Magnetic resonance to assess the aortic valve area in aortic stenosis - How does it compare to current diagnostic standards?

被引:116
作者
John, AS
Dill, T
Brandt, RR
Rau, M
Ricken, W
Bachmann, G
Hamm, CW
机构
[1] Royal Brompton Hosp, Cardiovasc Magnet Resonance Unit, London SW3 6NP, England
[2] Kerckhoff Clin, Dept Cardiol, Bad Nauheim, Germany
[3] Kerckhoff Clin, Dept Radiol, Bad Nauheim, Germany
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00707-1
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVES The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether magnetic resonance (MR) planimetry of the aortic valve area (AVA) may prove to be a reliable, non-invasive diagnostic tool in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis, and how the results compare with current diagnostic standards. BACKGROUND Current standard techniques for assessing the severity of aortic stenosis include transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as well as transvalvular pressure measurements during cardiac catheterization. METHODS Forty consecutive patients underwent cardiac catheterization, TEE, and MR. The AVA was estimated by direct planimetry (MR, TEE) or calculated indirectly via the peak systolic transvalvular gradient (catheter). Pressure gradients from cardiac catheterization and Doppler echocardiography were also compared. RESULTS By MR, the mean AVA(max) was 0.91 +/- 0.25 cm(2); by TEE, AVA(max) was 0.89 +/- 0.28 cm(2) and by catheter, the AVA was calculated as 0.64 +/- 0.26 cm(2). Mean absolute differences in AVA were 0.02 cm(2) for MR versus TEE, 0.27 cm(2) for MR versus catheter, and 0.25 cm(2) for TEE versus catheter. Correlations for AVA(max) were r = 0.96 between MR and TEE, r = 0.47 between TEE and catheter, and r = 0.44 between MR and catheter. The correlation between Doppler and catheter gradients was r = 0.71. CONCLUSIONS Magnetic resonance planimetry of the AVA correlates well with TEE and less well with the catheter-derived AVA. Invasive and Doppler pressure correlated less well than those obtained from planimetric techniques. Magnetic resonance planimetry of the AVA may provide an accurate, non-invasive, well-tolerated alternative to invasive techniques and transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of aortic stenosis. (C) 2003 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
引用
收藏
页码:519 / 526
页数:8
相关论文
共 17 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1998, CURR PROB CARDIOLOGY, V23, P434
  • [2] ACCURACY OF AORTIC-STENOSIS SEVERITY ASSESSMENT BY DOPPLER-ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY - IMPORTANCE OF IMAGE QUALITY
    BARTUNEK, J
    DEBACQUER, D
    RODRIGUES, AC
    DEBRUYNE, B
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIAC IMAGING, 1995, 11 (02): : 97 - 104
  • [3] Reduction in sample size for studies of remodeling in heart failure by the use of cardiovascular magnetic resonance
    Bellenger, NG
    Davies, LC
    Francis, JM
    Coats, AJS
    Pennell, DJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE, 2000, 2 (04) : 271 - 278
  • [4] STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
    BLAND, JM
    ALTMAN, DG
    [J]. LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) : 307 - 310
  • [5] Bonow R O, 1998, J Heart Valve Dis, V7, P672
  • [6] BRAUNWALD E, 1992, HEART DIS TXB CARDIO, P1039
  • [7] Burwash IG, 2000, CAN J CARDIOL, V16, P985
  • [8] INADEQUACY OF THE GORLIN FORMULA FOR PREDICTING PROSTHETIC VALVE AREA
    CANNON, SR
    RICHARDS, KL
    CRAWFORD, MH
    FOLLAND, ED
    PIERPONT, G
    SETHI, GK
    HAMMERMEISTER, KE
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1988, 62 (01) : 113 - 116
  • [9] FACTORS AFFECTING DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHIC VALVE AREA ASSESSMENT IN AORTIC-STENOSIS
    DANIELSEN, R
    NORDREHAUG, JE
    VIKMO, H
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 1989, 63 (15) : 1107 - 1111
  • [10] Galan A, 1985, CIRCULATION, V72, P810