular involvement as assessed by tricuspid annular motion in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol (2002) 90:778–781.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
85. Maslow A.D., Regan M.M., Panzica P., Heindel S., Mashikian J., Comunale M.E. Precardiopulmonary bypass right ventricular function is associated with poor outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Anesth Analg (2002) 95:1507–1518. table.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
86. Severino S., Caso P., Cicala S., Galderisi M., De Simone L., D'Andrea A., et al. Involvement of right ventricle in left ventricular hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: analysis by pulsed Doppler tissue imaging. Eur J Echocardiogr (2000) 1:281–288.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
87. Spencer K.T., Mor-Avi V., Gorcsan J. III, DeMaria A.N., Kimball T.R., Monaghan M.J., et al. Effects of aging on left atrial reservoir, conduit, and booster pump function: a multi-institution acoustic quantification study. Heart (2001) 85:272–277.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
88. Tsang T.S., Barnes M.E., Gersh B.J., Bailey K.R., Seward J.B. Left atrial volume as a morphophysiologic expression of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and relation to cardiovascular risk burden. Am J Cardiol (2002) 90:1284–1289.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
89. Tsang T.S., Barnes M.E., Gersh B.J., Takemoto Y., Rosales A.G., Bailey K.R., et al. Prediction of risk for first age-related cardiovascular events in an elderly population: the incremental value of echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol (2003) 42:1199–1205.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
90. Kizer J.R., Bella J.N., Palmieri V., et al. Left atrial diameter as an independent predictor of first clinical cardiovascular events in middle-aged and elderly adults: the strong heart study. Am Heart J (2006) 151:412–418.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
91. Simek C.L., Feldman M.D., Haber H.L., Wu C.C., Jayaweera A.R., Kaul S. Relationship between left ventricular wall thickness and left atrial size: comparison with other measures of diastolic function. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1995) 8:37–47.[CrossRef][Medline]
92. Appleton C.P., Galloway J.M., Gonzalez M.S., Gaballa M., Basnight M.A. Estimation of left ventricular filling pressures using two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography in adult patients with cardiac disease. Additional value of analyzing left atrial size, left atrial ejection fraction and the difference in duration of pulmonary venous and mitral flow velocity at atrial contraction. J Am Coll Cardiol (1993) 22:1972–1982.[Abstract]
93. Benjamin E.J., D'Agostino R.B., Belanger A.J., Wolf P.A., Levy D. Left atrial size and the risk of stroke and death. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation (1995) 92:835–841.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
94. Bolca O., Akdemir O., Eren M., Dagdeviren B., Yildirim A., Tezel T. Left atrial maximum volume is a recurrence predictor in lone atrial fibrillation: an acoustic quantification study. Jpn Heart J (2002) 43:241–248.[CrossRef][Medline]
95. Di Tullio M.R., Sacco R.L., Sciacca R.R., Homma S. Left atrial size and the risk of ischemic stroke in an ethnically mixed population. Stroke (1999) 30:2019–2024.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
96. Flaker G.C., Fletcher K.A., Rothbart R.M., Halperin J.L., Hart R.G. Clinical and echocardiographic features of intermittent atrial fibrillation that predict recurrent atrial fibrillation. Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (SPAF) Investigators. Am J Cardiol (1995) 76:355–358.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
97. Tsang T.S., Barnes M.E., Bailey K.R., Leibson C.L., Montgomery S.C., Takemoto Y., et al. Left atrial volume: important risk marker of incident atrial fibrillation in 1655 older men and women. Mayo Clin Proc (2001) 76:467–475.[Abstract]
98. Vaziri S.M., Larson M.G., Benjamin E.J., Levy D. Echocardiographic predictors of nonrheumatic atrial fibrillation. The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation (1994) 89:724–730.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
99. Barnes M.E., Miyasaka Y., Seward J.B., Gersh B.J., Rosales A.G., Bailey K.R., et al. Left atrial volume in the prediction of first ischemic stroke in an elderly cohort without atrial fibrillation. Mayo Clin Proc (2004) 79:1008–1014.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
100. Tsang T.S., Barnes M.E., Gersh B.J., Bailey K.R., Seward J.B. Risks for atrial fibrillation and congestive heart failure in patients >/=65 years of age with abnormal left ventricular diastolic relaxation. Am J Cardiol (2004) 93:54–58.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
101. Tsang T.S., Gersh B.J., Appleton C.P., Tajik A.J., Barnes M.E., Bailey K.R., et al. Left ventricular diastolic dysfunction as a predictor of the first diagnosed nonvalvular atrial fibrillation in 840 elderly men and women. J Am Coll Cardiol (2002) 40:1636–1644.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
102. Moller J.E., Hillis G.S., Oh J.K., Seward J.B., Reeder G.S., Wright R.S., et al. Left atrial volume: a powerful predictor of survival after acute myocardial infarction. Circulation (2003) 107:2207–2212.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
103. Beinart R., Boyko V., Schwammenthal E., Kuperstein R., Sagie A., Hod H., et al. Long-term prognostic significance of left atrial volume in acute myocardial infarction. J Am Coll Cardiol (2004) 44:327–334.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
104. Modena M.G., Muia N., Sgura F.A., Molinari R., Castella A., Rossi R. Left atrial size is the major predictor of cardiac death and overall clinical outcome in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy: a long-term follow-up study. Clin Cardiol (1997) 20:553–560.[Web of Science][Medline]
105. Quinones M.A., Greenberg B.H., Kopelen H.A., Koilpillai C., Limacher M.C., Shindler D.M., et al. Echocardiographic predictors of clinical outcome in patients with left ventricular dysfunction enrolled in the SOLVD registry and trials: significance of left ventricular hypertrophy. Studies of Left Ventricular Dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol (2000) 35:1237–1244.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
106. Rossi A., Cicoira M., Zanolla L., Sandrini R., Golia G., Zardini P., et al. Determinants and prognostic value of left atrial volume in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy. J Am Coll Cardiol (1425) 2002:40.
