Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2006 Sep;7(5):441-4.

Reliability of two-dimensional echocardiography in the assessment of clinically significant abnormal hemidiaphragm motion in pediatric cardiothoracic patients: Comparison with fluoroscopy.

Author information

  • 1Division of Pediatric Cardiology, University of California at San Francisco, USA.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:

To assess the utility and reliability of echocardiographic assessment of hemidiaphragm motion abnormalities in pediatric cardiothoracic patients.

DESIGN:

Retrospective observational study, with post hoc blinded assessment of echocardiographic and fluoroscopic results.

SETTING:

Tertiary care center.

PATIENTS:

Thirty-six consecutive pediatric cardiothoracic patients with suspected hemidiaphragm paralysis were identified and included in the study.

INTERVENTIONS:

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS:

The results of both echocardiographic and fluoroscopic studies on all patients were included. In addition, blinded review of study results were performed. The sensitivity and specificity of fluoroscopy in identifying hemidiaphragms that needed plication were 100% and 74%, respectively. The positive predictive value was 55%; negative predictive value was 100%. Comparing reported diagnoses with blinded review of the studies showed poor agreement; reviewers agreed with 89% diagnosed as normal, 44% of paralyzed, and 76% of paradoxical hemidiaphragms. The sensitivity and specificity of echo in identifying hemidiaphragms that needed plication were 100% and 81%, respectively. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 66% and 100%. Comparing reported diagnoses with blinded review, reviewers agreed with 97% diagnosed as normal, 81% of paralyzed, and 100% of paradoxical hemidiaphragms. Echocardiography was less accurate in discriminating between paralyzed and paradoxical diaphragm motion. Echocardiography was specific for paradoxical motion, since both patients identified by echocardiography were confirmed by fluoroscopy, but it was not sensitive. In nine patients, echo showed paralyzed motion that was identified by fluoroscopy as paradoxical.

CONCLUSIONS:

This study supports the use of echocardiography in the assessment of diaphragm function. When the diaphragms are clearly visualized by echo, as they are in the majority of cases, the addition of an additional fluoroscopic study adds no clinical value. The differentiation between paralyzed and paradoxical motion is unreliable by both imaging modalities.

Comment in

PMID:
16738495
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk