Normal Values of Cardiac Output and Stroke Volume According to Measurement Technique, Age, Sex, and Ethnicity: Results of the World Alliance of Societies of Echocardiography Study

Background Assessment of cardiac output (CO) and stroke volume (SV) is essential to understand cardiac function and hemodynamics. These parameters can be examined using three echocardiographic techniques (pulsed-wave Doppler, two-dimensional [2D], and three-dimensional [3D]). Whether these methods can be used interchangeably is unclear. The influence of age, sex, and ethnicity on CO and SV has also not been examined in depth. In this report from the World Alliance of Societies of Echocardiography Normal Values Study, the authors compare CO and SV in healthy adults according to age, sex, ethnicity, and measurement techniques. Methods A total of 1,450 adult subjects (53% men) free of heart, lung, and kidney disease were prospectively enrolled in 15 countries, with even distributions among age groups and sex. Subjects were divided into three age groups (young, 18–40 years; middle aged, 41–65 years; and old, >65 years) and three main racial groups (whites, blacks, and Asians). CO and SV were indexed (cardiac index [CI] and SV index [SVI], respectively) to body surface area and height and measured using three echocardiographic methods: Doppler, 2D, and 3D. Images were analyzed at two core laboratories (one each for 2D and 3D). Results CI and SVI were significantly lower by 2D compared with both Doppler and 3D methods in both sexes. SVI was significantly lower in women than men by all three methods, while CI differed only by 2D. SVI decreased with aging by all three techniques, whereas CI declined only with 2D and 3D. CO and SV were smallest in Asians and largest in whites, and the differences persisted after normalization for body surface area. Conclusions The present results provide normal reference values for CO and SV, which differ by age, sex, and race. Furthermore, CI and SVI measurements by the different echocardiographic techniques are not interchangeable. All these factors need to be taken into account when evaluating cardiac function and hemodynamics in individual patients.