某学术机构对经导管主动脉瓣置入术前连续主动脉瓣狭窄患者的临床和血流动力学特征进行了研究。超声心动图与有创评价的比较分析

Larissa Garcia, F. Campos, J. Marin-Neto, Renata Angelo, Isabela Capodifoglio, H. Moreira, A. Schmidt, M. Romano, A. Badran, M. Lima-Filho, I. Lago, J. Chierice
{"title":"某学术机构对经导管主动脉瓣置入术前连续主动脉瓣狭窄患者的临床和血流动力学特征进行了研究。超声心动图与有创评价的比较分析","authors":"Larissa Garcia, F. Campos, J. Marin-Neto, Renata Angelo, Isabela Capodifoglio, H. Moreira, A. Schmidt, M. Romano, A. Badran, M. Lima-Filho, I. Lago, J. Chierice","doi":"10.31160/jotci202331a20230001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In view of the better understanding of the pathophysiology of aortic valve stenosis, the complexity of assessing its severity has simultaneously grown, with relevant uncertainty persisting as to the applicability of invasive methods by cardiac catheterization and non-invasive methods based on echocardiography. The objective of this study was to analyze the hemodynamic patterns of evaluation with echocardiography compared to the estimation of severity of aortic stenosis with catheterization in consecutive patients referred for diagnostic evaluation by the laboratory of a tertiary academic hospital in the 2016 to 2018 triennium. Methods: An observational, descriptive and retrospective study of clinical characteristics and results of assessments of severity of aortic valve stenosis obtained in 96 consecutive patients, through catheterization and echocardiography. Results: A population sample of 49 men and 47 women, with a median age of 66.5 (56.5 to 72.8) years, degenerative aortic valve stenosis in 49%, and rheumatic aortic stenosis in 40%, in addition to several comorbidities, including coronary disease (37%). Using catheterization, based on the peak gradient of 48 (20 to 68), aortic valve stenosis was assessed as severe in 56%, with ventricular end-diastolic pressure of 20mmHg (16 to 30mmHg). Using echocardiography, the valve area was 0.9cm2 (0.7 to 1.2cm2), indexed valve area was 0.5cm2/m2 (0.43 to 0.5cm2/m2), with peak gradient of 62±26mmHg. Aortic valve stenosis was considered severe in 69.2%. There was disagreement between the methods regarding severity of aortic valve stenosis in 30% of exams, with a Spearman coefficient between the valve area on the echocardiogram and the peak gradient on catheterization of -0.7 (p<0.001). Conclusion: In a representative sample of various hemodynamic patterns, the assessment of severity of aortic valve stenosis, as routinely practiced in an academic laboratory, was limited to measuring the peak transvalvular gradient. The estimation of the valve area using the echocardiographic method was indirect and also subject to criticism, and contributed to the discrepancies found, rendering it justifiable to seek the improvement of both methods, in view of the clinical and hemodynamic complexity detected.","PeriodicalId":152272,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transcatheter Interventions","volume":"75 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical and hemodynamic profile of consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis studied in the pre-transcatheter aortic valve implantation era at an academic institution. Comparative analysis of invasive evaluation with echocardiography\",\"authors\":\"Larissa Garcia, F. Campos, J. Marin-Neto, Renata Angelo, Isabela Capodifoglio, H. Moreira, A. Schmidt, M. Romano, A. Badran, M. Lima-Filho, I. Lago, J. Chierice\",\"doi\":\"10.31160/jotci202331a20230001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: In view of the better understanding of the pathophysiology of aortic valve stenosis, the complexity of assessing its severity has simultaneously grown, with relevant uncertainty persisting as to the applicability of invasive methods by cardiac catheterization and non-invasive methods based on echocardiography. The objective of this study was to analyze the hemodynamic patterns of evaluation with echocardiography compared to the estimation of severity of aortic stenosis with catheterization in consecutive patients referred for diagnostic evaluation by the laboratory of a tertiary academic hospital in the 2016 to 2018 triennium. Methods: An observational, descriptive and retrospective study of clinical characteristics and results of assessments of severity of aortic valve stenosis obtained in 96 consecutive patients, through catheterization and echocardiography. Results: A population sample of 49 men and 47 women, with a median age of 66.5 (56.5 to 72.8) years, degenerative aortic valve stenosis in 49%, and rheumatic aortic stenosis in 40%, in addition to several comorbidities, including coronary disease (37%). Using catheterization, based on the peak gradient of 48 (20 to 68), aortic valve stenosis was assessed as severe in 56%, with ventricular end-diastolic