COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of stenotic aortic valve area: a comparative study.

Acta Radiologica 2012 November 2
BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and echocardiography both allow assessment of aortic valve stenosis. In MR the aortic valve area (AvA) is measured using planimetry while in transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) AvA is usually calculated by applying the continuity equation.

PURPOSE: To compare the measured stenotic aortic valve areas using five different MR-acquisition alternatives with the corresponding area values calculated by TTE.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: The aortic valve was imaged in 14 patients, with diagnosed aortic valve stenosis, using balanced steady state free precession (bSSFP) gradient echo (GE) and phase contrast imaging (PC). Three adjacent slices were planned to encompass the aortic valve and the aortic valve area was measured using planimetry. The two sets of complex valued images generated by the PC sequence formed three kinds of images that could be used for aortic valve area measurements: the magnitude image (PC/Mag), the modulus (PCA/M), and phase difference (PCA/P) between the two complex images, respectively. The valve area from TTE was calculated using the continuity equation. A cut-off of <1.0 cm(2) was used as a criteria for severe stenosis.

RESULTS: The mean area differences between the different MR acquisitions and TTE method were -0.05 ± 0.37 cm(2) (GE), -0.18 ± 0.46 cm(2) (bSSFP), 0.27 ± 0.43 cm(2) (PC/Mag), 0.15 ± 0.32 cm(2) (PCA/P), and 0.26 ± 0.27 cm(2) (PCA/M). The valve area was significantly overestimated using PCA/M that, in turn, implied a significant underestimation of the aortic valve stenosis severity compared to the assessments using TTE.

CONCLUSION: The smallest area valve difference between TTE and an MR-acquisition alternative is obtained with gradient echo images. The use of PCA/M leads to significant differences in planimetry measurements of the aortic valve orifice and the gradation of the stenosis severity compared to TTE.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app