PetCaseFinder

Peer-reviewed veterinary case report

Comparing 3D and 2D heart scans for left atrial size in dogs

By Tidholm, Anna et al.·Published in Journal of veterinary internal medicine·2019·Anicura Albano Animal Hospital·View original on PubMed

PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →

Original publication title: Comparison between real-time 3-dimensional and 2-dimensional biplane echocardiographic assessment of left atrial volumes in dogs with myxomatous mitral valve disease.

Species:
dog

Plain-English summary

A study looked at how well two different ultrasound methods measured the size of the left atrium in dogs with myxomatous mitral valve disease (MMVD), a common heart condition. The researchers found that the 2-dimensional method (SMOD) tended to underestimate the size, while the area-length method (ALM) overestimated it. The 3-dimensional method (RT3DE) provided the most accurate measurements. Because the difference between RT3DE and SMOD was small, SMOD might be the better option for vets when assessing heart size in these dogs.

People also search for: dog heart disease treatment · myxomatous mitral valve disease in dogs · echocardiogram results for dogs

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Assessment of left atrial (LA) size is important in medical decision making and prognostication in dogs with myxomatous mitral valve disease (MMVD). Real-time 3-dimensional (RT3DE) and 2-dimensional echocardiographic (2DE) methods may be used to assess LA size. OBJECTIVES: To compare measured LA volumes obtained by RT3DE with those calculated by biplane Simpson's modified method of discs (SMOD) and the area-length method (ALM) using the same RT3DE acquisition with the same timing. ANIMALS: One hundred twenty-one privately owned dogs with naturally occurring MMVD. METHODS: Prospective observational study comparing LA volumes indexed to body weight using RT3DE and 2DE-based biplane SMOD and ALM. Agreement between methods was evaluated using Bland-Altman plots and linear regression analyses. RESULTS: Estimations of LA volume using SMOD or ALM did not show good agreement with RT3DE-derived measurements. Absolute differences between methods increased with increasing LA volume, but SMOD underestimated whereas ALM overestimated calculated volumes compared to RT3DE-derived measurements. The difference in LA volume between RT3DE and the biplane methods showed a systematic underestimation of 7% for SMOD and a systematic overestimation of 24% for ALM. Comparison of LA volumes obtained by SMOD and ALM did not show good agreement. The ALM yielded 30% larger LA volumes compared to SMOD. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: In comparison with RT3DE, SMOD systematically underestimated whereas ALM systematically overestimated LA volumes in dogs with MMVD. Because the systematic difference between RT3DE and SMOD was only 7%, SMOD might be considered the method of choice.

Find similar cases for your pet

PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.

Search related cases →

Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30628129/