Left Atrial Volume and Strain by Two‐Dimensional Versus Three‐Dimensional Echocardiography in Healthy Subjects: Reference Values are Not Interchangeable.

Background: Little is known about the differences in left atrial (LA) volume and strain assessed with two‐dimensional (2DE) and three‐dimensional echocardiography(3DE). Therefore, this study aimed to compare 2DE and 3DE parameters in healthy subjects. Methods: We obtained LA volumes and strains by 3...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Echocardiography Vol. 43; no. 6; pp. 1 - 10
Autores principales: Li, Lei, You, Chunyuan, Yan, Xiaoyang, Jin, Yan
Formato: diagnostic images research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Jun2026
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=194811774&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 194811774
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        07422822
        GSE
      jtl: Echocardiography
      issn: 07422822
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2026
      vid: 43
      iid: 6
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        194811774
        194811774
        194811774
        10.1111/echo.70538
        194811774
      ppf: 1
      ppct: 9
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Left Atrial Volume and Strain by Two‐Dimensional Versus Three‐Dimensional Echocardiography in Healthy Subjects: Reference Values are Not Interchangeable.
      aug:
        au:
          Li, Lei
          You, Chunyuan
          Yan, Xiaoyang
          Jin, Yan
        affil: Department of Cardiology, Wuxi No. 2 People's Hospital, Wuxi, China
      sug:
        subj:
          Reference Values
          Electrocardiography Methods
          Heart Atrium, Left Ultrasonography
          Heart Atrium, Left Anatomy and Histology
          Cardiac Output
          Human
          Male
          Female
          Adult
          Middle Age
          Aged
          Retrospective Design
          Record Review
          Comparative Studies
          Reproducibility of Results
          Sensitivity and Specificity
          Diastole Physiology
          Risk Assessment
          Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
          Correlational Studies
          China
          Global Longitudinal Strain
          Systole Physiology
          T-Tests
          Pearson's Correlation Coefficient
          Interrater Reliability
          Intrarater Reliability
          Descriptive Statistics
          Data Analysis Software
          Adult: 19-44 years
          Middle Aged: 45-64 years
          Aged: 65+ years
          Male
          Female
      ab: Background: Little is known about the differences in left atrial (LA) volume and strain assessed with two‐dimensional (2DE) and three‐dimensional echocardiography(3DE). Therefore, this study aimed to compare 2DE and 3DE parameters in healthy subjects. Methods: We obtained LA volumes and strains by 3DE and 2DE in 328 healthy subjects (52 ± 13 years; 51.83% men). Results: Means of 3DE LA volume indexes (LAVIs) were higher than those derived from 2DE (maximal LAVI: 26.75 vs. 22.66 mL/m2; minimal LAVI: 11.76 vs. 9.30 mL/m2; preA LAVI: 19.52 vs. 16.23 mL/m2, respectively, all p < 0.001). Conversely, means of 3DE LA phasic strains were lower than those derived from 2DE (LA reservoir strain: 25.16 vs. 32.01%; LA conduit strain: 13.09 vs. 16.52%; LA contractile strain: 12.12 vs. 15.52%, respectively, all p < 0.001). Similarly, total, passive, and active LA emptying fractions (EF) were lower with 3DE than those with 2DE (all p < 0.05). Correlation between 3DE and 2DE was moderate for LAVIs (all r > 0.65, all p < 0.001), with 2DE showing a systematic underestimation (bias: −4.09 mL/m2 for maximal LAVI; −2.46 mL/m2 for minimal LAVI, −3.30 mL/m2 for preA LAVI). For LA strain parameters, only conduit strain showed moderate correlation (r = 0.65, p < 0.001) with an overestimation bias of +3.42%, while reservoir and contractile strains correlated poorly between modalities with wide limits of agreement. LAEFs also demonstrated poor inter‐modality agreement. Conclusions: 2DE yielded lower LAVIs but higher LA strain and EF values compared to 3DE. Although there was a significant correlation between the 2D and 3D parameters, agreement analysis indicated that their normal reference values were not interchangeable.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        diagnostic images
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N