107. Dini F.L., Cortigiani L., Baldini U., Boni A., Nuti R., Barsotti L., et al. Prognostic value of left atrial enlargement in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol (2002) 89:518–523.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
108. Sabharwal N., Cemin R., Rajan K., Hickman M., Lahiri A., Senior R. Usefulness of left atrial volume as a predictor of mortality in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol (2004) 94:760–763.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
109. Schabelman S., Schiller N.B., Silverman N.H., Ports T.A. Left atrial volume estimation by two-dimensional echocardiography. Catheterization Cardiovasc Diagn (1981) 7:165–178.[Web of Science][Medline]
110. Wade M.R., Chandraratna P.A., Reid C.L., Lin S.L., Rahimtoola S.H. Accuracy of nondirected and directed M-mode echocardiography as an estimate of left atrial size. Am J Cardiol (1987) 60:1208–1211.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
111. Lester S.J., Ryan E.W., Schiller N.B., Foster E. Best method in clinical practice and in research studies to determine left atrial size. Am J Cardiol (1999) 84:829–832.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
112. Loperfido F., Pennestri F., Digaetano A., Scabbia E., Santarelli P., Mongiardo R., et al. Assessment of left atrial dimensions by cross sectional echocardiography in patients with mitral valve disease. Br Heart J (1983) 50:570–578.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
113. Pritchett A.M., Jacobsen S.J., Mahoney D.W., Rodeheffer R.J., Bailey K.R., Redfield M.M. Left atrial volume as an index of left atrial size: a population-based study. J Am Coll Cardiol (2003) 41:1036–1043.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
114. Kircher B., Abbott J.A., Pau S., Gould R.G., Himelman R.B., Higgins C.B., et al. Left atrial volume determination by biplane two-dimensional echocardiography: validation by cine computed tomography. Am Heart J (1991) 121:864–871.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
115. Rodevan O., Bjornerheim R., Ljosland M., Maehle J., Smith H.J., Ihlen H. Left atrial volumes assessed by three- and two-dimensional echocardiography compared to MRI estimates. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging (1999) 15:397–410.[CrossRef]
116. Vandenberg B.F., Weiss R.M., Kinzey J., Acker M., Stark C.A., Stanford W., et al. Comparison of left atrial volume by two-dimensional echocardiography and cine-computed tomography. Am J Cardiol (1995) 75:754–757.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
117. Khankirawatana B., Khankirawatana S., Porter T. How should left atrial size be reported? Comparative assessment with use of multiple echocardiographic methods. Am Heart J (2004) 147:369–374.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
118. Hiraishi S., DiSessa T.G., Jarmakani J.M., Nakanishi T., Isabel-Jones J., Friedman W.F. Two-dimensional echocardiographic assessment of left atrial size in children. Am J Cardiol (1983) 52:1249–1257.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
119. Jessurun E.R., van Hemel N.M., Kelder J.C., Defauw J.A., Brutel D.L.R., Ernst J.M., et al. The effect of maze operations on atrial volume. Ann Thorac Surg (2003) 75:51–56.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
120. Wang Y., Gutman J.M., Heilbron D., Wahr D., Schiller N.B. Atrial volume in a normal adult population by two-dimensional echocardiography. Chest (1984) 86:595–601.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
121. Keller A.M., Gopal A.S., King D.L. Left and right atrial volume by freehand three-dimensional echocardiography: in vivo validation using magnetic resonance imaging. Eur J Echocardiogr (2000) 1:55–65.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
122. Khankirawatana B., Khankirawatana S., Lof J., Porter T.R. Left atrial volume determination by three-dimensional echocardiography reconstruction: validation and application of a simplified technique. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2002) 15:1051–1056.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
123. Poutanen T., Ikonen A., Vainio P., Jokinen E., Tikanoja T. Left atrial volume assessed by transthoracic three dimensional echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging: dynamic changes during the heart cycle in children. Heart (2000) 83:537–542.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
124. Knutsen K.M., Stugaard M., Michelsen S., Otterstad J.E. M-mode echocardiographic findings in apparently healthy, non-athletic Norwegians aged 20–70 years. Influence of age, sex and body surface area. J Intern Med (1989) 225:111–115.[Web of Science][Medline]
125. Pearlman J.D., Triulzi M.O., King M.E., Abascal V.M., Newell J., Weyman A.E. Left atrial dimensions in growth and development: normal limits for two-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol (1990) 16:1168–1174.[Abstract]
