2 resultados para Bi-Ventricular Assist Device
em DI-fusion - The institutional repository of Université Libre de Bruxelles
Resumo:
Background. In clinical practice and in clinical trials, echocardiography and scintigraphy are used the most for the evaluation of global left ejection fraction (LVEF) and left ventricular (LV) volumes. Actually, poor quality imaging and geometrical assumptions are the main limitations of LVEF measured by echocardiography. Contrast agents and 3D echocardiography are new methods that may alleviate these potential limitations. Methods. Therefore we sought to examine the accuracy of contrast 3D echocardiography for the evaluation of LV volumes and LVEF relative to MIBI gated SPECT as an independent reference. In 43 patients addressed for chest pain, contrast 3D echocardiography (RT3DE) and MIBI gated SPECT were prospectively performed on the same day. The accuracy and the variability of LV volumes and LVEF measurements were evaluated. Results. Due to good endocardial delineation, LV volumes and LVEF measurements by contrast RT3DE were feasible in 99% of the patients. The mean LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) of the group by scintigraphy was 143 65 mL and was underestimated by triplane contrast RT3DE (128 60 mL; p < 0.001) and less by full-volume contrast RT3DE (132 62 mL; p < 0.001). Limits of agreement with scintigraphy were similar for triplane andfull-volume, modalities with the best results for full-volume. Results were similar for calculation of LV end-systolic volume (LVESV). The mean LVEF was 44 16% with scintigraphy and was not significantly different with both triplane contrast RT3DE (45 15%) and full-volume contrast RT3DE (45 15%). There was an excellent correlation between two different observers for LVEDV, LVESV and LVEF measurements and inter observer agreement was also good for both contrast RT3DE techniques. Conclusion. Contrast RT3DE allows an accurate assessment of LVEF compared to the LVEF measured by SPECT, and shows low variability between observers. Although RT3DE triplane provides accurate evaluation of left ventricular function, RT3DE full-volume is superior to triplane modality in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. © 2009 Cosyns et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Resumo:
Over the last decade, multi-touch devices (MTD) have spread in a range of contexts. In the learning context, MTD accessibility leads more and more teachers to use them in their classroom, assuming that it will improve the learning activities. Despite a growing interest, only few studies have focused on the impacts of MTD use in terms of performance and suitability in a learning context.However, even if the use of touch-sensitive screens rather than a mouse and keyboard seems to be the easiest and fastest way to realize common learning tasks (as for instance web surfing), we notice that the use of MTD may lead to a less favorable outcome. More precisely, tasks that require users to generate complex and/or less common gestures may increase extrinsic cognitive load and impair performance, especially for intrinsically complex tasks. It is hypothesized that task and gesture complexity will affect users’ cognitive resources and decrease task efficacy and efficiency. Because MTD are supposed to be more appealing, it is assumed that it will also impact cognitive absorption. The present study also takes into account user’s prior knowledge concerning MTD use and gestures by using experience with MTD as a moderator. Sixty university students were asked to perform information search tasks on an online encyclopedia. Tasks were set up so that users had to generate the most commonly used mouse actions (e.g. left/right click, scrolling, zooming, text encoding…). Two conditions were created: MTD use and laptop use (with mouse and keyboard) in order to make a comparison between the two devices. An eye tracking device was used to measure user’s attention and cognitive load. Our study sheds light on some important aspects towards the use of MTD and the added value compared to a laptop in a student learning context.