Accuracy and Reliability of Left Atrial Appendage Morphology Assessment by Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiographic Glass Rendering Modality: A Comparative Study With Computed Tomography

Background: Contrast-enhanced computed tomography is the reference-standard imaging technique to assess left atrial appendage (LAA) morphology. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy and reliability of two-dimensional and new three-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiographic rendering modalities in assessing LAA morphology. Methods: Seventy consecutive patients who underwent both computed tomography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) were retrospectively enrolled. The traditional LAA morphology classification system (LAAcs; chicken wing, cauliflower, cactus, and windsock) and a new simplified LAAcs based on the LAA bend angle were used for the analysis. LAA morphology was independently assessed by two trained readers using three different modalities: two-dimensional TEE, 3D TEE with multiplanar reconstruction, and a new 3D transesophageal echocardiographic rendering modality with improved transparency (Glass). The new LAAcs and traditional LAAcs were compared in terms of intra- and interrater reliability. Results: With the new LAAcs, two-dimensional TEE was fairly accurate in identifying LAA morphology (κ = 0.43, P < .05), with moderate interrater (κ = 0.50, P < .05) and substantial intrarater (κ = 0.65, P < .005) agreement. Three-dimensional TEE showed higher accuracy and reliability: 3D TEE with multiplanar reconstruction had almost perfect accuracy (κ = 0.85, P < .001) and substantial (κ = 0.79, P < .001) interrater reliability, while 3D TEE with Glass had substantial accuracy (κ = 0.70, P < .001) and almost perfect (κ = 0.84, P < .001) interrater reliability. Intrarater agreement was almost perfect for both 3D transesophageal echocardiographic modalities (κ = 0.85, P < .001). Accuracy was considerably lower when the traditional LAAcs was used, with 3D TEE with Glass being the most reliable technique (κ = 0.75, P < .05). The new LAAcs showed higher inter- and intrarater reliability compared with the traditional LAAcs (interrater, κ = 0.85 vs κ = 0.49; intrarater, κ = 0.94 vs κ = 0.68; P < .05). Conclusions: Three-dimensional TEE is an accurate, reliable, and feasible alternative to computed tomography in assessing LAA morphology with the new LAAcs. The new LAAcs shows higher reliability rates than the traditional one.