pressure of 20mmHg (16 to 30mmHg). Using echocardiography, the valve area was 0.9cm2 (0.7 to 1.2cm2), indexed valve area was 0.5cm2/m2 (0.43 to 0.5cm2/m2), with peak gradient of 62±26mmHg. Aortic valve stenosis was considered severe in 69.2%. There was disagreement between the methods regarding severity of aortic valve stenosis in 30% of exams, with a Spearman coefficient between the valve area on the echocardiogram and the peak gradient on catheterization of -0.7 (p<0.001). Conclusion: In a representative sample of various hemodynamic patterns, the assessment of severity of aortic valve stenosis, as routinely practiced in an academic laboratory, was limited to measuring the peak transvalvular gradient. The estimation of the valve area using the echocardiographic method was indirect and also subject to criticism, and contributed to the discrepancies found, rendering it justifiable to seek the improvement of both methods, in view of the clinical and hemodynamic complexity detected.\",\"PeriodicalId\":152272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Transcatheter Interventions\",\"volume\":\"75 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Transcatheter Interventions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31160/jotci202331a20230001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transcatheter Interventions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31160/jotci202331a20230001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着对主动脉瓣狭窄病理生理学认识的加深,主动脉瓣狭窄严重程度评估的复杂性也随之增加,对于心导管有创方法与超声心动图无创方法的适用性存在不确定性。本研究的目的是分析超声心动图评估的血流动力学模式与2016年至2018年三年期某三级学术医院实验室连续转诊进行诊断评估的主动脉狭窄严重程度的导管插管评估的血流动力学模式。方法:对连续96例主动脉瓣狭窄患者的临床特征和严重程度评估结果进行观察性、描述性和回顾性研究。结果:人群样本为49名男性和47名女性,中位年龄为66.5岁(56.5至72.8岁),退行性主动脉瓣狭窄占49%,风湿性主动脉瓣狭窄占40%,此外还有一些合并症,包括冠心病(37%)。采用导管置入术,根据峰值梯度48(20 ~ 68),56%的主动脉瓣狭窄被评估为严重,心室舒张末期压为20mmHg (16 ~ 30mmHg)。超声心动图显示瓣膜面积0.9cm2 (0.7 ~ 1.2cm2),指标瓣膜面积0.5cm2/m2 (0.43 ~ 0.5cm2/m2),峰值梯度为62±26mmHg。69.2%的人认为主动脉瓣狭窄严重。在30%的检查中,不同的方法对主动脉瓣狭窄的严重程度存在差异,超声心动图瓣膜面积与导管峰值梯度之间的Spearman系数为-0.7 (p<0.001)。结论:在各种血流动力学模式的代表性样本中,在学术实验室常规实践的主动脉瓣狭窄严重程度评估仅限于测量经瓣梯度峰值。超声心动图法对瓣膜面积的估计是间接的,也受到批评,并导致了发现的差异,鉴于临床和血流动力学的复杂性,有理由寻求两种方法的改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Clinical and hemodynamic profile of consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis studied in the pre-transcatheter aortic valve implantation era at an academic institution. Comparative analysis of invasive evaluation with echocardiography
Background: In view of the better understanding of the pathophysiology of aortic valve stenosis, the complexity of assessing its severity has simultaneously grown, with relevant uncertainty persisting as to the applicability of invasive methods by cardiac catheterization and non-invasive methods based on echocardiography. The objective of this study was to analyze the hemodynamic patterns of evaluation with echocardiography compared to the estimation of severity of aortic stenosis with catheterization in consecutive patients referred for diagnostic evaluation by the laboratory of a tertiary academic hospital in the 2016 to 2018 triennium. Methods: An observational, descriptive and retrospective study of clinical characteristics and results of assessments of severity of aortic valve stenosis obtained in 96 consecutive patients, through catheterization and echocardiography. Results: A population sample of 49 men and 47 women, with a median age of 66.5 (56.5 to 72.8) years, degenerative aortic valve stenosis in 49%, and rheumatic aortic stenosis in 40%, in addition to several comorbidities, including coronary disease (37%). Using catheterization, based on the peak gradient of 48 (20 to 68), aortic valve stenosis was assessed as severe in 56%, with ventricular end-diastolic pressure of 20mmHg (16 to 30mmHg). Using echocardiography, the valve area was 0.9cm2 (0.7 to 1.2cm2), indexed valve area was 0.5cm2/m2 (0.43 to 0.5cm2/m2), with peak gradient of 62±26mmHg. Aortic valve stenosis was considered severe in 69.2%. There was disagreement between the methods regarding severity of aortic valve stenosis in 30% of exams, with a Spearman coefficient between the valve area on the echocardiogram and the peak gradient on catheterization of -0.7 (p<0.001). Conclusion: In a representative sample of various hemodynamic patterns, the assessment of severity of aortic valve stenosis, as routinely practiced in an academic laboratory, was limited to measuring the peak transvalvular gradient. The estimation of the valve area using the echocardiographic method was indirect and also subject to criticism, and contributed to the discrepancies found, rendering it justifiable to seek the improvement of both methods, in view of the clinical and hemodynamic complexity detected.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信