Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Heart Rhythm. 2009 Mar 11;6(7):984–992. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.03.013

Table 2.

Comparison of RV function and wall motion abnormalities reported by the core laboratories for 2D echocardiogram, MRI and angiography in studies adequate for interpretation of RVEF, FAC and wall motion

# %
Structural abnormalities by imaging
  Global function
    Severe RV dilatation and reduced RVEF**
    MRI; RVEF less than 45% 20/56* 36
    Echocardiogram; RV FAC<26% 13/85* 15
    Angiogram; severely reduced global function 17/81 21
    Mild RV global dilatation and/or reduced RVEF***
    MRI; RVEF 45 – 51% 18/56* 32
    Echocardiogram; RV FAC 26 – 32% 24/85* 28
    Angiogram; mildly reduced global function 25/81 31
  Right ventricular wall motion abnormalities
    Severe hypokinesis, akinesis, dyskinesis, aneurysm or diastolic bulging **
    MRI 24/88 27
    Echocardiogram 44/93 47
    Angiogram 28/81 35
    Mild hypokinesis ***
    MRI 21/88 24
    Echocardiogram 24/93 26
    Angiogram 28/81 35

Excluding missing data

*

# of imaging studies including views adequate for RVEF or FAC measurements

**

Major task force criteria

***

Minor task force criteria