Suppr超能文献

四维血流心血管磁共振评估主动脉瓣狭窄的验证。

Validation of four-dimensional flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance for aortic stenosis assessment.

机构信息

Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 29;10(1):10569. doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-66659-6.

Abstract

The management of patients with aortic stenosis (AS) crucially depends on accurate diagnosis. The main aim of this study were to validate the four-dimensional flow (4D flow) cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) methods for AS assessment. Eighteen patients with clinically severe AS were recruited. All patients had pre-valve intervention 6MWT, echocardiography and CMR with 4D flow. Of these, ten patients had a surgical valve replacement, and eight patients had successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). TAVI patients had invasive pressure gradient assessments. A repeat assessment was performed at 3-4 months to assess the remodelling response. The peak pressure gradient by 4D flow was comparable to an invasive pressure gradient (54 ± 26 mmHG vs 50 ± 34 mmHg, P = 0.67). However, Doppler yielded significantly higher pressure gradient compared to invasive assessment (61 ± 32 mmHG vs 50 ± 34 mmHg, P = 0.0002). 6MWT was associated with 4D flow CMR derived pressure gradient (r = -0.45, P = 0.01) and EOA (r = 0.54, P < 0.01) but only with Doppler EOA (r = 0.45, P = 0.01). Left ventricular mass regression was better associated with 4D flow derived pressure gradient change (r = 0.64, P = 0.04). 4D flow CMR offers an alternative method for non-invasive assessment of AS. In addition, 4D flow derived valve metrics have a superior association to prognostically relevant 6MWT and LV mass regression than echocardiography.

摘要

主动脉瓣狭窄(AS)患者的管理关键取决于准确的诊断。本研究的主要目的是验证四维血流(4D 流)心血管磁共振(CMR)在 AS 评估中的方法。

招募了 18 例临床上严重的 AS 患者。所有患者均在术前干预前 6MWT、超声心动图和 CMR 进行 4D 流检查。其中 10 例患者接受了外科瓣膜置换术,8 例患者接受了经导管主动脉瓣植入术(TAVI)。TAVI 患者进行了有创压力梯度评估。在 3-4 个月时进行重复评估,以评估重塑反应。4D 流的峰值压力梯度与有创压力梯度相当(54±26mmHg 比 50±34mmHg,P=0.67)。然而,多普勒测量的压力梯度明显高于有创评估(61±32mmHg 比 50±34mmHg,P=0.0002)。

6MWT 与 4D 流 CMR 衍生的压力梯度(r=-0.45,P=0.01)和 EOA(r=0.54,P<0.01)相关,但仅与多普勒 EOA 相关(r=-0.45,P=0.01)。左心室质量回归与 4D 流衍生的压力梯度变化更好相关(r=0.64,P=0.04)。

4D 流 CMR 为 AS 的非侵入性评估提供了一种替代方法。此外,与超声心动图相比,4D 流衍生的瓣膜指标与预后相关的 6MWT 和 LV 质量回归有更好的关联。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ce9f/7324609/bce977ba5fd4/41598_2020_66659_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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