Department of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, Berlin 10117, Germany.
AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011 Sep;197(3):614-22. doi: 10.2214/AJR.10.5132.
We evaluated the precision of helical MDCT for the quantification of mitral valve stenosis (MVS) compared with transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cardiac catheterization.
A total of 28 patients with MVS of differing severity underwent an ECG-gated contrast-enhanced MDCT scan. The mitral valve area (MVA) was determined planimetrically by MDCT and was compared with Doppler TTE using the pressure half-time method and with cardiac catheterization using the Gorlin formula.
Planimetry of the MVA with MDCT was feasible in all cases. The MVA on MDCT (1.88 ± 0.76 cm(2)) was significantly larger than that seen with TTE (1.74 ± 0.75 cm(2); p = 0.039) or cardiac catheterization (1.72 ± 0.67 cm(2); p = 0.037). The correlation between MDCT and TTE (r = 0.90; p < 0.001; limits of agreement, ± 0.65 cm(2)) and that between MDCT and cardiac catheterization (r = 0.86; p < 0.001; limits of agreement, ± 0.76 cm(2)) were good and similar to the correlation between TTE and cardiac catheterization (r = 0.88; p < 0.001; limits of agreement, ± 0.71 cm(2)). The best cutoff level for detecting moderate-to-severe stenosis at MDCT was an MVA of 1.70 cm(2), resulting in a sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of 73%, 88%, 82%, 80%, and 83%, respectively, with two false-positive and three false-negative results.
The MVA planimetrically determined by MDCT is systematically larger than those calculated by Doppler TTE and cardiac catheterization. However, because of a good correlation between methods and adjustment for the systematic bias, MDCT may allow reliable quantification of MVS and effectual discrimination among severity grades, although discrepancies between methods remain in individual cases.
我们评估了螺旋 MDCT 定量评估二尖瓣狭窄(MVS)的精度,与经胸超声心动图(TTE)和心导管检查进行比较。
共 28 例不同严重程度的 MVS 患者接受了 ECG 门控对比增强 MDCT 扫描。通过 MDCT 进行二尖瓣瓣口面积(MVA)的平面测量,并使用压力半时间法与多普勒 TTE 比较,使用 Gorlin 公式与心导管检查比较。
所有病例均可行 MDCT 测量 MVA。MDCT 测量的 MVA(1.88 ± 0.76 cm²)显著大于 TTE(1.74 ± 0.75 cm²;p = 0.039)或心导管检查(1.72 ± 0.67 cm²;p = 0.037)。MDCT 与 TTE(r = 0.90;p < 0.001;一致性界限,± 0.65 cm²)和 MDCT 与心导管检查(r = 0.86;p < 0.001;一致性界限,± 0.76 cm²)之间的相关性良好,与 TTE 与心导管检查(r = 0.88;p < 0.001;一致性界限,± 0.71 cm²)之间的相关性相似。MDCT 检测中重度狭窄的最佳截断值为 MVA 为 1.70 cm²,此时灵敏度、特异性、准确性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为 73%、88%、82%、80%和 83%,有 2 个假阳性和 3 个假阴性结果。
MDCT 平面测量的 MVA 比多普勒 TTE 和心导管检查计算的 MVA 系统地更大。然而,由于方法之间存在良好的相关性,并且对系统偏差进行了调整,因此 MDCT 可能可以可靠地定量评估 MVS,并有效地对严重程度分级进行区分,尽管在个别情况下方法之间仍存在差异。