Contrast Specific Echocardiogram Versus Left Ventricular Opacification (LVO) Imaging Settings

Comparison of Image Quality Generated by Contrast Specific Echocardiogram and Left Ventricular Opacification (LVO) Imaging Settings in Patients Enrolled in Luminity 422 Study

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT04286100

Acronym

ELVIS

Enrollment

Registered

2020-02-26

Start date

2020-04-29

Completion date

2026-03-31

Last updated

2025-05-22

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Contrast Echocardiography Imaging

Keywords

Coronary artery disease, Myocardial contrast echocardiography, Left ventricle opacification

Brief summary

This study compares contrast specific imaging setting images with left ventricular opacification (LVO) images taken on the same group of patients at different points in time, to see if one is more effective at assessing the function of the heart.

Detailed description

Ultrasound testing of the heart using a dye or contrast is often used to get clear pictures of the heart in many heart conditions. When this test is done when the heart is working hard, such as when exercising, this is called contrast stress echocardiography. Current guidelines recommend the method called contrast specific imaging setting, as the best way of looking at the main pumping part of the heart. However, it is not known if it provides better pictures when compared to a different method called left ventricular opacification (LVO). This study will compare pictures in patients who have had tests done using both ways of looking at the heart and will compare; LVO; enhanced and unenhanced LVEBD; LVO imaging with contrast specific imaging Wall Motion Classification and LVO to contrast specific imaging Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF). The comparison will be done by a group of experts in cardiac ultrasound.

Interventions

None listed

Study design

Observational model

CASE_CONTROL

Time perspective

RETROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to No maximum

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

1. Participants enrolled in the Luminity 422 study that also have complete data with contrast specific imaging obtained within a 60 day window. 2. Participants who are able to give voluntary, written informed consent to participate in this clinical investigation and from whom consent has been obtained.

Exclusion criteria

1\. Unwilling / unable to give informed consent

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
To determine whether the technique left ventricular opacification (LVO) imaging provide better quality images than current best practice contrast specific imaging setting, in patients routinely referred for a transthoracic echocardiogram.	8 months

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
To determine whether the technique LVO imaging provide better quality images than the current best practice for comparison of segmental LVEBD between images obtained by LVO imaging (intermediate MI) and contrast specific imaging (low MI).	8 months
To determine whether the technique LVO imaging provide better quality images than the current best practice for comparison of wall motion classification between images obtained by LVO imaging (intermediate MI) and contrast specific imaging (low MI).	8 months
To determine whether the technique LVO imaging provide better quality images than the current best practice for comparison of LVEF assessment between images obtained by LVO imaging (intermediate MI) and contrast specific imaging (low MI).	8 months

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results