共 33 条
Estimation of Stroke Volume and Aortic Valve Area in Patients with Aortic Stenosis: A Comparison of Echocardiography versus Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance
被引:35
作者:
Guzzetti, Ezequiel
[1
]
Capoulade, Romain
[2
]
Tastet, Lionel
[1
]
Garcia, Julio
[3
,4
,5
]
Le Ven, Florent
[6
]
Arsenault, Marie
[1
]
Bedard, Elisabeth
[1
]
Larose, Eric
[1
]
Clavel, Marie-Annick
[1
]
Pibarot, Philippe
[1
]
机构:
[1] Laval Univ, Inst Univ Cardiol & Pneumol Quebec, Quebec Heart & Lung Inst, Quebec City, PQ, Canada
[2] UNIV Nantes, Inst Thorax, CHU Nantes, CNRS,INSERM, Nantes, France
[3] Univ Calgary, Stephenson Cardiac Imaging Ctr, Dept Cardiac Sci & Radiol, Calgary, AB, Canada
[4] Univ Calgary, Stephenson Cardiac Imaging Ctr, Libin Cardiovasc Inst Alberta, Calgary, AB, Canada
[5] Alberta Childrens Prov Gen Hosp, Res Inst, Calgary, AB, Canada
[6] CHU Brest, Brest, France
基金:
加拿大健康研究院;
关键词:
Aortic stenosis;
Stroke volume;
Aortic valve area;
Doppler echocardiography;
Cardiovascular magnetic resonance;
Left ventricular outflow tract;
EFFECTIVE ORIFICE AREA;
EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION;
LOW-GRADIENT;
AMERICAN SOCIETY;
CARDIAC-OUTPUT;
DOPPLER;
IMPACT;
FLOW;
RECOMMENDATIONS;
QUANTIFICATION;
D O I:
10.1016/j.echo.2020.03.020
中图分类号:
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号:
1002 ;
100201 ;
摘要:
Background: In aortic stenosis, accurate measurement of left ventricular stroke volume (SV) is essential for the calculation of aortic valve area (AVA) and the assessment of flow status. Current American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging guidelines suggest that measurements of left ventricular outflow tract diameter (LVOTd) at different levels (at the annulus vs 5 or 10 mm below) yield similar measures of SV and AVA. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the location of LVOTd measurement on the accuracy of SV and AVA measured on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: One hundred six patients with aortic stenosis underwent both TTE and CMR. SV was estimated on TTE using the continuity equation with LVOTd measurements at four locations: at the annulus and 2, 5, and 10 mm below annulus. SV was also determined on CMR using phase contrast acquired in the aorta (SVCMR-PC), and a hybrid AVA(CMR-PC) was calculated by dividing SVCMR-PC by the transthoracic echocardiographic Doppler aortic velocity-time integral. Comparison between methods was made using Bland-Altman analysis. Results: Compared with the referentmethod of phase-contrast CMR for the estimation of SVCMR-PC and AVA(CMR-PC) (SVCMR-PC 83616 mL, AVA(CMR-PC) 1.2760.35cm(2)), the best agreement was obtained by measuring LVOTd at the annulus or 2 mm below (P = NS), whereas measuring 5 and 10 mm below the annulus resulted in significant underestimation ofSVandAVAbyup to 15.9617.3mLand 0.2460.28cm(2), respectively (P<.01 for all). Accuracy for classification of low flow was best at the annulus (86%) and 2 mm below (82%), whereas measuring 5 and 10 mm below the annulus significantly underperformed (69% and 61%, respectively, P <.001). Conclusions: Measuring LVOTd at the annulus or very close to it provides the most accurate measures of SV and AVA, whereas measuring LVOTd 5 or 10 mm below significantly underestimates these parameters and leads to significant overestimation of the severity of aortic stenosis and prevalence of low-flow status.
引用
收藏
页码:953 / +
页数:16
相关论文