S'abonner

Doppler Imaging in Aortic Stenosis: The Importance of the Nonapical Imaging Windows to Determine Severity in a Contemporary Cohort - 01/07/15

Doi : 10.1016/j.echo.2015.02.016 
Jeremy J. Thaden, MD a, Vuyisile T. Nkomo, MD, MPH a, Kwang Je Lee, MD, PhD a, b, Jae K. Oh, MD a,
a Division of Cardiovascular Disease, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota 
b Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chung-Ang University Hospital, Seoul, Korea 

Reprint requests: Jae K. Oh, MD, Mayo Clinic, Division of Cardiovascular Disease, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905.

Abstract

Background

Although the highest aortic valve velocity was thought to be obtained from imaging windows other than the apex in about 20% of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), its occurrence appears to be increasing as the age of patients has increased with the application of transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency with which the highest peak jet velocity (Vmax) is found at each imaging window, the degree to which neglecting nonapical imaging windows underestimates AS severity, and factors influencing the location of the optimal imaging window in contemporary patients.

Methods

Echocardiograms obtained in 100 consecutive patients with severe AS from January 3 to May 23, 2012, in which all imaging windows were interrogated, were retrospectively analyzed. AS severity (aortic valve area and mean gradient) was calculated on the basis of the apical imaging window alone and the imaging window with the highest peak jet velocity. The left ventricular–aortic root angle measured in the parasternal long-axis view as well as clinical variables were correlated with the location of highest peak jet velocity.

Results

Vmax was most frequently obtained in the right parasternal window (50%), followed by the apex (39%). Subjects with acute angulation more commonly had Vmax at the right parasternal window (65% vs 43%, P = .05) and less commonly had Vmax at the apical window (19% vs 48%, P = .005), but Vmax was still located outside the apical imaging window in 52% of patients with obtuse aortic root angles. If nonapical windows were neglected, 8% of patients (eight of 100) were misclassified from high-gradient severe AS to low-gradient severe AS, and another 15% (15 of 100) with severe AS (aortic valve area < 1.0 cm2) were misclassified as having moderate AS (aortic valve area > 1.0 cm2).

Conclusions

In this contemporary cohort, Vmax was located outside the apical imaging window in 61% of patients, and neglecting the nonapical imaging windows resulted in the misclassification of AS severity in 23% of patients. Aortic root angulation as measured by two-dimensional echocardiography influences the location of Vmax modestly. Despite increasing time constraints on many echocardiography laboratories, these data confirm that routine Doppler interrogation from multiple imaging windows is critical to accurately determine the severity of AS in contemporary clinical practice.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Keywords : Doppler echocardiography, Aortic stenosis, Peak velocity, Low gradient, Aortic root angulation

Abbreviations : AVA, LVOT, 2D


Plan


© 2015  American Society of Echocardiography. Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS. Tous droits réservés.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 28 - N° 7

P. 780-785 - juillet 2015 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Libman-Sacks Endocarditis: Detection, Characterization, and Clinical Correlates by Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiography
  • Carlos A. Roldan, Kirsten Tolstrup, Leonardo Macias, Clifford R. Qualls, Diana Maynard, Gerald Charlton, Wilmer L. Sibbitt
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Mitral Annular Dynamics in Mitral Annular Calcification: A Three-Dimensional Imaging Study
  • Gregg S. Pressman, Rajesh Movva, Yan Topilsky, Marie-Annick Clavel, Jason A. Saldanha, Nozomi Watanabe, Maurice Enriquez-Sarano

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.