126. Gutman J., Wang Y.S., Wahr D., Schiller N.B. Normal left atrial function determined by 2-dimensional echocardiography. Am J Cardiol (1983) 51:336–340.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
127. Thomas L., Levett K., Boyd A., Leung D.Y., Schiller N.B., Ross D.L. Compensatory changes in atrial volumes with normal aging: is atrial enlargement inevitable? J Am Coll Cardiol (2002) 40:1630–1635.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
128. Losi M.A., Betocchi S., Aversa M., Lombardi R., Miranda M., D'Alessandro G., et al. Determinants of atrial fibrillation development in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol (2004) 94:895–900.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
129. Schnittger I., Gordon E.P., Fitzgerald P.J., Popp R.L. Standardized intracardiac measurements of two-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol (1983) 2:934–938.[Abstract]
130. DePace N.L., Ren J.F., Kotler M.N., Mintz G.S., Kimbiris D., Kalman P. Two-dimensional echocardiographic determination of right atrial emptying volume: a noninvasive index in quantifying the degree of tricuspid regurgitation. Am J Cardiol (1983) 52:525–529.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
131. Kaplan J.D., Evans G.T. Jr., Foster E., Lim D., Schiller N.B. Evaluation of electrocardiographic criteria for right atrial enlargement by quantitative two-dimensional echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol (1994) 23:747–752.[Abstract]
132. Roman M.J., Devereux R.B., Kramer-Fox R., O'Loughlin J. Two-dimensional echocardiographic aortic root dimensions in normal children and adults. Am J Cardiol (1989) 64:507–512.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
133. Roman M.J., Devereux R.B., Niles N.W., Hochreiter C., Kligfield P., Sato N., et al. Aortic root dilatation as a cause of isolated, severe aortic regurgitation. Prevalence, clinical and echocardiographic patterns, and relation to left ventricular hypertrophy and function. Ann Intern Med (1987) 106:800–807.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
134. Morrison D., Devereux R., Roman M.J. Association of aortic root dilation with aortic dissection: a case-control study. J Am Coll Cardiol (2003) 41. Ref Type: Abstract.
135. Kim M., Roman M.J., Cavallini M.C., Schwartz J.E., Pickering T.G., Devereux R.B. Effect of hypertension on aortic root size and prevalence of aortic regurgitation. Hypertension (1996) 28:47–52.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
136. Moreno F.L., Hagan A.D., Holmen J.R., Pryor T.A., Strickland R.D., Castle C.H. Evaluation of size and dynamics of the inferior vena cava as an index of right-sided cardiac function. Am J Cardiol (1984) 53:579–585.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
137. Kircher B.J., Himelman R.B., Schiller N.B. Noninvasive estimation of right atrial pressure from the inspiratory collapse of the inferior vena cava. Am J Cardiol (1990) 66:493–496.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
138. Goldhammer E., Mesnick N., Abinader E.G., Sagiv M. Dilated inferior vena cava: a common echocardiographic finding in highly trained elite athletes. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1999) 12:988–993.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
139. Jue J., Chung W., Schiller N.B. Does inferior vena cava size predict right atrial pressures in patients receiving mechanical ventilation? J Am Soc Echocardiogr (1992) 5:613–619.[Medline]
140. Bendjelid K., Romand J.A., Walder B., Suter P.M., Fournier G. Correlation between measured inferior vena cava diameter and right atrial pressure depends on the echocardiographic method used in patients who are mechanically ventilated. J Am Soc Echocardiogr (2002) 15:944–949.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				W. J. Paulus and J. J.M. van Ballegoij Treatment of Heart Failure With Normal Ejection Fraction: An Inconvenient Truth! J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., February 9, 2010; 55(6): 526 - 537. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S.T. de Vries, S.A. Kleijn, A.W.J. van 't Hof, H. Snaak, G.C. van Enst, O. Kamp, and A. Breeman Impact of high altitude on echocardiographically determined cardiac morphology and function in patients with coronary artery disease and healthy controls Eur J Echocardiogr, February 6, 2010; (2010) jep237v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Dalsgaard, J. Kjaergaard, R. Pecini, K. K. Iversen, L. Kober, J. E. Moller, P. Grande, P. Clemmensen, and C. Hassager Predictors of exercise capacity and symptoms in severe aortic stenosis Eur J Echocardiogr, February 6, 2010; (2010) jeq002v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Jurcut, S. Giusca, A. La Gerche, S. Vasile, C. Ginghina, and J.