4.4 Article

Left atrial volume and phasic function in clinically healthy dogs of 12 different breeds

Journal

VETERINARY JOURNAL
Volume 197, Issue 3, Pages 639-645

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2013.05.045

Keywords

Canine; Heart; Biplane area-length method; Echocardiography; Left atrial function; Left atrial volume

Funding

  1. University of Copenhagen

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The left atrium (IA) of the heart is a validated marker of clinical and subclinical cardiovascular disease. Since the LA is a three-dimensional structure, volume-based methods of chamber quantification might be more accurate than linear methods. The aims of this study were to establish the feasibility and reproducibility of biplane two-dimensional echocardiographic LA volume measurements and to provide reference ranges for LA volume and phasic function in adult dogs (n = 237) without cardiovascular disease. The study also assessed the effects of bodyweight (BW), breed, sex, age and heart rate (HR) on LA volume and function. The biplane area-length method was used to calculate LA volumes from the left apical four- and two-chamber views. LA volume and function were correlated with body size and there were significant breed differences. For dogs of all sizes and breeds, LA maximal volume had a 95th percentile of 0.92 mL/kg. There was no correlation between age or sex and LA volume or LA reservoir function, but conduit function decreased and booster pump function increased with age. LA volume and function varied with HR. LA size was calculated using the biplane area-length method, with good reproducibility and little inter-observer variability. The reference ranges presented for LA volume and function in healthy dogs could be used to refine the diagnostic criteria for the assessment of LA enlargement and altered function by conventional echocardiography. (C) 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available