Cargando…
Aortic Root Downward Movement as a Novel Method for Identification of an Adequately Performed Valsalva Maneuver to Detect Patent Foramen Ovale during Transesophageal Echocardiograph
The Valsalva maneuver (VM) is the most sensitive auxiliary method for the detection of patent foramen ovale (PFO), but it is difficult to assess whether the maneuver is adequately performed during transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). In this study, we tried to use aortic root downward movement as...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9027372/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35454028 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12040980 |
Sumario: | The Valsalva maneuver (VM) is the most sensitive auxiliary method for the detection of patent foramen ovale (PFO), but it is difficult to assess whether the maneuver is adequately performed during transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). In this study, we tried to use aortic root downward movement as a novel method for judging whether VM was adequate or not, and to evaluate whether this novel method can increase the sensitivity of detecting PFO. A total of 224 patients with clinically suspected PFO were enrolled in this study. These patients were injected with activated normal saline to detect the right-to-left shunt (RLS), in the following three conditions: contrast-enhanced transthoracic echocardiography under adequate VM (AVM cTTE), contrast-enhanced TEE under non-adequate VM (non-AVM cTEE), and cTEE under adequate VM (AVM cTEE). A novel method in which the aorta root moves downward (movement range ≥16 mm) in the cTEE judged whether AVM was performed. The PFO detection rate and sensitivity of AVM cTEE were better than that of non-AVM cTEE (detection rate: 108 PFOs [48.2%] vs. 86 PFOs [38.4%], p = 0.036; sensitivity: 100% vs. 79.6%). Among AVM cTTE, non-AVM cTEE, and AVM cTEE, the RLS grade evaluation results were inconsistent, with significant differences (p < 0.05). Non-AVM cTEE had RLS underestimation or false negatives. Compared with non-AVM cTEE, AVM cTEE and AVM cTTE had better consistency in evaluating PFO RLS (kappa value = 0.675). Aortic root downward movement could be used as a novel method for judging the effectiveness of VM, which is critical for the detection of PFO in cTEE. Concerning effectiveness and convenience, this method should be promoted during the clinical detection of PFO. |
---|