Cargando…

Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND: The effective orifice area (EOA) estimated by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) via the continuity equation is commonly used to determine the severity of aortic stenosis (AS). However, there are often discrepancies between TTE-derived EOA and invasive indices of stenosis, thus...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Garcia, Julio, Kadem, Lyes, Larose, Eric, Clavel, Marie-Annick, Pibarot, Philippe
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3108925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21527021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-13-25
_version_ 1782205386291412992
author Garcia, Julio
Kadem, Lyes
Larose, Eric
Clavel, Marie-Annick
Pibarot, Philippe
author_facet Garcia, Julio
Kadem, Lyes
Larose, Eric
Clavel, Marie-Annick
Pibarot, Philippe
author_sort Garcia, Julio
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The effective orifice area (EOA) estimated by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) via the continuity equation is commonly used to determine the severity of aortic stenosis (AS). However, there are often discrepancies between TTE-derived EOA and invasive indices of stenosis, thus raising uncertainty about actual definite severity. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as an alternative method for non-invasive estimation of valve EOA. The objective of this study was to assess the concordance between TTE and CMR for the estimation of valve EOA. METHODS AND RESULTS: 31 patients with mild to severe AS (EOA range: 0.72 to 1.73 cm(2)) and seven (7) healthy control subjects with normal transvalvular flow rate underwent TTE and velocity-encoded CMR. Valve EOA was calculated by the continuity equation. CMR revealed that the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) cross-section is typically oval and not circular. As a consequence, TTE underestimated the LVOT cross-sectional area (A(LVOT), 3.84 ± 0.80 cm(2)) compared to CMR (4.78 ± 1.05 cm(2)). On the other hand, TTE overestimated the LVOT velocity-time integral (VTI(LVOT): 21 ± 4 vs. 15 ± 4 cm). Good concordance was observed between TTE and CMR for estimation of aortic jet VTI (61 ± 22 vs. 57 ± 20 cm). Overall, there was a good correlation and concordance between TTE-derived and CMR-derived EOAs (1.53 ± 0.67 vs. 1.59 ± 0.73 cm(2), r = 0.92, bias = 0.06 ± 0.29 cm(2)). The intra- and inter- observer variability of TTE-derived EOA was 5 ± 5% and 9 ± 5%, respectively, compared to 2 ± 1% and 7 ± 5% for CMR-derived EOA. CONCLUSION: Underestimation of A(LVOT )by TTE is compensated by overestimation of VTI(LVOT), thereby resulting in a good concordance between TTE and CMR for estimation of aortic valve EOA. CMR was associated with less intra- and inter- observer measurement variability compared to TTE. CMR provides a non-invasive and reliable alternative to Doppler-echocardiography for the quantification of AS severity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3108925
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-31089252011-06-07 Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis Garcia, Julio Kadem, Lyes Larose, Eric Clavel, Marie-Annick Pibarot, Philippe J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Research BACKGROUND: The effective orifice area (EOA) estimated by transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) via the continuity equation is commonly used to determine the severity of aortic stenosis (AS). However, there are often discrepancies between TTE-derived EOA and invasive indices of stenosis, thus raising uncertainty about actual definite severity. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) has emerged as an alternative method for non-invasive estimation of valve EOA. The objective of this study was to assess the concordance between TTE and CMR for the estimation of valve EOA. METHODS AND RESULTS: 31 patients with mild to severe AS (EOA range: 0.72 to 1.73 cm(2)) and seven (7) healthy control subjects with normal transvalvular flow rate underwent TTE and velocity-encoded CMR. Valve EOA was calculated by the continuity equation. CMR revealed that the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) cross-section is typically oval and not circular. As a consequence, TTE underestimated the LVOT cross-sectional area (A(LVOT), 3.84 ± 0.80 cm(2)) compared to CMR (4.78 ± 1.05 cm(2)). On the other hand, TTE overestimated the LVOT velocity-time integral (VTI(LVOT): 21 ± 4 vs. 15 ± 4 cm). Good concordance was observed between TTE and CMR for estimation of aortic jet VTI (61 ± 22 vs. 57 ± 20 cm). Overall, there was a good correlation and concordance between TTE-derived and CMR-derived EOAs (1.53 ± 0.67 vs. 1.59 ± 0.73 cm(2), r = 0.92, bias = 0.06 ± 0.29 cm(2)). The intra- and inter- observer variability of TTE-derived EOA was 5 ± 5% and 9 ± 5%, respectively, compared to 2 ± 1% and 7 ± 5% for CMR-derived EOA. CONCLUSION: Underestimation of A(LVOT )by TTE is compensated by overestimation of VTI(LVOT), thereby resulting in a good concordance between TTE and CMR for estimation of aortic valve EOA. CMR was associated with less intra- and inter- observer measurement variability compared to TTE. CMR provides a non-invasive and reliable alternative to Doppler-echocardiography for the quantification of AS severity. BioMed Central 2011-04-28 /pmc/articles/PMC3108925/ /pubmed/21527021 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-13-25 Text en Copyright ©2011 Garcia et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research
Garcia, Julio
Kadem, Lyes
Larose, Eric
Clavel, Marie-Annick
Pibarot, Philippe
Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title_full Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title_fullStr Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title_short Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
title_sort comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3108925/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21527021
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1532-429X-13-25
work_keys_str_mv AT garciajulio comparisonbetweencardiovascularmagneticresonanceandtransthoracicdopplerechocardiographyfortheestimationofeffectiveorificeareainaorticstenosis
AT kademlyes comparisonbetweencardiovascularmagneticresonanceandtransthoracicdopplerechocardiographyfortheestimationofeffectiveorificeareainaorticstenosis
AT laroseeric comparisonbetweencardiovascularmagneticresonanceandtransthoracicdopplerechocardiographyfortheestimationofeffectiveorificeareainaorticstenosis
AT clavelmarieannick comparisonbetweencardiovascularmagneticresonanceandtransthoracicdopplerechocardiographyfortheestimationofeffectiveorificeareainaorticstenosis
AT pibarotphilippe comparisonbetweencardiovascularmagneticresonanceandtransthoracicdopplerechocardiographyfortheestimationofeffectiveorificeareainaorticstenosis