-U. Voigt The echocardiographic assessment of the right ventricle: what to do in 2010? Eur J Echocardiogr, February 2, 2010; (2010): jep234v1 - jep234. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W.-J. Flu, J.-P. van Kuijk, W. Galal, R. Kuiper, L. L. van de Ven, H. J.M. Verhagen, J. J. Bax, and D. Poldermans Prevalence and pharmacological treatment of left-ventricular dysfunction in patients undergoing vascular surgery Eur J Heart Fail, January 22, 2010; (2010): hfp201v1 - hfp201. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Cramariuc, E. Gerdts, E. S. Davidsen, L. Segadal, and K. Matre Myocardial deformation in aortic valve stenosis: relation to left ventricular geometry Heart, January 15, 2010; 96(2): 106 - 112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. A. Losi, B. Memoli, C. Contaldi, G. Barbati, M. Del Prete, S. Betocchi, M. Cavallaro, G. Carpinella, A. Fundaliotis, L.-S Parrella, et al. Myocardial fibrosis and diastolic dysfunction in patients on chronic haemodialysis Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., January 14, 2010; (2010) gfp747v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Popescu, A. Calin, C. C. Beladan, D. Muraru, M. Rosca, D. Deleanu, P. Lancellotti, F. Antonini-Canterin, G. L. Nicolosi, and C. Ginghina Left ventricular torsional dynamics in aortic stenosis: relationship between left ventricular untwisting and filling pressures. A two-dimensional speckle tracking study Eur J Echocardiogr, January 6, 2010; (2010) jep224v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. K. Poulsen, J. E. Henriksen, J. Dahl, A. Johansen, O. Gerke, W. Vach, T. Haghfelt, P. F. Hoilund-Carlsen, H. Beck-Nielsen, and J. E. Moller Left Ventricular Diastolic Function in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Prevalence and Association With Myocardial and Vascular Disease Circ Cardiovasc Imaging, January 1, 2010; 3(1): 24 - 31. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. de la Morena, D. Saura, M. J. Oliva, F. Soria, J. Gonzalez, M. Garcia, V. Moreno, J. C. Bonaque, and M. Valdes Real-time three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis Eur J Echocardiogr, January 1, 2010; 11(1): 9 - 13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. P. Badano, C. Ginghina, J. Easaw, D. Muraru, M. T. Grillo, P. Lancellotti, B. Pinamonti, G. Coghlan, M. P. Marra, B. A. Popescu, et al. Right ventricle in pulmonary arterial hypertension: haemodynamics, structural changes, imaging, and proposal of a study protocol aimed to assess remodelling and treatment effects Eur J Echocardiogr, January 1, 2010; 11(1): 27 - 37. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. R. Matos-Souza, M. E. Fernandes-Santos, E. L. Hoehne, K. G. Franchini, and W. Nadruz Jr Isolated mitral valve prolapse is an independent predictor of aortic root size in a general population Eur J Echocardiogr, December 17, 2009; (2009) jep219v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Caselli, E. Canali, M. L. Foschi, D. Santini, E. Di Angelantonio, N. G. Pandian, and S. De Castro Long-term prognostic significance of three-dimensional echocardiographic parameters of the left ventricle and left atrium Eur J Echocardiogr, December 7, 2009; (2009) jep198v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Thorstensen, H. Dalen, B. H. Amundsen, S. A. Aase, and A. Stoylen Reproducibility in echocardiographic assessment of the left ventricular global and regional function, the HUNT study Eur J Echocardiogr, December 3, 2009; (2009) jep188v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Q. Ciampi, B. Petruzziello, M. D. Porta, S. Caputo, V. Manganiello, C. Astarita, and B. Villari Effect of intraventricular dyssynchrony on diastolic function and exercise tolerance in patients with heart failure Eur J Echocardiogr, December 1, 2009; 10(8): 907 - 913. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kiotsekoglou, J. C. Moggridge, B. H. Bijnens, V. Kapetanakis, F. Alpendurada, M. J. Mullen, S. Saha, D. K. Nassiri, J. Camm, G. R. Sutherland, et al. Biventricular and atrial diastolic function assessment using conventional echocardiography and tissue-Doppler imaging in adults with Marfan syndrome Eur J Echocardiogr, December 1, 2009; 10(8): 947 - 955. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. A. Popescu, M. J. Andrade, L. P. Badano, K. F. Fox, F. A. Flachskampf, P. Lancellotti, A. Varga, R. Sicari, A. Evangelista, P. Nihoyannopoulos, et al. European Association of Echocardiography recommendations for training, competence, and quality improvement in echocardiography Eur J Echocardiogr, December 1, 2009; 10(8): 893 - 905. