• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Acta Radiologica >Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of stenotic aortic valve area: a comparative study.
【24h】

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

机译：心血管磁共振成像和经胸超声心动图在狭窄主动脉瓣面积评估中的比较研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

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.
机译：背景技术磁共振（MR）成像和超声心动图都可以评估主动脉瓣狭窄。在MR中，主动脉瓣面积（AvA）使用平面测量法进行测量，而在经胸超声心动图（TTE）中，AvA通常通过应用连续性方程来计算。目的比较使用五个不同的MR采集替代方法对测量的狭窄主动脉瓣面积与TTE计算的相应面积值进行比较。材料和方法使用平衡的稳态无进动（bSSFP）梯度回波（GE）和相衬成像（PC）对14例诊断为主动脉瓣狭窄的患者进行主动脉成像。计划三个相邻的切片以包围主动脉瓣，并使用平面法测量主动脉瓣面积。 PC序列生成的两组复数值图像形成了三种可用于主动脉瓣面积测量的图像：幅值图像（PC / Mag），模量（PCA / M）和相位差（PCA / P）分别在两个复杂图像之间。 TTE的阀门面积是使用连续性方程计算的。临界值<1.0 cm（2）被用作严重狭窄的标准。结果不同MR采集和TTE方法之间的平均面积差异为-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）和0.26±0.27 cm（2）（PCA / M）。使用PCA / M显着高估了瓣膜面积，与使用TTE进行的评估相比，这暗示了主动脉瓣狭窄程度的严重低估。结论通过梯度回波图像可以获得TTE和MR采集替代方案之间的最小面积阀差。与TTE相比，PCA / M的使用在主动脉瓣口的平面测量和狭窄严重程度的分级方面存在显着差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号