• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

主动脉瓣口面积的平面测量:多层螺旋 CT 与磁共振成像的对比。

Planimetry of the aortic valve orifice area: comparison of multislice spiral computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

机构信息

Department of Radiology, Charité - University Medicine, Berlin, Germany.

出版信息

Eur J Radiol. 2011 Mar;77(3):426-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.08.014. Epub 2009 Sep 23.

DOI:10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.08.014
PMID:19783394
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the comparability of multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for measuring the aortic valve orifice area (AVA) and grading aortic valve stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-seven individuals, among them 18 patients with valvular stenosis, underwent AVA planimetry by both MSCT and MRI. In the subset of patients with valvular stenosis, AVA was also calculated from transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (TTE) using the continuity equation.

RESULTS

There was excellent correlation between MSCT and MRI (r = 0.99) and limits of agreement were in an acceptable range (± 0.42 cm(2)) although MSCT yielded a slightly smaller mean AVA than MRI (1.57 ± 0.83 cm(2) vs. 1.67 ± 0.98 cm(2), p < 0.05). However, in the subset of patients with valvular stenosis, the mean AVA was not different between MSCT and MRI (1.05 ± 0.30 cm(2) vs. 1.04 ± 0.39 cm(2); p > 0.05). The mean AVAs on both MSCT and MRI were systematically larger than on TTE (0.88 ± 0.28 cm(2), p < 0.001 each). Using an AVA of 1.0 cm(2) on TTE as reference, the best threshold for detecting severe-to-critical stenosis on MSCT and MRI was an AVA of 1.25 cm(2) and 1.30 cm(2), respectively, resulting in an accuracy of 96% each.

CONCLUSION

Our study specifies recent reports on the suitability of MSCT for quantifying AVA. The data presented here suggest that certain methodical discrepancies of AVA measurements exist between MSCT, MRI and TTE. However, MSCT and MRI have shown excellent correlation in AVA planimetry and similar accuracy in grading aortic valve stenosis.

摘要

目的

我们旨在确定多层螺旋 CT(MSCT)和磁共振成像(MRI)在测量主动脉瓣口面积(AVA)和分级主动脉瓣狭窄方面的可比性。

材料和方法

27 名参与者,其中 18 名为瓣膜狭窄患者,同时接受了 MSCT 和 MRI 的 AVA 平面测量。在瓣膜狭窄患者亚组中,也使用经胸多普勒超声心动图(TTE)的连续方程计算 AVA。

结果

MSCT 与 MRI 之间具有极好的相关性(r = 0.99),且一致性界限在可接受范围内(± 0.42 cm²),尽管 MSCT 得出的平均 AVA 略小于 MRI(1.57 ± 0.83 cm² 与 1.67 ± 0.98 cm²,p < 0.05)。然而,在瓣膜狭窄患者亚组中,MSCT 和 MRI 之间的平均 AVA 没有差异(1.05 ± 0.30 cm² 与 1.04 ± 0.39 cm²;p > 0.05)。MSCT 和 MRI 上的平均 AVA 均大于 TTE(0.88 ± 0.28 cm²,p < 0.001 各)。以 TTE 上的 1.0 cm²AVA 为参考,MSCT 和 MRI 检测严重至重度狭窄的最佳阈值分别为 1.25 cm²和 1.30 cm²,准确率均为 96%。

结论

我们的研究明确了 MSCT 用于量化 AVA 的适用性的最新报告。这里提供的数据表明,MSCT、MRI 和 TTE 之间在 AVA 测量方面存在一定的方法学差异。然而,MSCT 和 MRI 在 AVA 平面测量方面显示出极好的相关性,在分级主动脉瓣狭窄方面具有相似的准确性。

