Suppr超能文献

[使用血氧测定法、同位素和多普勒超声心动图对房间隔缺损中的左向右分流进行定量分析。是否存在参考方法?]

[Quantification of left-to-right shunt in atrial septal defect using oximetry, isotopes, and Doppler echocardiography. Is there a method of reference?].

作者信息

Evangelista A, Aguadé S, Candell-Riera J, Angel J, Galve E, García del Castillo H, González-Alujas T, Soler-Soler J

机构信息

Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital General Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona.

出版信息

Rev Esp Cardiol. 1998;51 Suppl 1:2-9.

PMID:9549394
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Determination of pulmonary to systemic blood flow ratio (QP/QS) is considered to be important for the management of patients with atrial septal defect. The QP/QS provides information on shunt severity and is usually determined by three methods: oximetry, first-pass radionuclide angiocardiography and Doppler echocardiography. The aim of the present study was to assess the accuracy and concordance level of these three methods in QP/QS quantification in atrial septal defects.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-four adult atrial septal defects patients in whom QP/QS was determined by these three methods with a 6 month interval were studied. Nuclear and echocardiographic post-surgical studies were repeated in 36 patients.

RESULTS

QP/QS values determined by the three techniques had a low correlation between them: oximetry (r = 0.52; SEE = 0.74); radionuclide angiocardiography (r = 0.40; SEE = 0.79) and Doppler echocardiography (r = 0.72; SEE = 0.57). Radionuclide angiocardiography underestimated QP/QS > 3 (-0.61 +/- 1.21; p < 0.01). Only in 33% of studies there concordance (differences < 0.5) among the three methods and in 58% between two methods. Right ventricular dilatation and tricuspid regurgitation influenced radionuclide accuracy. Nevertheless, the correlation between this technique and echocardiography was satisfactory when the 36 post-surgical were included (r = 0.75); both techniques agreed in the diagnosis of the two cases with residual post-surgical shunt.

CONCLUSIONS

Inter-method disparity in QP/QS quantification is high and no method can be used as a gold standard; clinical decisions therefore based on QP/QS quantification by one technique alone are ill-advised.

摘要

引言

肺循环与体循环血流量比值(QP/QS)的测定被认为对房间隔缺损患者的治疗管理很重要。QP/QS可提供分流严重程度的信息,通常通过三种方法测定:血氧饱和度测定法、首次通过放射性核素血管造影术和多普勒超声心动图。本研究的目的是评估这三种方法在房间隔缺损QP/QS定量中的准确性和一致性水平。

患者与方法

对64例成年房间隔缺损患者进行了研究,这三种方法以6个月的间隔对其QP/QS进行测定。36例患者进行了术后核医学和超声心动图检查。

结果

三种技术测定的QP/QS值之间相关性较低:血氧饱和度测定法(r = 0.52;标准估计误差[SEE] = 0.74);放射性核素血管造影术(r = 0.40;SEE = 0.79)和多普勒超声心动图(r = 0.72;SEE = 0.57)。放射性核素血管造影术低估了QP/QS > 3的情况(-0.61 ± 1.21;p < 0.01)。仅在33%的研究中三种方法之间具有一致性(差异 < 0.5),在58%的研究中两种方法之间具有一致性。右心室扩张和三尖瓣反流影响放射性核素的准确性。然而,当纳入36例术后患者时,该技术与超声心动图之间的相关性良好(r = 0.75);两种技术在诊断两例术后残余分流病例时结果一致。

结论

QP/QS定量的方法间差异很大,没有一种方法可作为金标准;因此,仅基于一种技术的QP/QS定量做出临床决策是不明智的。

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