Shapiro S M, Young E, De Guzman S, Ward J, Chiu C Y, Ginzton L E, Bayer A S
Division of Cardiology, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, Calif 90509.
Chest. 1994 Feb;105(2):377-82. doi: 10.1378/chest.105.2.377.
To determine whether transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was superior to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in defining valvular vegetations and diagnosing clinical infective endocarditis (IE) in patients suspected of having this infection.
Between April 1989 and May 1991, 64 febrile patients with clinical and/or microbiologic risk factors for IE were prospectively enrolled. Patients underwent both TEE and TTE, which were interpreted in a blinded fashion as to the patient's clinical status. Clinical criteria for the diagnosis of IE were compared with TEE and TTE findings to delineate the ability of the two echocardiographic techniques to define valvular vegetations and to establish the clinical diagnosis of vegetative IE.
Thirty-four valves had typical valvular vegetations demonstrated by either TEE or TTE. Transesophageal echocardiography was more sensitive than TTE in identifying valvular vegetations (33/34 vs 23/34 instances, respectively; p = 0.004). Also, TEE was better at identifying smaller vegetations (< 1 cm) than TTE; 12 patients with such vegetations were identified by TEE as compared with only 5 of 12 identified by TTE (p = 0.02). Of the 64 patients enrolled, 30 (47 percent) were classified as having "definite" or "probable" IE by modified von Reyn criteria. Among these 30 patients, TEE was significantly more sensitive than TTE at documenting vegetative valvular lesions (26/30 [87 percent] vs 18/30 [60 percent], respectively) (p < 0.01). Both TEE and TTE were highly specific (91 percent) in delineating valvular vegetations in this patient population; two of the three false-positive TEE studies for valvular vegetations occurred in patients with a history of IE. All nine periannular complications of IE were identified by TEE, as compared with only two being defined by TTE (p = 0.001).
Transesophageal echocardiography is significantly more sensitive than TTE and highly specific in both confirming the clinical diagnosis of IE, as well as in identifying valvular vegetations in patients at risk for this infection. Our data also support the concept that TEE is the echocardiographic method of choice for defining small vegetations and periannular complications in IE.
确定在疑似患有感染性心内膜炎(IE)的患者中,经食管超声心动图(TEE)在明确瓣膜赘生物和诊断临床感染性心内膜炎方面是否优于经胸超声心动图(TTE)。
在1989年4月至1991年5月期间,前瞻性纳入了64例有IE临床和/或微生物学危险因素的发热患者。患者接受了TEE和TTE检查,检查结果以盲法解读,不了解患者的临床状况。将IE的临床诊断标准与TEE和TTE的检查结果进行比较,以描述这两种超声心动图技术在明确瓣膜赘生物和确立赘生性IE临床诊断方面的能力。
34个瓣膜有典型的瓣膜赘生物,TEE或TTE均能显示。经食管超声心动图在识别瓣膜赘生物方面比TTE更敏感(分别为33/34例和23/34例;p = 0.004)。此外,TEE在识别较小赘生物(<1 cm)方面比TTE更出色;TEE识别出12例有此类赘生物的患者,而TTE在12例中仅识别出5例(p = 0.02)。在纳入的64例患者中,根据改良的冯·雷诺标准,30例(47%)被归类为患有“确诊”或“可能”的IE。在这30例患者中,TEE在记录赘生性瓣膜病变方面比TTE明显更敏感(分别为26/30 [87%]和18/30 [60%])(p < 0.01)。在该患者群体中,TEE和TTE在明确瓣膜赘生物方面均具有高度特异性(91%);TEE对瓣膜赘生物的三项假阳性研究中有两项发生在有IE病史的患者中。所有9例IE的瓣周并发症均由TEE识别,而TTE仅识别出2例(p = 0.001)。
经食管超声心动图在证实IE的临床诊断以及识别有感染风险患者的瓣膜赘生物方面,比TTE明显更敏感且具有高度特异性。我们的数据还支持以下观点,即TEE是明确IE中小赘生物和瓣周并发症的首选超声心动图检查方法。