相似文献

1
Planimetry of the aortic valve orifice area: comparison of multislice spiral computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.主动脉瓣口面积的平面测量:多层螺旋 CT 与磁共振成像的对比。
Eur J Radiol. 2011 Mar;77(3):426-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2009.08.014. Epub 2009 Sep 23.
2
Grading of aortic valve stenosis at 64-slice spiral computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography and calibration against cardiac catheterization.64层螺旋计算机断层扫描评估主动脉瓣狭窄:与经胸超声心动图的比较及与心导管检查的校准
Invest Radiol. 2009 Jun;44(6):360-8. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3181a64d76.
3
Quantification of aortic valve stenosis: head-to-head comparison of 64-slice spiral computed tomography with transesophageal and transthoracic echocardiography and cardiac catheterization.主动脉瓣狭窄的定量分析:64层螺旋计算机断层扫描与经食管和经胸超声心动图及心导管检查的直接比较
Invest Radiol. 2009 Jan;44(1):7-14. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e31818f769b.
4
Precision of forty slice spiral computed tomography for quantifying aortic valve stenosis: comparison with echocardiography and validation against cardiac catheterization.40层螺旋计算机断层扫描定量评估主动脉瓣狭窄的准确性:与超声心动图比较及与心导管检查对照验证
Invest Radiol. 2008 Oct;43(10):719-28. doi: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e318184d7c5.
5
Differences in aortic valve area measured with CT planimetry and echocardiography (continuity equation) are related to divergent estimates of left ventricular outflow tract area.通过CT平面测量法和超声心动图(连续方程)测量的主动脉瓣面积差异与左心室流出道面积的不同估计值相关。
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009 Jun;192(6):1668-73. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1986.
6
Correlation of aortic valve area obtained by the velocity-encoded phase contrast continuity method to direct planimetry using cardiovascular magnetic resonance.通过速度编码相位对比连续性方法获得的主动脉瓣面积与使用心血管磁共振直接平面测量法的相关性。
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2007;9(5):799-805. doi: 10.1080/10976640701545479.
7
Evaluation of aortic valve stenosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparison of an original semiautomated analysis of phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance with Doppler echocardiography.应用心血管磁共振评估主动脉瓣狭窄:相位对比心血管磁共振原始半自动分析与多普勒超声心动图的比较。
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Sep 1;5(5):604-12. doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.111.971218. Epub 2012 Jul 13.
8
Planimetry of aortic valve area in aortic stenosis by magnetic resonance imaging.磁共振成像评估主动脉瓣狭窄时主动脉瓣面积的平面测量法
Invest Radiol. 2005 Oct;40(10):631-6. doi: 10.1097/01.rli.0000178362.67085.fd.
9
Assessment of aortic valve area in aortic stenosis using cardiac magnetic resonance tomography: comparison with echocardiography.利用心脏磁共振断层扫描评估主动脉瓣狭窄时的主动脉瓣面积:与超声心动图的比较
Cardiology. 2008;109(2):126-34. doi: 10.1159/000105554. Epub 2007 Aug 21.
10
Multislice computed tomography for detection of patients with aortic valve stenosis and quantification of severity.多层螺旋计算机断层扫描用于检测主动脉瓣狭窄患者并量化狭窄严重程度。
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006 Apr 4;47(7):1410-7. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.11.056. Epub 2006 Mar 20.

引用本文的文献

1
Discordant High-Gradient Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review.不一致性高梯度主动脉瓣狭窄:一项系统评价
J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2025 Jul 3;12(7):255. doi: 10.3390/jcdd12070255.
2
Cardiovascular Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Guideline of the Brazilian Society of Cardiology and the Brazilian College of Radiology - 2024.巴西心脏病学会和巴西放射学会心血管计算机断层扫描与磁共振成像指南 - 2024年
Arq Bras Cardiol. 2024 Oct 28;121(9):e20240608. doi: 10.36660/abc.20240608.
3
SCMR Position Paper (2020) on clinical indications for cardiovascular magnetic resonance.
SCMR 立场文件(2020 年):心血管磁共振的临床适应证。
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Nov 9;22(1):76. doi: 10.1186/s12968-020-00682-4.
4
Evaluation of aortic stenosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: a systematic review & meta-analysis.使用心血管磁共振评估主动脉瓣狭窄:一项系统评价与荟萃分析。
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2020 Jun 15;22(1):45. doi: 10.1186/s12968-020-00633-z.
5
Iterative reconstruction in single-source dual-energy CT angiography: feasibility of low and ultra-low volume contrast medium protocols.单源双能量CT血管造影中的迭代重建:低剂量和超低剂量对比剂方案的可行性
Br J Radiol. 2017 Jul;90(1075):20160506. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20160506. Epub 2017 Jun 23.
6
Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography.320 排 CT 评估主动脉瓣口面积:与经胸超声心动图的比较。
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014 Jan;30(1):165-73. doi: 10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6. Epub 2013 Oct 15.
7
Heart valve disease: investigation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance.心脏瓣膜病:心血管磁共振检查。
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012 Jan 19;14(1):7. doi: 10.1186/1532-429X-14-7.
8
Preoperative quantification of aortic valve stenosis: comparison of 64-slice computed tomography with transesophageal and transthoracic echocardiography and size of implanted prosthesis.术前主动脉瓣狭窄的定量评估:64 层 CT 与经食管及经胸超声心动图比较和植入假体的大小。
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2012 Feb;28(2):343-52. doi: 10.1007/s10554-010-9784-z. Epub 2011 Jan 30.