Introduction: Echocardiography is a valuable diagnostic test to evaluate the cardiovascular system and assess physiologic function in a variety of diseases. Diastolic dysfunction is a
common condition and a valuable factor for predicting hospitalization and mortality; therefore, assessment of diastolic function should be a part of every routine echocardiogram.
Purpose: Interested in reproductivity of diastolic measurements, between cardiologist and radiographer, we have revaluated one hundred echocardiographic examinations made in
2019. Also assessing the usage of new Recommendations for Echocardiographic Assessment of Left Ventricular Diastolic Function. Methods: Descriptive method was used to review
the internet and library literature. Retrospective analaysis of measurements, using different dopler tehniques (pulsed, continuous wave doppler and tissue doppler), has been carried out among one hundred consecutive cardiac ultrasound examinations, made in echocardiographic laboratory in Slovenj Gradec in 2019; excluding patients with atrial
fibrillation and genetic heart diseases. Focusing on measurements that are necessary for diastolic evaluation (E, A, e’sept, e’ lat, TR ^^^^, LAVI).We have used bias assessment to indicate the true difference in two data points, Bland-Altman plot to demonstrate the degree
of agreement and Cohen's κ to asses agreement of two observers. We have used plots to present the usage of latest recommendations for grading diastolic function. Results: With
bias statistical tests we have determined that there are significant differences in paired data
for e'sept, e'lat measurements. With the Bland- Altman we demonstrate degree of agreement between both operators for all parameters. The agreement was excellent for all parameters except for e'sept and e'lat. Nevertheless inter-observer reproducibility of diastolic function
was excellent for most diastolic function parameters, with limits of agreement sufficiently narrow to conclude that the fluctuation in measures is unlikely to have noteworthy impact in
classification of diastolic function. Kappa statistics demonstrates a strong agreement
between the two observers with regard to diastolic dysfunction identification (κ=0,810).
Regarding the latest recommendations for diastolic function, left out measurements (TR ^^^^
and others) testify to poor usage of current guidelines. Discussion and conclusion: We
provide strong evidence to support that reproducibility of echocardiographic parameters for
diastolic function between radiographers and cardiologist is high, and that fluctuation in
Measurements in unlikely to have noteworthy impact on diastolic function classification. Also
the inter-observer agreement of echocardiographic parameters for diastolic function is excellent, with regard to diastolic dysfunction presence. The assessment of diastolic function
should be a part of every routine cardiogram, with adherence to guideline recommendations.
|
