Research Communications of the 27(th) ECVIM-CA Congress: Intercontinental, Saint Julian's, Malta, 14th to 16th September 2017

There were no statistically significant differences between SV (P = 0.16) and EF (P = 0.31) obtained by MDCT and 3DE. There were significant differences between EDV (P = 0.03) and ESV (P = 0.01) RVV obtained by MDCT and 3DE. No statistically significant difference in HR was noted between methods (P = 0.84). The correlation between MDCT and 3DE was very good for EDV and ESV (R = 0.87), moderate for EF (R = 0.60) and poor for SV (R = 0.31). Bland-Altman analysis showed a systematic underestimation of RVV derived from 3DE compared to MDCT, with an average bias of 15 and 10.3 mL for EDV and ESV, respectively. The intra-(EDV 12%, ESV 18%) and interobserver (EDV 14%, ESV 11%) variability was acceptable for 3DE.