Catheterization-Doppler discrepancies in nonsimultaneous evaluations of aortic stenosis

Echocardiography

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2005, Pages 367-373

  Aghassi, Payam ^a   Aurigemma, Gerard P ^a   Folland, Edward D ^a   Tighe, Dennis A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

Aortic stenosis; Aortic valve; Doppler echocardiography; Echocardiography; Left ventricular ejection fraction

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AORTA STENOSIS; AORTA VALVE; ARTERY DIAMETER; ARTERY WALL; CATHETER; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; GENDER; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE EJECTION FRACTION; HEART LEFT VENTRICLE ENDDIASTOLIC PRESSURE; HEART OUTPUT; HEART RATE; HEART RHYTHM; HUMAN; LINEAR REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRESSURE GRADIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIODIAGNOSIS; REVIEW;

AGED; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; FEMALE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART RATE; HUMANS; MALE; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SEX FACTORS; STROKE VOLUME; VENTRICULAR FUNCTION, LEFT; VENTRICULAR PRESSURE; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 18744368478     PISSN: 07422822     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8175.2005.04006.x     Document Type: Review

References (20)

1. Holen J, Aaslid R, Landmark K, et al: Determination of pressure gradient in mitral stenosis with a noninvasive ultrasound Doppler technique. Acta Med Scand 1976;199:455-460.
2. Hatle L, Angelsen BA, Tromsdal A: Non-invasive assessment of aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound. Br Heart J 1980;43:284-292.
3. Hegrenaes L, Hatle L: Aortic stenosis in adults: Non-invasive estimation of pressure differences by continuous wave Doppler echocardiography. Br Heart J 1985;54:396-404.
4. Currie PJ, Steward JB, Reeder GS, et al: Continuous-wave Doppler echocardiographic assessment of severity of calcific aortic stenosis: A simultaneous Doppler-catheter correlative study in 100 adult patients. Circulation 1985;71:1162-1169.
5. Oh JK, Taliercio CP, Holmes DR Jr, et al: Prediction of the severity of aortic stenosis by Doppler aortic valve area determination: Prospective Doppler-catheterization correlation in 100 patients. J Am Coll Cardiol 1988;11:1227-1134.
6. Ohlsson J, Wranne B: Noninvasive assessment of valve area in patients with aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;7:501-508.
7. Levine RA, Jimoh A, Cape EG, et al: Pressure recovery distal to a stenosis: Potential causes of gradient "over-estimation" by Doppler echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989;13:706-715.
8. Carroll JD, Carroll EP, Feldman T, et al: Sex-associated differences in left ventricular function in aortic stenosis of the elderly. Circulation 1992;86:1099-1107.
9. Aurigemma GP, Silver KH, McLaughlin M, et al: Impact of chamber geometry and gender on left ventricular systolic function in patients >60 years of age with aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 1994;74:794-798.
10. Gorlin R, Gorlin SG: Hydraulic formula for calculation of the area of the stenotic mitral valve, other cardiac valves, and central circulatory shunts. I. Am Heart J 1951;4:1-29.
11. Bland JM, Altaman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet 1988;I:307-311.
12. Wexler LF, Lesperance J, Ryan TJ, et al: Interobserver variability in interpreting contrast left ventriculograms (CASS). Cathet Cardiovasc Diagn 1982;8:341-355.
13. Niederberger J, Schima H, Maurer G, et al: Importance of pressure recovery for the assessment of aortic stenosis by Doppler ultrasound: Role of aortic size, aortic valve area, and direction of the stenotic jet in vitro. Circulation 1996;94:1934-1940.
14. Baumgartner H, Khan S, DeRobertis M, et al: Discrepancies between Doppler and catheter gradients in aortic prosthetic valves in vitro: A manifestation of localized gradients and pressure recovery. Circulation 1990;82:1467-1475.
15. Baumgartner H, Stefenelli T, Niederberger J, et al: " Overestimation" of catheter gradients by Doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: A predictable manifestation of pressure recovery. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:1655-1661.
16. Cape EG, Jones M, Yamada I, et al: Turbulent/viscous interactions control Doppler/catheter pressure discrepancies in aortic stenosis. The role of the Reynolds number. Circulation 1996;94:2975-2981.
17. Lemler MS, Valdes-Cruz LM, Shandas RS, et al: Insights into catheter/Doppler discrepancies in congenital aortic stenosis. Am J Cardiol 1999;83:1447-1450.
18. Gjertsson P, Caidahl K, Svensson G, et al: Important pressure recovery in patients with aortic stenosis and high Doppler gradients. Am J Cardiol 2001;88:139-144.
19. Come PC, Riley MF, Ferguson JF, et al: Prediction of severity of aortic stenosis: Accuracy of multiple noninvasive parameters. Am J Cardiol 1988;85:29-37.
20. Garcia D, Dumesnil JG, Durand LG, et al: Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon: Practical implications with regard to quantification of aortic stenosis severity. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003;41:435-442.