Stereoscopic Display Is Superior to Conventional Display for Three-Dimensional Echocardiography of Congenital Heart Anatomy
Stereoscopic Display Is Superior to Conventional Display for Three-Dimensional Echocardiography of Congenital Heart Anatomy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.016
复制
发表时间：
2020-11-01
影响因子：
6.5
通讯作者：
Khoo, Nee Scze
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Harake, Danielle;Gnanappa, Ganesh Kumar;Khoo, Nee Scze
背景：三维超声心动图（3DE）提高了心脏病变的可视化。当前在常规显示器上观看3DE研究减少了用于深度感知的编码立体（立体）信息。本研究的目的是评估临床医生的主观和客观经验的立体显示与非立体显示的3DE在先天性heartdisease.Methods：在这项前瞻性研究中，22名心脏病学家，先进的心脏病学实习生，心胸外科医生使用了一种商用的立体显示系统与专有软件，查看10个3DE数据集，简单和复杂的病变之间交替。在A部分中，参与者查看每个数据集，随机分为1分钟的立体显示，然后是1分钟的非立体显示，反之亦然。在部分B中，参与者可以在立体和非立体显示之间自由切换，每个数据集额外90秒。参与者回答了一系列问题，并在Likert量表上使用立体与非立体显示模式对他们的主观体验进行了评分。客观的数据，在每个显示模式所花费的时间在部分B和互动的持续时间和程度的运动的3DE数据集在部分A和B也covered.Results：所有临床医生组发现立体显示优于非立体显示的3DE（P < .0001）。当使用非立体显示时，复杂病变的显示率低于简单病变（P <0.01）。当使用立体显示时，简单和复杂病变的评级同样良好（P = 0.14）。当在部分B中选择显示模式时，参与者在立体显示中花费更多的时间（P < .0001），并与立体显示中的3DE数据集进行更多的交互（P < .0001）。结论：对于查看简单和复杂的病变，所有临床医生组都更喜欢3DE的交互式立体显示而不是传统的非立体显示。这种偏好在观察复杂病变时尤其如此。
Background: Three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) improves visualization of cardiac lesions. Current viewing of 3DE studies on a conventional display diminishes the encoded stereoscopic (stereo) information for depth perception. This study aims to evaluate clinician subjective and objective experience of stereo display compared with nonstereo display of 3DE in congenital heart disease.Methods: In this prospective study, 22 cardiologists, advanced cardiology trainees, and cardiothoracic surgeons used a commercially available stereo display system with proprietary software to view 10 3DE data sets, alternating between simple and complex lesions. In part A, participants viewed each data set, randomized to 1 minute of stereo display followed by 1 minute of nonstereo display, or vice versa. In part B, participants could freely toggle between stereo and nonstereo display for an additional 90 seconds per data set. Participants answered a series of questions and rated their subjective experience using stereo versus nonstereo display mode on a Likert scale. Objective data on time spent in each display mode during part B and duration of interaction and degree of movement of the 3DE data set in parts A and B were also collected.Results: All clinician groups found stereo display preferable to nonstereo display of 3DE (P < .0001). Viewing complex lesions was rated lower than simple lesions when using nonstereo display (P < .01). Simple and complex lesions were equally well rated when using stereo display (P = .14). When given a choice of display modes in part B, participants spent more time in stereo display (P < .0001) and interacted more with the 3DE data sets in stereo display (P < .0001).Conclusions: Interactive stereoscopic display of 3DE was preferred over conventional nonstereo display by all clinician groups for viewing both simple and complex lesions. This preference is especially true for viewing complex lesions.