经胸经食管超声心动图诊断二尖瓣主动脉瓣的准确性:与手术表现的比较。

Osaka city medical journal Pub Date : 2013-12-01
Hisateru Takeda, Takashi Muro, Toshio Saito, Eiichi Hyodo, Shoichi Ehara, Akihisa Hanatani, Kenei Shimada, Shigefumi Suehiro, Minoru Yoshiyama
{"title":"经胸经食管超声心动图诊断二尖瓣主动脉瓣的准确性:与手术表现的比较。","authors":"Hisateru Takeda,&nbsp;Takashi Muro,&nbsp;Toshio Saito,&nbsp;Eiichi Hyodo,&nbsp;Shoichi Ehara,&nbsp;Akihisa Hanatani,&nbsp;Kenei Shimada,&nbsp;Shigefumi Suehiro,&nbsp;Minoru Yoshiyama","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is associated with an increased risk of aortic valve (AV) dysfunction, aortic dissection, and infective endocarditis. Therefore, its accurate diagnosis is critical. The morphological features of AVs are generally evaluated by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), however, the difference in the diagnostic capability of these imaging modalities for detecting BAV remains unclear. Here, we compared these 2 methods to determine their accuracy, and to clarify each role in the diagnosis of BAV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This blind study evaluated 126 patients (age, 70.3 +/- 7.8 years) who subsequently underwent AV replacement. The number of AV cusps of each patient was estimated by TTE and TEE and compared to the number of AV written in the operative record. Patients with poor echocardiographic images were not excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surgical findings showed 97 tricuspid AVs and 29 BAVs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the diagnosis of BAV were 61%, 81%, and 77%, respectively, for TTE and 86%, 90%, and 89%, respectively, for TEE. The accuracy of TEE was significantly higher than that of TTE (p = 0.016). In non-calcified AVs, the accuracy of TTE was similar to that of TEE (96%, each) whereas in calcified AVs, TTE had a lower accuracy than TEE (72% vs 87%, p = 0.011). The feasibility was significantly higher for TEE than for TTE (98% vs 90%, p = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TEE provides higher accuracy and feasibility than TTE in the diagnosis of BAV, and it should therefore be indicated when morphological features of AVs cannot be evaluated by TTE.</p>","PeriodicalId":19613,"journal":{"name":"Osaka city medical journal","volume":"59 2","pages":"69-78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Diagnostic accuracy of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography for the diagnosis of bicuspid aortic valve: comparison with operative findings.\",\"authors\":\"Hisateru Takeda,&nbsp;Takashi Muro,&nbsp;Toshio Saito,&nbsp;Eiichi Hyodo,&nbsp;Shoichi Ehara,&nbsp;Akihisa Hanatani,&nbsp;Kenei Shimada,&nbsp;Shigefumi Suehiro,&nbsp;Minoru Yoshiyama\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is associated with an increased risk of aortic valve (AV) dysfunction, aortic dissection, and infective endocarditis. Therefore, its accurate diagnosis is critical. The morphological features of AVs are generally evaluated by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), however, the difference in the diagnostic capability of these imaging modalities for detecting BAV remains unclear. Here, we compared these 2 methods to determine their accuracy, and to clarify each role in the diagnosis of BAV.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This blind study evaluated 126 patients (age, 70.3 +/- 7.8 years) who subsequently underwent AV replacement. The number of AV cusps of each patient was estimated by TTE and TEE and compared to the number of AV written in the operative record. Patients with poor echocardiographic images were not excluded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Surgical findings showed 97 tricuspid AVs and 29 BAVs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the diagnosis of BAV were 61%, 81%, and 77%, respectively, for TTE and 86%, 90%, and 89%, respectively, for TEE. The accuracy of TEE was significantly higher than that of TTE (p = 0.016). In non-calcified AVs, the accuracy of TTE was similar to that of TEE (96%, each) whereas in calcified AVs, TTE had a lower accuracy than TEE (72% vs 87%, p = 0.011). The feasibility was significantly higher for TEE than for TTE (98% vs 90%, p = 0.003).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>TEE provides higher accuracy and feasibility than TTE in the diagnosis of BAV, and it should therefore be indicated when morphological features of AVs cannot be evaluated by TTE.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19613,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Osaka city medical journal\",\"volume\":\"59 2\",\"pages\":\"69-78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Osaka city medical journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osaka city medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","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:二尖瓣主动脉瓣(BAV)与主动脉瓣功能障碍、主动脉夹层和感染性心内膜炎的风险增加有关。因此,对其进行准确诊断至关重要。avv的形态学特征通常通过经胸超声心动图(TTE)或经食管超声心动图(TEE)来评估,然而,这些成像方式对检测BAV的诊断能力的差异尚不清楚。在这里,我们比较了这两种方法,以确定它们的准确性,并阐明它们在BAV诊断中的作用。方法:这项盲研究评估了126例(年龄70.3±7.8岁)随后接受房室置换术的患者。通过TTE和TEE估计每位患者的房室尖头数,并与手术记录中记录的房室尖头数进行比较。不排除超声心动图图像差的患者。结果:三尖瓣房颤97例,房颤29例。TTE诊断BAV的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为61%、81%和77%,TEE诊断BAV的敏感性、特异性和准确性分别为86%、90%和89%。TEE的准确度显著高于TTE (p = 0.016)。在未钙化的av中,TTE的准确性与TEE相似(分别为96%),而在钙化的av中,TTE的准确性低于TEE(72%对87%,p = 0.011)。TEE的可行性显著高于TTE (98% vs 90%, p = 0.003)。结论:TEE诊断BAV的准确性和可行性均高于TTE,当TTE不能评价AVs形态学特征时应考虑TEE。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Diagnostic accuracy of transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography for the diagnosis of bicuspid aortic valve: comparison with operative findings.

Background: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is associated with an increased risk of aortic valve (AV) dysfunction, aortic dissection, and infective endocarditis. Therefore, its accurate diagnosis is critical. The morphological features of AVs are generally evaluated by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), however, the difference in the diagnostic capability of these imaging modalities for detecting BAV remains unclear. Here, we compared these 2 methods to determine their accuracy, and to clarify each role in the diagnosis of BAV.

Methods: This blind study evaluated 126 patients (age, 70.3 +/- 7.8 years) who subsequently underwent AV replacement. The number of AV cusps of each patient was estimated by TTE and TEE and compared to the number of AV written in the operative record. Patients with poor echocardiographic images were not excluded.

Results: Surgical findings showed 97 tricuspid AVs and 29 BAVs. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy for the diagnosis of BAV were 61%, 81%, and 77%, respectively, for TTE and 86%, 90%, and 89%, respectively, for TEE. The accuracy of TEE was significantly higher than that of TTE (p = 0.016). In non-calcified AVs, the accuracy of TTE was similar to that of TEE (96%, each) whereas in calcified AVs, TTE had a lower accuracy than TEE (72% vs 87%, p = 0.011). The feasibility was significantly higher for TEE than for TTE (98% vs 90%, p = 0.003).

Conclusions: TEE provides higher accuracy and feasibility than TTE in the diagnosis of BAV, and it should therefore be indicated when morphological features of AVs cannot be evaluated by TTE.

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