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Dalen, A. Thorstensen, S. A. Aase, C. B. Ingul, H. Torp, L. J. Vatten, and A. Stoylen Segmental and global longitudinal strain and strain rate based on echocardiography of 1266 healthy individuals: the HUNT study in Norway Eur J Echocardiogr, November 28, 2009; (2009) jep194v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. A. Warnes Adult congenital heart disease importance of the right ventricle. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., November 17, 2009; 54(21): 1903 - 1910. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. A. Marsan, L. F Tops, P. Nihoyannopoulos, E. R Holman, and J. J Bax Real-time three dimensional echocardiography: current and future clinical applications Heart, November 15, 2009; 95(22): 1881 - 1890. [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. R. Van de Veire, V. Delgado, J. D. Schuijf, E. E. van der Wall, M. J. Schalij, and J. J. Bax The role of non-invasive imaging in patient selection Europace, November 1, 2009; 11(suppl_5): v32 - v39. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. A. Marsan, J. J.M. Westenberg, C. Ypenburg, R. J. van Bommel, S. Roes, V. Delgado, L. F. Tops, R. J. van der Geest, E. Boersma, A. de Roos, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging and response to cardiac resynchronization therapy: relative merits of left ventricular dyssynchrony and scar tissue Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2009; 30(19): 2360 - 2367. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W.-J. Flu, J.-P. van Kuijk, J. J. Bax, J. Gorcsan III, and D. Poldermans Three-dimensional speckle tracking echocardiography: a novel approach in the assessment of left ventricular volume and function? Eur. Heart J., October 1, 2009; 30(19): 2304 - 2307. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Kiotsekoglou, G R Sutherland, J C Moggridge, D K Nassiri, A J Camm, and A H Child The unravelling of primary myocardial impairment in Marfan syndrome by modern echocardiography Heart, October 1, 2009; 95(19): 1561 - 1566. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. T. Lonnebakken, E. M. Staal, O. Bleie, E. Strand, O. K. Nygard, and E. Gerdts Quantitative contrast stress echocardiography in assessment of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease Eur J Echocardiogr, October 1, 2009; 10(7): 858 - 864. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Wang, J. M. Buergler, K. Veerasamy, Y. P. Ashton, and S. F. Nagueh Delayed untwisting: the mechanistic link between dynamic obstruction and exercise tolerance in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., September 29, 2009; 54(14): 1326 - 1334. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Capalbo, A. Lo Vecchio, V. Farina, L. Spinelli, A. Palladino, C. Tiano, T. Lettiero, G. Lombardi, A. Colao, and M. Salerno Subtle Alterations of Cardiac Performance in Children with Growth Hormone Deficiency: Results of a Two-Year Prospective, Case-Control Study J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., September 1, 2009; 94(9): 3347 - 3355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Stahlberg, M. Damgaard, P. Norsk, A. Gabrielsen, A. Sahlen, C. Linde, and F. Braunschweig Cardiac output response to changes of the atrioventricular delay in different body positions and during exercise in patients receiving cardiac resynchronization therapy Europace, September 1, 2009; 11(9): 1160 - 1167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Palmieri, C. Russo, E. A. Palmieri, S. Pezzullo, and A. Celentano Changes in components of left ventricular mechanics under selective beta-1 blockade: insight from traditional and new technologies in echocardiography Eur J Echocardiogr, August 1, 2009; 10(6): 745 - 752. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T.-M. Lee, C.-C. Chen, and N.-C. Chang Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor increases sympathetic reinnervation and the arrhythmogenic response to programmed electrical stimulation after myocardial infarction in rats Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, August 1, 2009; 297(2): H512 - H522. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Delgado, J. J. Bax, and E. E. van der Wall Towards assessment of left ventricular mechanics in true three dimensions Eur. Heart J., July 1, 2009; 30(13): 1554 - 1555. [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Rigatelli, S. Aggio, P. Cardaioli, G. Braggion, M. Giordan, F. Dell'avvocata, M. Chinaglia, G. Rigatelli, L. Roncon, and J. P. Chen Left Atrial Dysfunction in Patients With Patent Foramen Ovale and Atrial Septal Aneurysm: An Alternative Concurrent Mechanism for Arterial Embolism? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Intv., July 1, 2009; 2(7): 655 - 662. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Thomopoulos, D. P. Papadopoulos, O. Papazachou, A. Bratsas, S. Massias, G. Anastasiadis, D. Perrea, and T. Makris Free Leptin Is Associated With Masked Hypertension in Nonobese Subjects: A Cross-Sectional Study Hypertension, June 1, 2009; 53(6): 965 - 972. