Stereoscopic Display Is Superior to Conventional Display for Three-Dimensional Echocardiography of Congenital Heart Anatomy

Danielle Harake; Ganesh Kumar Gnanappa; Silvia G V Alvarez; Andrew Whittle; Kumaradevan Punithakumar; Patricia Boechler; Michelle Noga; Nee Scze Khoo

doi:10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.016

Stereoscopic Display Is Superior to Conventional Display for Three-Dimensional Echocardiography of Congenital Heart Anatomy

J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2020 Nov;33(11):1297-1305. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.016. Epub 2020 Sep 9.

Authors

Danielle Harake¹, Ganesh Kumar Gnanappa¹, Silvia G V Alvarez¹, Andrew Whittle², Kumaradevan Punithakumar², Patricia Boechler³, Michelle Noga², Nee Scze Khoo⁴

Affiliations

¹ Stollery Children's Hospital and University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
² Radiology and Diagnostic Imaging, University of Alberta and Mazankowski Alberta Heart Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
³ Educational Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
⁴ Stollery Children's Hospital and University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. Electronic address: harake@ualberta.ca.

PMID: 32919855
DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2020.06.016

Abstract

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.

Keywords: 3D; Congenital heart disease; Echocardiography; Stereoscopic.

MeSH terms

Cardiologists*
Cardiology*
Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional*
Heart Defects, Congenital* / diagnostic imaging
Humans
Prospective Studies
Random Allocation