Left ventricular stroke volume quantification by contrast echocardiography - comparison of linear and flow-based methods to cardiac magnetic resonance.
Left ventricular stroke volume quantification by contrast echocardiography - comparison of linear and flow-based methods to cardiac magnetic resonance.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/echo.12155
复制
发表时间：
2013-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Weinsaft JW
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dele-Michael AO;Fujikura K;Devereux RB;Islam F;Hriljac I;Wilson SR;Lin F;Weinsaft JW
超声心动图（echo）定量LV每搏输出量（SV）被广泛用于评估急性心肌梗死（AMI）后的收缩功能。本研究比较了两种常见的回波方法-基于血流（多普勒）和线性腔室尺寸（Teichholz）-通过心脏磁共振（CMR）量化的体积SV和全局梗死参数。多模态成像作为AMI后登记的一部分进行。超声心动图采用多普勒法和Teichholz法测量SV。电影CMR用于容积SV和LVEF定量，延迟增强CMR用于梗死面积。142例患者接受了当天超声心动图和CMR。在超声心动图上，Teichholz的平均SV（78± 17 ml）略高于多普勒（75± 16 ml; Δ=3± 13 ml，p=0.02）。与CMR的SV（78± 18 ml）相比，Teichholz的平均差异（Δ=−0.2±14; p=0.89）略小于多普勒（Δ−3±14; p=0.02），但CMR和超声方法之间的一致性限值相似（Teichholz：−28，27 ml，多普勒：−31，24 ml）。对于Teichholz，在前间隔或侧壁运动功能减退的患者中，CMR SV的差异最大（p<0.05）。对于多普勒，差异与主动脉瓣异常或根部扩张相关（p=0.01）。两种超声方法的SV均逐步降低，与CMR定量LVEF和梗死面积评估的整体LV损伤相关（p<0.01）。Teichholz和多普勒计算的SV产生与CMR相似的一致幅度。与CMR的Teichholz差异随着间隔或侧壁收缩功能障碍而增加，而多普勒产量增加主动脉重构患者的偏移。
Echocardiography (echo) quantified LV stroke volume (SV) is widely used to assess systolic performance after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This study compared two common echo approaches – predicated on flow (Doppler) and linear chamber dimensions (Teichholz) – to volumetric SV and global infarct parameters quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). Multimodality imaging was performed as part of a post-AMI registry. For echo, SV was measured by Doppler and Teichholz methods. Cine-CMR was used for volumetric SV and LVEF quantification, and delayed-enhancement CMR for infarct size. 142 patients underwent same-day echo and CMR. On echo, mean SV by Teichholz (78±17ml) was slightly higher than Doppler (75±16ml; Δ=3±13ml, p=0.02). Compared to SV on CMR (78±18ml), mean difference by Teichholz (Δ=−0.2±14; p=0.89) was slightly smaller than Doppler (Δ−3±14; p=0.02) but limits of agreement were similar between CMR and echo methods (Teichholz: −28, 27 ml, Doppler: −31, 24ml). For Teichholz, differences with CMR SV were greatest among patients with anteroseptal or lateral wall hypokinesis (p<0.05). For Doppler, differences were associated with aortic valve abnormalities or root dilation (p=0.01). SV by both echo methods decreased stepwise in relation to global LV injury as assessed by CMR-quantified LVEF and infarct size (p<0.01). Teichholz and Doppler calculated SV yield similar magnitude of agreement with CMR. Teichholz differences with CMR increase with septal or lateral wall contractile dysfunction, whereas Doppler yields increased offsets in patients with aortic remodeling.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.1161/hypertensionaha.109.129031
发表时间：
2009-11
期刊：
Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979)
影响因子：
--
作者：
De Marco M;de Simone G;Roman MJ;Chinali M;Lee ET;Russell M;Howard BV;Devereux RB
通讯作者：
Devereux RB
影响因子：
19.7
作者：
François, CJ;Fieno, DS;Finn, JP
通讯作者：
Finn, JP
影响因子：
39.3
作者：
Hoffmann, R;von Bardeleben, S;Vanoverschelde, JL
通讯作者：
Vanoverschelde, JL
影响因子：
37.8
作者：
LEWIS, JF;KUO, LC;QUINONES, MA
通讯作者：
QUINONES, MA
影响因子：
6.4
作者：
Sievers, B;Kirchberg, S;Trappe, HJ
通讯作者：
Trappe, HJ