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Cramariuc, G. Cioffi, A. E. Rieck, R. B. Devereux, E. M. Staal, S. Ray, K. Wachtell, and E. Gerdts Low-Flow Aortic Stenosis in Asymptomatic Patients: Valvular-Arterial Impedance and Systolic Function From the SEAS Substudy J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. Img., April 1, 2009; 2(4): 390 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. H. Mayo, Y. Beaulieu, P. Doelken, D. Feller-Kopman, C. Harrod, A. Kaplan, J. Oropello, A. Vieillard-Baron, O. Axler, D. Lichtenstein, et al. American College of Chest Physicians/La Societe de Reanimation de Langue Francaise Statement on Competence in Critical Care Ultrasonography Chest, April 1, 2009; 135(4): 1050 - 1060. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. S.P. Lam, V. L. Roger, R. J. Rodeheffer, B. A. Borlaug, F. T. Enders, and M. M. Redfield Pulmonary hypertension in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction a community-based study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol., March 31, 2009; 53(13): 1119 - 1126. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Napoli, V. Apuzzi, G. Bosso, C. D'Anna, A. De Sena, C. Pirozzi, A. Marano, G. A. Lupoli, G. Cudemo, U. Oliviero, et al. Recombinant Human Thyrotropin Enhances Endothelial-Mediated Vasodilation of Conduit Arteries J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2009; 94(3): 1012 - 1016. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kiotsekoglou, G. R. Sutherland, J. C. Moggridge, V. Kapetanakis, A. Bajpai, N. Bunce, M. J. Mullen, G. Louridas, D. K. Nassiri, J. Camm, et al. Impaired right ventricular systolic function demonstrated by reduced atrioventricular plane displacement in adults with Marfan syndrome Eur J Echocardiogr, March 1, 2009; 10(2): 295 - 302. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. H. Bijnens, M. Cikes, P. Claus, and G. R. Sutherland Velocity and deformation imaging for the assessment of myocardial dysfunction Eur J Echocardiogr, March 1, 2009; 10(2): 216 - 226. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. F. Nagueh, C. P. Appleton, T. C. Gillebert, P. N. Marino, J. K. Oh, O. A. Smiseth, A. D. Waggoner, F. A. Flachskampf, P. A. Pellikka, and A. Evangelisa Recommendations for the Evaluation of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function by Echocardiography Eur J Echocardiogr, March 1, 2009; 10(2): 165 - 193. [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Donal, L. H. Lund, C. Linde, M. Edner, S. Lafitte, H. Persson, F. Bauer, J. Ohrvik, P.-V. Ennezat, C. Hage, et al. Rationale and design of the Karolinska-Rennes (KaRen) prospective study of dyssynchrony in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction Eur J Heart Fail, February 1, 2009; 11(2): 198 - 204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. R. Concha, V. F. Mertz, L. I. Cortinez, K. A. Gonzalez, J. M. Butte, F. Lopez, G. Pinedo, and A. Zuniga The Volume of Lactated Ringer's Solution Required to Maintain Preload and Cardiac Index During Open and Laparoscopic Surgery Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2009; 108(2): 616 - 622. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V. Mor-Avi, L. Sugeng, and R. M. Lang Real-Time 3-Dimensional Echocardiography: An Integral Component of the Routine Echocardiographic Examination in Adult Patients? Circulation, January 20, 2009; 119(2): 314 - 329. [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Baumgartner, J. Hung, J. Bermejo, J. B. Chambers, A. Evangelista, B. P. Griffin, B. Iung, C. M. Otto, P. A. Pellikka, and M. Quinones Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice Eur J Echocardiogr, January 1, 2009; 10(1): 1 - 25. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. S. Kushwaha, E. Raichlin, Y. Sheinin, W. K. Kremers, K. Chandrasekaran, G. J. Brunn, and J. L. Platt Sirolimus affects cardiomyocytes to reduce left ventricular mass in heart transplant recipients Eur. Heart J., November 2, 2008; 29(22): 2742 - 2750. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. V. Huikuri, K. Kervinen, M. Niemela, K. Ylitalo, M. Saily, P. Koistinen, E.-R. Savolainen, H. Ukkonen, M. Pietila, J. K.E. Airaksinen, et al. Effects of intracoronary injection of mononuclear bone marrow cells on left ventricular function, arrhythmia risk profile, and restenosis after thrombolytic therapy of acute myocardial infarction Eur. Heart J., November 2, 2008; 29(22): 2723 - 2732. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Tagore, L. H. Ling, H. Yang, H.-Y. Daw, Y.-H. Chan, and S. K. Sethi Natriuretic Peptides in Chronic Kidney Disease Clin. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., November 1, 2008; 3(6): 1644 - 1651. