Suppr超能文献

用于评估瓣膜反流分数的侵入性和超声多普勒评估中每搏输出量测量的误差。临床评估与计算机模拟。

Errors in measurements of stroke volume for invasive and echo-Doppler evaluations of valvular regurgitant fractions. Clinical evaluation and computer simulation.

作者信息

Iliceto S, D'Ambrosio G, Amico A, Tota F, Piccinni G, Marangelli V, Rizzon P

机构信息

Division of Cardiology, University of Bari, Italy.

出版信息

Eur Heart J. 1990 Apr;11(4):355-60. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a059710.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare cardiac catheterization (CATH) with 2D echo-Doppler (ED) in clinically evaluating the stroke volumes (SV) needed to calculate aortic and mitral regurgitant fractions (aortic and mitral SV for the ED method, thermodilution and angiographic SV for the CATH). As there is no 'gold standard' for this kind of measurement, only subjects without valvular regurgitation were considered. In these subjects, though the two SV measurements needed to calculate the regurgitant volume should have been identical, there was, in fact a difference due to the systematic and random errors of the methods. We calculated the mean value and the standard deviation of this difference in a series of patients without valvular regurgitation in order to obtain an estimate of both systematic and random errors. In 20 patients studied by ED a difference of 11.9 +/- 16.7 ml was found. In 36 patients studied by cardiac catheterization the difference was 19.6 +/- 20.1 ml. A significant systematic error was found for both ED and the invasive method; The transmitral SV tended to be larger than the aortic and the angiographic SV larger than that obtained by thermodilution. To try to determine the extent to which the random errors could be attributed to the reproducibility of the measurements, we carried out computer simulations. The SVs of 50 000 hypothetical patients were randomly generated and then attributed a random error calculated on the basis of the variability of the CATH (thermodilution 4%, angiography 10%) and the ED measurements (aortic annulus 6%, mitral annulus 18%, mitral time velocity integral 10%, aortic time velocity integral 8%).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

本研究的目的是比较心脏导管插入术(CATH)和二维超声心动图(ED)在临床评估计算主动脉和二尖瓣反流分数所需的每搏输出量(SV)方面的差异(ED法的主动脉和二尖瓣SV,CATH法的热稀释法和血管造影术SV)。由于此类测量尚无“金标准”,仅纳入无瓣膜反流的受试者。在这些受试者中,尽管计算反流容积所需的两种SV测量值本应相同,但实际上由于方法的系统误差和随机误差而存在差异。我们计算了一系列无瓣膜反流患者中该差异的平均值和标准差,以获得系统误差和随机误差的估计值。在20例接受ED检查的患者中,发现差异为11.9±16.7 ml。在36例接受心脏导管插入术检查的患者中,差异为19.6±20.1 ml。ED法和侵入性方法均存在显著的系统误差;经二尖瓣的SV往往大于主动脉的SV,血管造影术的SV大于热稀释法获得的SV。为了确定随机误差在多大程度上可归因于测量的可重复性,我们进行了计算机模拟。随机生成50000例假设患者的SV,然后根据CATH(热稀释法4%,血管造影术10%)和ED测量值(主动脉瓣环6%,二尖瓣瓣环18%,二尖瓣时间速度积分10%,主动脉时间速度积分8%)的变异性计算随机误差。(摘要截断于250字)

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验