Determination of ventricular ejection fraction: A comparison of available imaging methods

John A. Rumberger; Thomas Behrenbeck; Malcolm R. Bell; Jerome F. Breen; Donald L. Johnston; David R. Holmes; Maurice Enriquez-Sarano

doi:10.4065/72.9.860

Determination of ventricular ejection fraction: A comparison of available imaging methods

John A. Rumberger, Thomas Behrenbeck, Malcolm R. Bell, Jerome F. Breen, Donald L. Johnston, David R. Holmes, Maurice Enriquez-Sarano

Cardiovascular Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

76 Scopus citations

Abstract

Knowledge of left ventricular ejection fraction has been shown to provide diagnostic and prognostic information in patients with known or suspected heart disease. In clinical practice, the ejection fraction can be determined by using one of the five currently available imaging techniques: contrast angiography, echocardiography, radionuclide techniques of blood pool and first pass imaging, electron beam computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In this review, we discuss the clinical application as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods as it relates to determination of ventricular ejection fraction.

Original language	English (US)
Pages (from-to)	860-870
Number of pages	11
Journal	Mayo Clinic proceedings
Volume	72
Issue number	9
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.4065/72.9.860
State	Published - 1997

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Medicine(all)

Access to Document

10.4065/72.9.860

Cite this

@article{bd200246bea3439d8c01c6ee684102ec,

title = "Determination of ventricular ejection fraction: A comparison of available imaging methods",

abstract = "Knowledge of left ventricular ejection fraction has been shown to provide diagnostic and prognostic information in patients with known or suspected heart disease. In clinical practice, the ejection fraction can be determined by using one of the five currently available imaging techniques: contrast angiography, echocardiography, radionuclide techniques of blood pool and first pass imaging, electron beam computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In this review, we discuss the clinical application as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods as it relates to determination of ventricular ejection fraction.",

author = "Rumberger, {John A.} and Thomas Behrenbeck and Bell, {Malcolm R.} and Breen, {Jerome F.} and Johnston, {Donald L.} and Holmes, {David R.} and Maurice Enriquez-Sarano",

year = "1997",

doi = "10.4065/72.9.860",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "72",

pages = "860--870",

journal = "Mayo Clinic proceedings",

issn = "0025-6196",

publisher = "Elsevier Science",

number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Determination of ventricular ejection fraction

T2 - A comparison of available imaging methods

AU - Rumberger, John A.

AU - Behrenbeck, Thomas

AU - Bell, Malcolm R.

AU - Breen, Jerome F.

AU - Johnston, Donald L.

AU - Holmes, David R.

AU - Enriquez-Sarano, Maurice

PY - 1997

Y1 - 1997

N2 - Knowledge of left ventricular ejection fraction has been shown to provide diagnostic and prognostic information in patients with known or suspected heart disease. In clinical practice, the ejection fraction can be determined by using one of the five currently available imaging techniques: contrast angiography, echocardiography, radionuclide techniques of blood pool and first pass imaging, electron beam computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In this review, we discuss the clinical application as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods as it relates to determination of ventricular ejection fraction.

AB - Knowledge of left ventricular ejection fraction has been shown to provide diagnostic and prognostic information in patients with known or suspected heart disease. In clinical practice, the ejection fraction can be determined by using one of the five currently available imaging techniques: contrast angiography, echocardiography, radionuclide techniques of blood pool and first pass imaging, electron beam computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In this review, we discuss the clinical application as well as the advantages and disadvantages of each of these methods as it relates to determination of ventricular ejection fraction.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0030799132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0030799132&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4065/72.9.860

DO - 10.4065/72.9.860

M3 - Article

C2 - 9294535

AN - SCOPUS:0030799132

SN - 0025-6196

VL - 72

SP - 860

EP - 870

JO - Mayo Clinic proceedings

JF - Mayo Clinic proceedings

IS - 9

ER -

Determination of ventricular ejection fraction: A comparison of available imaging methods

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this