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Colao, M. Galderisi, A. Di Sarno, M. Pardo, M. Gaccione, M. D'Andrea, E. Guerra, R. Pivonello, G. Lerro, and G. Lombardi Increased Prevalence of Tricuspid Regurgitation in Patients with Prolactinomas Chronically Treated with Cabergoline J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2008; 93(10): 3777 - 3784. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Richardson-Lobbedez, S. Marechaux, C. Bauters, J. Darchis, J. L. Auffray, J. J. Bauchart, J. M. Aubert, T. H. LeJemtel, M. Lesenne, E. Van Belle, et al. Prognostic importance of tissue Doppler-derived diastolic function in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome: a bedside echocardiographic study Eur J Echocardiogr, September 1, 2008; 9(5): 594 - 598. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Kiotsekoglou, A. Bajpai, B. H. Bijnens, V. Kapetanakis, G. Athanassopoulos, J. C. Moggridge, M. J. Mullen, D. K. Nassiri, J. Camm, G. R. Sutherland, et al. Early impairment of left ventricular long-axis systolic function demonstrated by reduced atrioventricular plane displacement in patients with Marfan syndrome Eur J Echocardiogr, September 1, 2008; 9(5): 605 - 613. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. L. Muiesan, M. Salvetti, A. Paini, C. Agabiti-Rosei, C. Monteduro, G. Galbassini, E. Belotti, C. Aggiusti, D. Rizzoni, M. Castellano, et al. Inappropriate Left Ventricular Mass in Patients With Primary Aldosteronism Hypertension, September 1, 2008; 52(3): 529 - 534. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Salerno, U. Oliviero, T. Lettiero, V. Guardasole, D. M. Mattiacci, L. Saldamarco, D. Capalbo, A. Lucariello, L. Sacca, and A. Cittadini Long-Term Cardiovascular Effects of Levothyroxine Therapy in Young Adults with Congenital Hypothyroidism J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., July 1, 2008; 93(7): 2486 - 2491. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Evangelista, F. Flachskampf, P. Lancellotti, L. Badano, R. Aguilar, M. Monaghan, J. Zamorano, P. Nihoyannopoulos, and on behalf of the European Association of Echocardi European Association of Echocardiography recommendations for standardization of performance, digital storage and reporting of echocardiographic studies Eur J Echocardiogr, July 1, 2008; 9(4): 438 - 448. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. L. Dini, P. Fontanive, E. Panicucci, D. Andreini, P. Chella, and S. M. De Tommasi Prognostic significance of tricuspid annular motion and plasma NT-proBNP in patients with heart failure and moderate-to-severe functional mitral regurgitation Eur J Heart Fail, June 1, 2008; 10(6): 573 - 580. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. B. Hinton Jr., C. M. Alfieri, S. A. Witt, B. J. Glascock, P. R. Khoury, D. W. Benson, and K. E. Yutzey Mouse heart valve structure and function: echocardiographic and morphometric analyses from the fetus through the aged adult Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, June 1, 2008; 294(6): H2480 - H2488. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. Jiamsripong, T. Honda, C. S. Reuss, R. T. Hurst, H. P. Chaliki, D. E. Grill, S. L. Schneck, R. Tyler, B. K. Khandheria, and S. J. Lester Three methods for evaluation of left atrial volume Eur J Echocardiogr, May 1, 2008; 9(3): 351 - 355. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Arriagada, A. Berruezo, L. Mont, D. Tamborero, I. Molina, B. Coll-Vinent, B. Vidal, M. Sitges, P. Berne, J. Brugada, et al. Predictors of arrhythmia recurrence in patients with lone atrial fibrillation Europace, January 1, 2008; 10(1): 9 - 14. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Stockburger, S. Fateh-Moghadam, A. Nitardy, O. Celebi, A. Krebs, D. Habedank, and R. Dietz Baseline Doppler parameters are useful predictors of chronic left ventricular reduction in size by cardiac resynchronization therapy Europace, January 1, 2008; 10(1): 69 - 74. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. S. Hydock, C.-Y. Lien, C. M. Schneider, and R. Hayward Effects of voluntary wheel running on cardiac function and myosin heavy chain in chemically gonadectomized rats Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, December 1, 2007; 293(6): H3254 - H3264. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Neglia, A. De Caterina, P. Marraccini, A. Natali, M. Ciardetti, C. Vecoli, A. Gastaldelli, D. Ciociaro, P. Pellegrini, R. Testa, et al. Impaired myocardial metabolic reserve and substrate selection flexibility during stress in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, December 1, 2007; 293(6): H3270 - H3278. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. T. Vestergaard, N. H. Andersen, T. K. Hansen, L. M. Rasmussen, N. Moller, K. E. Sorensen, E. Sloth, and J. O. L. Jorgensen Cardiovascular effects of intravenous ghrelin infusion in healthy young men Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol, November 1, 2007; 293(5): H3020 - H3026. