de Agustin Jose Alberto, Mejia Hernan, Viliani Dafne, Marcos-Alberca Pedro, Gomez de Diego Jose Juan, Nuñez-Gil Ivan Javier, Almeria Carlos, Rodrigo Jose Luis, Luaces Maria, Garcia-Fernandez Miguel Angel, Macaya Carlos, Perez de Isla Leopoldo
Instituto Cardiovascular, Unidad de Imagen Cardiaca, Hospital Universitario San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Instituto Cardiovascular, Unidad de Imagen Cardiaca, Hospital Universitario San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2014 Aug;27(8):838-45. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2014.04.023. Epub 2014 Jun 6.
The two-dimensional (2D) proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) method has important technical limitations for mitral valve orifice area (MVA) assessment in mitral stenosis (MS), mainly the geometric assumptions of PISA shape and the requirement of an angle correction factor. Single-beat real-time three-dimensional (3D) color Doppler imaging allows the direct measurement of PISA without geometric assumptions or the requirement of an angle correction factor. The aim of this study was to validate this method in patients with rheumatic MS.
Sixty-three consecutive patients with rheumatic MS were included. MVA was assessed using the transthoracic 2D and 3D PISA methods. Planimetry of MVA (2D and 3D) and the pressure half-time method were used as reference methods.
The 3D PISA method had better correlations with the reference methods (with 2D planimetry, r = 0.85, P < .001; with 3D planimetry, r = 0.89, P < .001; and with pressure half-time, r = 0.85, P < .001) than the conventional 2D PISA method (with 2D planimetry, r = 0.63, P < .001; with 3D planimetry, r = 0.66, P < .001; and with pressure half-time, r = 0.68, P < .001). In addition, a consistent significant underestimation of MVA using the conventional 2D PISA method was observed. A high percentage (30%) of patients with nonsevere MS by 3D planimetry were misclassified by the 2D PISA method as having severe MS (effective regurgitant orifice area < 1 cm(2)). In contrast, the 3D PISA method had 94% agreement with 3D planimetry. Good intra- and interobserver agreement for 3D PISA measurements were observed, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.95 and 0.90, respectively.
MVA assessment using PISA by single-beat real-time 3D color Doppler echocardiography is feasible in the clinical setting and more accurate than the conventional 2D PISA method.
二维(2D)近端等速表面积(PISA)法在评估二尖瓣狭窄(MS)患者的二尖瓣口面积(MVA)时存在重要技术局限性,主要包括PISA形状的几何假设以及角度校正因子的需求。单搏实时三维(3D)彩色多普勒成像可直接测量PISA,无需几何假设或角度校正因子。本研究旨在验证该方法在风湿性MS患者中的有效性。
纳入63例连续的风湿性MS患者。使用经胸二维和三维PISA方法评估MVA。MVA的平面测量法(二维和三维)和压力减半时间法用作参考方法。
与传统二维PISA方法相比,三维PISA方法与参考方法的相关性更好(与二维平面测量法,r = 0.85,P <.001;与三维平面测量法,r = 0.89,P <.001;与压力减半时间法,r = 0.85,P <.001)(与二维平面测量法,r = 0.63,P <.001;与三维平面测量法,r = 0.66,P <.001;与压力减半时间法,r = 0.68,P <.001)。此外,观察到使用传统二维PISA方法时MVA存在持续显著低估。三维平面测量法显示为非重度MS的患者中,有高比例(30%)被二维PISA方法误分类为重度MS(有效反流口面积<1 cm²)。相比之下,三维PISA方法与三维平面测量法的一致性为94%。观察到三维PISA测量的观察者内和观察者间一致性良好,组内相关系数分别为0.95和0.90。
在临床环境中,使用单搏实时三维彩色多普勒超声心动图通过PISA评估MVA是可行的,且比传统二维PISA方法更准确。