Isolated mitral regurgitation: Quantitative assessment with 64-section multidetector CT - Comparison with MR imaging and echocardiography

Radiology

Volumn 252, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 369-376

  Guo, Ying Kun ^a,b   Yang, Zhi Gang ^b   Ning, Gang ^a   Rao, Li ^b   Dong, Li ^b   Pen, Ying ^b   Zhang, Tai Ming ^b   Wu, Yang ^b   Zhang, Xiao Chun ^b   Wang, Qi Ling ^b  

^a SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

IOPAMIDOL;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY SCANNER; CONTRAST ENHANCEMENT; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DISEASE SEVERITY; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; ELECTROCARDIOGRAM; FEMALE; GATED IMAGING; HUMAN; IMAGING SYSTEM; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; MITRAL VALVE DISEASE; MITRAL VALVE REGURGITATION; MULTIDETECTOR COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; TRANSTHORACIC ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; TWO DIMENSIONAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; WHOLE BODY IMAGING; ADOLESCENT; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; EVALUATION; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MITRAL VALVE INSUFFICIENCY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 70249132941     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2522081714     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Jones EC, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, et al. Prevalence and correlates of mitral regurgitation in a population-based sample (the Strong Heart Study). Am J Cardiol 2001;87:298-304. (Pubitemid 32144870)
2. Carabello BA, Crawford FA Jr. Valvular heart disease. N Engl J Med 1997;337:32-41.
3. Thomas L, Foster E, Hoffman JI, Schiller NB. The mitral regurgitation index: an echocardiographic guide to severity. J Am Coll Cardiol 1999;33:2016-2022.
4. Rerkpattanapipat P, Mazur W, Link KM, Hundley WG. Assessment of cardiac function with MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 2003;11:67-80.
5. Vogel-Claussen J, Pannu H, Spevak PJ, Fishman EK, Bluemke DA. Cardiac valve assessment with MR imaging and 64-section multi-detector row CT. RadioGraphics 2006;26:1769-1784.
6. Bolger AF, Eigler NL, Maurer G. Quantifying valvular regurgitation: limitations and inherent assumptions of Doppler techniques. Circulation 1988;78:1316-1318. (Pubitemid 18272368)
7. Miyatake K, Izumi S, Okamoto M, et al. Semi-quantitative grading of severity of mitral regurgitation by real-time two-dimensional Doppler flow imaging technique. J Am Coll Cardiol 1986;7:82-88. (Pubitemid 16132459)
8. Gelfand EV, Hughes S, Hauser TH, et al. Severity of mitral and aortic regurgitation as assessment by cardiovascular magnetic resonance optimizing correlation with Doppler echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2006;8:503-507.
9. Thomson HL, Enriquez-Sarano M, Tajik AJ. Timing of surgery in patients with chronic severe mitral regurgitation. Cardiol Rev 2001;9:137-143. (Pubitemid 32422845)
10. Rosenhek R, Rader F, Klaar U, et al. Outcome of watchful waiting in asymptomatic severe mitral regurgitation. Circulation 2006;113:2238-2244. (Pubitemid 43755147)
11. Wu YW, Tadamura E, Kanao S, et al. Left ventricular functional analysis using 64-slice multidetector row computed tomography: comparison with left ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance. Cardiology 2008;109:135-142.
12. Plumhans C, Mühlenbruch G, Rapaee A, et al. Assessment of global right ventricular function on 64-MDCT: compared with MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190:1358-1361. (Pubitemid 351684901)
13. Quiñones MA, Otto CM, Stoddard M, Waggoner A, Zoghbi WA; Doppler Quantification Task Force of the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the American Society of Echocardiography. Recommendations for quantification of Doppler echocardiography: a report from the Doppler Quantification Task Force of the Nomenclature and Standards Committee of the American Society of Echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2002;15:167-184.
14. Zoghbi WA, Enriquez-Sarano M, Foster E, et al. Recommendations for evaluation of the severity of native valvular regurgitation with two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2003;16:777-802. (Pubitemid 37391035)
15. Lembcke A, Borges AC, Dushe S, et al. Assessment of mitral valve regurgitation at electron-beam CT: comparison with Doppler echocardiography. Radiology 2005;236:47-55. (Pubitemid 40853293)
16. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-310. (Pubitemid 16134762)
17. Alkadhi H, Desbiolles L, Husmann L, et al. Aortic regurgitation: assessment with 64-section CT. Radiology 2007;245:111-121.
18. Alkadhi H, Bettex D, Wildermuth S, et al. Dynamic cine imaging of the mitral valve with 16-MDCT: a feasibility study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;185:636-646.
19. Alkadhi H, Wildermuth S, Bettex DA, et al. Mitral regurgitation: quantification with 16-detector row CT - initial experience. Radiology 2006;238:454-463. (Pubitemid 43136785)
20. Koch K, Oellig F, Oberholzer K, et al. Assessment of right ventricular function by 16-detector-row CT: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Eur Radiol 2005;15:312-318.
21. Guo YK, Gao HL, Zhang XC, Wang QL, Yang ZG, Ma ES. Accuracy and reproducibility of assessing right ventricular function with 64-section multi-detector row CT: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Cardiol. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2008.10.031. Published online November 22, 2008.
22. Irvine T, Li XK, Sahn DJ, Kenny A. Assessment of mitral regurgitation. Heart 2002;88(suppl 4):iv11-iv19.
23. Flohr TG, Schoepf UJ, Kuettner A, et al. Assessment advances in cardiac imaging with 16-section CT systems. Acad Radiol 2003;10:386-401. (Pubitemid 36383969)