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J.-P. Laissy, D. Messika-Zeitoun, J.-M. Serfaty, V. Sebban, E. Schouman-Claeys, B. Iung, and A. Vahanian Comprehensive evaluation of preoperative patients with aortic valve stenosis: usefulness of cardiac multidetector computed tomography Heart, September 1, 2007; 93(9): 1121 - 1125. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Varounis, N. Dagres, T. Maounis, D. Panagiotakos, and D. V. Cokkinos Atrial premature complexes and heart rate have prognostic significance in 1-month atrial fibrillation recurrence after electrical cardioversion Europace, August 1, 2007; 9(8): 633 - 637. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Messika-Zeitoun, M. Bellamy, J.-F. Avierinos, J. Breen, C. Eusemann, A. Rossi, T. Behrenbeck, C. Scott, J. A. Tajik, and M. Enriquez-Sarano Left atrial remodelling in mitral regurgitation--methodologic approach, physiological determinants, and outcome implications: a prospective quantitative Doppler-echocardiographic and electron beam-computed tomographic study Eur. Heart J., July 2, 2007; 28(14): 1773 - 1781. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M M. Lindsay and F. G Dunn Biochemical evidence of myocardial fibrosis in veteran endurance athletes Br. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2007; 41(7): 447 - 452. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Authors/Task Force Members:, G. Mancia, G. De Backer, A. Dominiczak, R. Cifkova, R. Fagard, G. Germano, G. Grassi, A. M. Heagerty, S. E. Kjeldsen, et al. 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Arterial Hypertension: The Task Force for the Management of Arterial Hypertension of the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) and of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Eur. Heart J., June 11, 2007; (2007) ehm236v1. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Olszewski, J. Timperley, S. Cezary, M. Monaghan, P. Nihoyannopoulis, R. Senior, and H. Becher The clinical applications of contrast echocardiography Eur J Echocardiogr, June 1, 2007; 8(3): s13 - s23. [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. F. Drager, L. A. Bortolotto, A. C. Figueiredo, B. C. Silva, E. M. Krieger, and G. Lorenzi-Filho Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Hypertension, and Their Interaction on Arterial Stiffness and Heart Remodeling Chest, May 1, 2007; 131(5): 1379 - 1386. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. S.P. Lam, V. L. Roger, R. J. Rodeheffer, F. Bursi, B. A. Borlaug, S. R. Ommen, D. A. Kass, and M. M. Redfield Cardiac Structure and Ventricular-Vascular Function in Persons With Heart Failure and Preserved Ejection Fraction From Olmsted County, Minnesota Circulation, April 17, 2007; 115(15): 1982 - 1990. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Tripepi, F. A. Benedetto, F. Mallamaci, R. Tripepi, L. Malatino, and C. Zoccali Left Atrial Volume Monitoring and Cardiovascular Risk in Patients with End-Stage Renal Disease: A Prospective Cohort Study J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., April 1, 2007; 18(4): 1316 - 1322. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Erdogan, I. Yildirim, O. Ciftci, I. Ozer, M. Caliskan, H. Gullu, and H. Muderrisoglu Effects of Normal Blood Pressure, Prehypertension, and Hypertension on Coronary Microvascular Function Circulation, February 6, 2007; 115(5): 593 - 599. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. P. Shapiro, M. D. McGoon, and M. M. Redfield Unexplained Pulmonary Hypertension in Elderly Patients Chest, January 1, 2007; 131(1): 94 - 100. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract FREE Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Personal Archive Download to citation manager Request Permissions Disclaimer Google Scholar Articles by Lang, R. M. Articles by Stewart, W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Lang, R. M. Articles by Stewart, W. Social Bookmarking          What's this?

Online ISSN 1532-2114 - Print ISSN 1525-2167

Copyright © 2010 European Society of Cardiology

Oxford Journals Oxford University Press

• Site Map
• Privacy Policy
• Frequently Asked Questions

Other Oxford University Press sites: Oxford University Press Oxford Journals China Oxford Journals Japan American National Biography Booksellers' Information Service Children's Fiction and Poetry Children's Reference Corporate & Special Sales Dictionaries Dictionary of National Biography Digital Reference English Language Teaching Higher Education Textbooks Humanities International Education Unit Law Medicine Music Online Products Oxford English Dictionary Reference Rights and Permissions Science School Books Social Sciences Very Short Introductions World's Classics