American heart journal · 2000
Strategy for optimal aortic regurgitation quantification by Doppler echocardiography: agreement among different methods.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Evangelista A, del Castillo H G, Calvo F, Permanyer-Miralda G, Brotons C, Angel J, González-Alujas T, Tornos P, Soler-Soler J
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although different Doppler methods have been validated for aortic regurgitation quantification, the benefit of combining information from different methods has not been defined.
METHODS: Our study included 2 phases. In the initial phase (60 patients), Doppler parameters (jet width, short-axis jet area, apical jet area, regurgitant fraction from pulmonary and mitral flow, and deceleration slope) were correlated with angiography; range values for each severity grade were defined and intraobserver and interobserver and intermachine variability were studied. In the validation phase (158 patients), defined value ranges were prospectively tested and a strategy based on considering as the definitive severity grade that in which the two best methods agreed was tested.
RESULTS: Jet width had the best correlation with angiography (r = 0.91), and its ratio with the left ventricular outflow diameter did not improve the correlation (r = 0.85) and decreased reproducibility. Apical jet area and regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow permitted acceptable quantification (r = 0.87 and 0.86, respectively) but with worse reproducibility. The other methods were not assessable in 20% to 30% of studies. Concordance with angiography decreased in jet width when the jet was eccentric (90% vs 77%, P <.01), in apical jet area when mitral valve disease was present (84% vs 65%, P <.02), and in short-axis jet area and regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow with concomitant aortic stenosis (77% vs 44%, P <.002 and 77% vs 53%, P <.02, respectively). Agreement with angiography was very high (94 [95%] of 99) when severity grade coincided in both jet width and apical jet area. In 59 cases without concordance, regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow was used as a third method. Overall, this strategy permitted concordance with angiography in 146 patients (92%).
CONCLUSIONS: Jet width is the best predictor in aortic regurgitation quantification by Doppler echocardiography. However, better results were obtained when a strategy based on concordance between jet width and another Doppler method was established, particularly when the jet was eccentric.
METHODS: Our study included 2 phases. In the initial phase (60 patients), Doppler parameters (jet width, short-axis jet area, apical jet area, regurgitant fraction from pulmonary and mitral flow, and deceleration slope) were correlated with angiography; range values for each severity grade were defined and intraobserver and interobserver and intermachine variability were studied. In the validation phase (158 patients), defined value ranges were prospectively tested and a strategy based on considering as the definitive severity grade that in which the two best methods agreed was tested.
RESULTS: Jet width had the best correlation with angiography (r = 0.91), and its ratio with the left ventricular outflow diameter did not improve the correlation (r = 0.85) and decreased reproducibility. Apical jet area and regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow permitted acceptable quantification (r = 0.87 and 0.86, respectively) but with worse reproducibility. The other methods were not assessable in 20% to 30% of studies. Concordance with angiography decreased in jet width when the jet was eccentric (90% vs 77%, P <.01), in apical jet area when mitral valve disease was present (84% vs 65%, P <.02), and in short-axis jet area and regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow with concomitant aortic stenosis (77% vs 44%, P <.002 and 77% vs 53%, P <.02, respectively). Agreement with angiography was very high (94 [95%] of 99) when severity grade coincided in both jet width and apical jet area. In 59 cases without concordance, regurgitant fraction from pulmonary flow was used as a third method. Overall, this strategy permitted concordance with angiography in 146 patients (92%).
CONCLUSIONS: Jet width is the best predictor in aortic regurgitation quantification by Doppler echocardiography. However, better results were obtained when a strategy based on concordance between jet width and another Doppler method was established, particularly when the jet was eccentric.