Speaker: Blagodir Boris Vladislavovich
During the webinar, we will discuss:
- How the reference values for LV/RV linear dimensions, chambers, and myocardial mass differ according to ASE 2015 and BSE 2020.
- How to interpret LVEF: where the “normal” range is, where the “low-normal” zone is, and when to describe reduced systolic function in different systems.
- Indexing to body surface area, height, and sex: what remains relevant and what has been revised.
- How to change the wording of the conclusion if you rely on different recommendations, while medical records, registries, and studies use their own thresholds.
- What to do if the machine and working protocols are tailored to ASE 2015, but you want to move toward BSE 2020.
- A possible “hybrid” approach: when it is appropriate to use elements of both systems and how to transparently reflect this in the protocol.
- Review of clinical examples:
- One patient — two conclusions: how the diagnosis will sound according to ASE 2015 and according to BSE 2020.
- Borderline cases: “slightly enlarged,” “moderately enlarged,” or “still within normal limits”?
- How to explain to the attending physician and to yourself why the numbers are the same, but the wording has changed.
4500 руб
31500 тенге
What the webinar is about:
In recent years, quantitative echocardiography has ceased to be an “add-on to visual assessment” and has become the basis for decision-making: from diagnosing heart failure to choosing treatment tactics and assessing prognosis.
At the same time, in real-world practice we live in two worlds at once: ASE 2015 and BSE 2020, which offer different reference ranges, thresholds, and approaches to interpretation.
In the webinar, we will discuss:
How reference values for linear LV/RV dimensions, chambers, and myocardial mass differ according to ASE 2015 and BSE 2020.
How to interpret LV EF: where the “normal” range is, where the “low-normal” zone is, and when to speak of reduced systolic function in different systems.
Indexing to body surface area, height, and sex: what remains relevant and what has been revised.
How to change the wording of the conclusion if you rely on different recommendations, while the medical history, registries, and studies use their own thresholds.
What to do if the machine and working protocols are tailored to ASE 2015, but you want to move toward BSE 2020.
A possible “hybrid” approach: when it is appropriate to use elements of both systems and how to reflect this transparently in the protocol.
Discussion of clinical examples:
One patient — two conclusions: how the diagnosis will be worded according to ASE 2015 and according to BSE 2020.
Borderline cases: “slightly enlarged,” “moderately enlarged,” or “still within normal limits”?
How to explain to the attending physician and to yourself why the numbers are the same, but the wording has changed.
Who will benefit:
Physicians in functional and ultrasound diagnostics who work with echocardiography every day.
Cardiologists who read echocardiography conclusions and make decisions on therapy and hospitalization.
Anyone who wants to move from “looks normal” to rigorous quantitative assessment without getting lost in the new guidelines.
What you will gain:
A clear understanding of which convention to use in 2025 and how to justify it.
Practical checklists for key parameters (dimensions, indexing, EF, LV mass).
Recommendations for adapting your protocol templates to modern quantitative echocardiography.
Other courses in this section
