Assessment of systolic left ventricular function: a multi-centre comparison of cineventriculography, cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, unenhanced and contrast-enhanced echocardiography

Abstract

Unenhanced echocardiography resulted in slight underestimation of EF and only moderate correlation compared with cineventriculography and MRI. Contrast echocardiography resulted in more accurate EF and significantly improved correlation with cineventriculography and MRI. Contrast echocardiography significantly improved inter-observer agreement on EF compared with unenhanced echocardiography. Inter-observer reliability on EF using contrast echocardiography reaches a level comparable to MRI and is better than those obtained by cineventriculography.