Ascending Aortic Diameters in Congenital Aortic Stenosis: Cardiac Magnetic Resonance versus Transthoracic Echocardiography

被引:20
|
作者
van der Linde, Denise [1 ]
Rossi, Alexia [2 ]
Yap, Sing C. [1 ]
McGhie, Jackie S. [1 ]
van den Bosch, Annemien E. [1 ]
Kirschbaum, Sharon W. M. [1 ,2 ]
Russo, Brunella [2 ]
van Dijk, Arie P. J. [3 ]
Moelker, Adriaan [2 ]
Krestin, Gabriel P. [2 ]
van Geuns, Robert-Jan M. [1 ,2 ]
Roos-Hesselink, Jolien W. [1 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus MC, Dept Cardiol, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Erasmus MC, Dept Radiol, NL-3000 CA Rotterdam, Netherlands
[3] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Med Ctr, Dept Cardiol, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen, Netherlands
关键词
aorta; aneurysm; aortic valve; bicuspid aortic valve; echocardiography; cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY; VALVE IMPLANTATION; HEART-DISEASE; DILATATION; DIMENSIONS; ROOT; RECOMMENDATIONS; ROSUVASTATIN; ASSOCIATION; PROGRESSION;
D O I
10.1111/echo.12086
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objectives/Background Congenital aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common obstructive left heart lesion in the young adult population and often complicated by aortic dilatation. Our objective was to evaluate accuracy of aortic imaging with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods Aortic diameters were measured at 4 levels by CMR and TTE. Agreement and concordance were assessed by Pearson's correlation and BlandAltman analysis. Results Fifty-nine patients (age 33 +/- 8years; 66% male) with congenital AS and a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) were included. Aortic diameters were generally smaller with TTE than with CMR. The best correlation was found at the level of the sinotubular junction (R2=0.78) with a bias of 1.46mm (limits of agreement: 5.47 to +8.39mm). In patients with an aortic aneurysm >40mm (n=29) the correlation and agreement between TTE and CMR were found to be less good when compared with patients with normal aortic diameters, especially at the level of the proximal ascending aorta. The correlation and agreement between both imaging modalities were better in patients with type 1 BAV compared with type 2 BAV. Intra- and interobserver variability was smaller with CMR (1.85.9%) compared with TTE (6.915.0%). Conclusions CMR was found to be superior to TTE for imaging of the aorta in patients with congenital AS, especially at the level of the proximal ascending aorta when an aortic aneurysm is present. Therefore, ideally CMR should be performed at least once to ensure an ascending aortic aneurysm is not missed. (Echocardiography 2013; 30: 497-504)
引用
收藏
页码:497 / 504
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The evaluation of mitral valve stenosis: comparison of transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance
    Helvacioglu, Funda
    Yildirimturk, Ozlem
    Duran, Cihan
    Yurdakul, Selen
    Tayyareci, Yelda
    Ulusoy, Onur Levent
    Aytekin, Saide
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL-CARDIOVASCULAR IMAGING, 2014, 15 (02) : 164 - 169
  • [32] Assessment of cardiac masses: magnetic resonance imaging versus transthoracic echocardiography
    Narin, Burcu
    Arman, Alper
    Arslan, Deniz
    Simsek, Masum
    Narin, Ahmet
    ANATOLIAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2010, 10 (01): : 69 - 74
  • [33] Estimation of Stroke Volume and Aortic Valve Area in Patients With Aortic Stenosis: A Comparison of Doppler-Echocardiography and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance
    Capoulade, Romain
    Le Ven, Florent
    Garcia, Julio
    Tastet, Lionel
    Dahou, Abdellaziz
    Dumesnil, Jean G.
    Arsenault, Marie
    Bedard, Elisabeth
    Larose, Eric
    Pibarot, Philippe
    CIRCULATION, 2014, 130
  • [34] Regarding "Estimation of Stroke Volume and Aortic Valve Area in Patients with Aortic Stenosis: A Comparison of Echocardiography versus Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance''
    Pu, Min
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, 2021, 34 (01) : 104 - 106
  • [35] Cardiovascular magnetic resonance as a complementary method to transthoracic echocardiography for aortic valve area estimation in patients with aortic stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Repanas, Theodoros, I
    Papanastasiou, Christos A.
    Efthimiadis, Georgios K.
    Fragkakis, Nikolaos
    Sachpekidis, Vassilios
    Klein, Rolf Michael
    Karvounis, Haralambos
    Karamitsos, Theodoros D.
    HELLENIC JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2021, 62 (02) : 107 - 111
  • [36] Aortic Stenosis assessment with a 3-directional phase contrast magnetic resonance technique. Comparison to transthoracic echocardiography
    Juliana Serafim da Silveira
    Matthew Smyke
    Ning Jin
    Rizwan Ahmad
    Lua Jafari
    Debbie Scandling
    Jennifer A Dickerson
    Subha V Raman
    Orlando P Simonetti
    Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 17 (Suppl 1)
  • [37] Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography in identifying aortic valve morphology in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm
    Wong, Charis
    Joshi, Nikhil
    Dweck, Marc
    Mackillop, Graham
    Newby, David
    CIRCULATION, 2012, 125 (19) : E815 - E815
  • [38] Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Transthoracic Echocardiography in evaluating aortic valve morphology in patients with thoracic aortic aneurysm
    Wong, Charis Huey Ling
    Joshi, Nikhil
    Dweck, Marc
    Mackillop, Graham
    Newby, David
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF MEDICAL RESEARCH, 2011, 16 : 109 - 109
  • [39] Cardiac magnetic resonance assessed valve morphology and aortic distensibility in severe aortic stenosis
    Christopher D Steadman
    Gerry P McCann
    Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, 14 (Suppl 1)
  • [40] Longitudinal cardiac magnetic resonance assessment in patients with aortic stenosis
    Everett, R.
    Chin, C. W. L.
    Kwiencinski, J.
    Jenkins, W. J.
    Clavel, M. A.
    Mirsadree, S.
    White, A.
    Semple, S.
    Prasad, S. K.
    Pibarot, P.
    Newby, D. E.
    Dweck, M. R.
    EUROPEAN HEART JOURNAL, 2017, 38 : 65 - 65