Suppr超能文献

应用自动化实时三维超声心动图近端等速表面积定量分析二尖瓣脱垂伴反流:多模态一致性及偏心指数的作用。

Quantification of regurgitation in mitral valve prolapse with automated real time echocardiographic 3D proximal isovelocity surface area: multimodality consistency and role of eccentricity index.

机构信息

University Department for Cardiac Surgery, HELIOS Heart Center Leipzig, Strümpellstraße 39, 04289, Leipzig, Germany.

Department of Electrophysiology, HELIOS Leipzig Heart Center, Leipzig, Germany.

出版信息

Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021 Jun;37(6):1947-1959. doi: 10.1007/s10554-021-02179-2. Epub 2021 Feb 22.

Abstract

Three-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography (3D-TTE) provides a semi-automated proximal isovelocity surface area method (3D-PISA) to obtain quantitative parameters. Data assessing regurgitation severity in mitral valve prolapse (MVP) are scarce, so we assessed the 3D-PISA method compared with 2D-PISA and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and the role of an eccentricity index. We evaluated the 3D-PISA method for assessing MR in 54 patients with MVP (57 ± 14 years; 42 men; 12 mild/mild-moderate; 12 moderate-severe; and 30 severe MR). Role of an asymmetric (i.e. eccentricity index ≥ 1.25) flow convergence region (FCR) and inter-modality consistency were then assessed. 3D-PISA derived regurgitant volume (RVol) showed a good correlation with 2D-PISA and CMR derived parameters (r = 0.86 and r = 0.81, respectively). The small mean differences with 2D-PISA derived RVol did not reach statistical significance in overall population (5.7 ± 23 ml, 95% CI - 0.6 to 12; p = 0.08) but differed in those with asymmetric 3D-FCR (n = 21; 2D-PISA: 72 ± 36 ml vs. 3D-PISA: 93 ± 47 ml; p = 0.001). RVol mean values were higher using PISA methods (CMR 57 ± 33 ml; 2D-PISA 73 ± 39 ml; and 3D-PISA 79 ± 45 ml) and an overestimation was observed when CMR was used as reference (2D-PISA vs. CMR: mean difference: 15.8 ml [95% CI 10-22, p < 0.001]; and 3D-PISA vs. CMR: 21.5 ml [95% CI 14-29, p < 0.001]). Intra- and inter-observer reliability was excellent (ICC 0.91-0.99), but with numerically lower coefficient of variation for 3D-PISA (8%-10% vs. 2D-PISA: 12%-16%). 3D-PISA method for assessing regurgitation in MVP may enable analogous evaluation compared to standard 2D-PISA, but with overestimation in case of asymmetric FCR or when CMR is used as reference method.

摘要

三维经胸超声心动图(3D-TTE)提供了一种半自动的近端等速表面积法(3D-PISA)来获取定量参数。二尖瓣脱垂(MVP)反流严重程度的数据评估较少,因此我们评估了 3D-PISA 方法与 2D-PISA 和心血管磁共振(CMR)的比较,并评估了偏心指数的作用。我们评估了 3D-PISA 方法在 54 例 MVP 患者(57±14 岁;42 名男性;12 例轻度/轻度中度;12 例中度重度;30 例重度 MR)中的应用。然后评估了不对称(即偏心指数≥1.25)的射流汇聚区(FCR)和跨模态一致性的作用。3D-PISA 得出的反流容积(RVol)与 2D-PISA 和 CMR 得出的参数有很好的相关性(r=0.86 和 r=0.81)。在整个人群中,3D-PISA 与 2D-PISA 得出的 RVol 的平均差异较小,没有达到统计学意义(5.7±23ml,95%CI-0.6 至 12;p=0.08),但在不对称 3D-FCR 的患者中有所不同(n=21;2D-PISA:72±36ml 与 3D-PISA:93±47ml;p=0.001)。使用 PISA 方法时,RVol 的平均值更高(CMR 57±33ml;2D-PISA 73±39ml;3D-PISA 79±45ml),当 CMR 用作参考时,会出现高估(2D-PISA 与 CMR:平均差异:15.8ml[95%CI 10-22,p<0.001];3D-PISA 与 CMR:21.5ml[95%CI 14-29,p<0.001])。观察者内和观察者间的可靠性都很好(ICC 0.91-0.99),但 3D-PISA 的变异系数略低(8%-10%比 2D-PISA:12%-16%)。3D-PISA 方法评估 MVP 中的反流可能能够与标准 2D-PISA 进行类似的评估,但在不对称 FCR 的情况下或当 CMR 用作参考方法时会出现高估。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/567b/8255267/0e235d480870/10554_2021_2179_Fig1_HTML.jpg

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