↓ Skip to main content

Right ventricular ejection fraction measurements using two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography by applying an ellipsoid model

Overview of attention for article published in Cardiovascular Ultrasound, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
17 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Right ventricular ejection fraction measurements using two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography by applying an ellipsoid model
Published in
Cardiovascular Ultrasound, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12947-017-0096-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stina Jorstig, Micael Waldenborg, Mats Lidén, Per Thunberg, Stina Jorstig, Micael Waldenborg, Mats Lidén, Per Thunberg

Abstract

There is today no established approach to estimate right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) using 2D transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). The aim of this study was to evaluate a new method for RVEF calculations using 2D TTE and compare the results with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE). A total of 37 subjects, 25 retrospectively included patients and twelve healthy volunteers, were included to give a wide range of RVEF. The right ventricle (RV) was modeled as a part of an ellipsoid enabling calculation of the RV volume by combining three distance measurements. RVEF calculated according to the model, RVEFTTE, were compared with reference CMR-derived RVEF, RVEFCMR. Further, TAPSE was measured in the TTE images and the correlations were calculated between RVEFTTE, TAPSE and RVEFCMR. The mean values were RVEFCMR = 43 ± 12% (range 20-66%) and RVEFTTE = 50 ± 9% (range 34-65%). There was a high correlation (r = 0.80, p < 0.001) between RVEFTTE and RVEFCMR. Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference between RVEFCMR and RVEFTTE of 6 percentage points (ppt) with limits of agreement from -11 to 23 ppt. The mean value for TAPSE was 19 ± 5 mm and the correlation between TAPSE and RVEFCMR was moderate (r = 0.54, p < 0.001). The correlation between RVEFTTE and RVEFCMR was significantly higher (p < 0.05) than the correlation between TAPSE and RVEFCMR. The ellipsoid model shows promise for RVEF calculations using 2D TTE for a wide range of RVEF, providing RVEF estimates that were significantly better correlated to RVEF obtained from CMR compared to TAPSE.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 17 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 17 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 18%
Student > Postgraduate 2 12%
Researcher 2 12%
Student > Bachelor 2 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 12%
Other 2 12%
Unknown 4 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 6 35%
Engineering 2 12%
Physics and Astronomy 1 6%
Computer Science 1 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 6%
Other 1 6%
Unknown 5 29%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 March 2017.
All research outputs
#6,986,657
of 9,165,968 outputs
Outputs from Cardiovascular Ultrasound
#173
of 212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,835
of 253,795 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cardiovascular Ultrasound
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 9,165,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 212 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.5. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 253,795 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.