Discrepancies between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and Doppler echocardiography in the measurement of transvalvular gradient in aortic stenosis: The effect of flow vorticity

Journal of Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance

Volumn 15, Issue 1, 2013, Pages

  Garcia, Julio ^a,b,c   Capoulade, Romain ^a   Le Ven, Florent ^a   Gaillard, Emmanuel ^d   Kadem, Lyes ^b   Pibarot, Philippe ^a   Larose, Éric ^a  

^a LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science   (Canada)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Aortic stenosis; Cardiovascular magnetic resonance; Echo Doppler; Flow vorticity; Mean pressure gradient

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AORTA STENOSIS; AORTA VALVE; ARTERIAL PRESSURE; ARTERY COMPLIANCE; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HEART STROKE VOLUME; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PHENOTYPE; PRESSURE GRADIENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMIC VASCULAR RESISTANCE;

ADULT; AGED; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; BLOOD FLOW VELOCITY; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; FEMALE; HEMODYNAMICS; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; LINEAR MODELS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, CARDIOVASCULAR; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 84884306923     PISSN: 10976647     EISSN: 1532429X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1532-429X-15-84     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. 2008 Focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, et al. Circulation 2008 118 523 e661 18820172
2. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease. Vahanian A, Alfieri O, Andreotti F, et al. Eur Heart J 2012 33 245 296
3. Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis. Garcia J, Kadem L, Larose E, Clavel M-A, Pibarot P, J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2011 13 25 10.1186/1532-429X-13-25 21527021
4. Practical value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for clinical quantification of aortic valve stenosis: comparison with echocardiography. Caruthers SD, Lin SJ, Brown P, Watkins MP, Williams TA, Lehr KA, Wickline SA, Circulation 2003 108 2236 2243 10.1161/01.CIR.0000095268.47282.A1 14568899 (Pubitemid 37363041)
5. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance evaluation of aortic stenosis severity using single plane measurement of effective orifice area. Garcia J, Marrufo OR, Rodriguez AO, Larose E, Pibarot P, Kadem L, J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2012 14 23 10.1186/1532-429X-14-23 22480269
6. Usefulness of cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for the evaluation of valve opening and closing kinetics in aortic stenosis. Garcia J, Pibarot P, Capoulade R, Le Ven F, Kadem L, Larose E, Eur Heart J CardiovascImaging 2013 14 819 826 10.1093/ehjci/jes314
7. Valve and great vessel stenosis: assessment with MR jet velocity mapping. Kilner P, Firmin D, Rees R, et al. Radiology 1991 178 229 235 1984310
8. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging for valvular heart disease: technique and validation. Cawley PJ, Maki JH, Otto CM, Circulation 2009 119 468 478 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.742486 19171869
9. Valve area and cardiac output in aortic stenosis: quantification by magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Sondergaard L, Hildebrandt P, Lindvig K, Thomsen C, Ståhlberg F, Kassis E, Henriksen O, Am Heart J 1993 126 1156 1164 10.1016/0002-8703(93)90669-Z 8237760 (Pubitemid 23330418)
10. Aortic valve pressure gradients in patients with aortic valve stenosis: quantification with velocity-encoded cine MR imaging. Eichenberger AC, Jenni R, Von Schulthess GK, AJR Am J Roentgenol 1993 160 971 977 10.2214/ajr.160.5. 8470612 8470612 (Pubitemid 23141234)
11. Turbulent flow effects on NMR imaging: measurement of turbulent intensity. Gao JH, Gore JO, Med Phys 1991 18 1045 1051 10.1118/1.596645 1961145
12. Magnetic resonance jet velocity mapping in mitral and aortic valve stenosis. Kilner PJ, Manzara CC, Mohiaddin RH, et al. Circulation 1993 87 1239 1248 10.1161/01.CIR.87.4.1239 8462150 (Pubitemid 23110396)
13. NMR signal loss from turbulence: models of time dependence compared with data. Kuethe DO, Gao JH, Phys RevE 1995 51 3252 3262
14. MRI phase contrast velocity and flow errors in turbulent stenotic jets. O'Brien KR, Cowan BR, Jain M, Stewart RAH, Kerr AJ, Young AA, J Magn Reson Imaging 2008 28 210 218 10.1002/jmri.21395 18581344 (Pubitemid 351956485)
15. Inconsistencies of echocardiographic criteria for the grading of aortic valve stenosis. Minners J, Allgeier M, Gohlke-Baerwolf C, Kienzle R-P, Neumann F-J, Jander N, Eur Heart J 2008 29 1043 1048 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm543 18156619 (Pubitemid 351844672)
16. Disagreement between Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance and Echo-Doppler Transvalvular Pressure Gradients. Garcia J, Kadem L, Larose E, Pibarot P, Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of ISMRM Montreal, Canada 2011 1209
17. New insights in the disagreement of transvalvular mean pressure gradient measured by transthoracic echo-Doppler and cardiovascular magnetic resonance in patients with aortic stenosis. Garcia J, Capoulade R, Kadem L, Larose E, Pibarot P, Proceedings of the 21th Annual Meeting of ISMRM Salt Lake City, USA 2013 64
18. Pressure recovery in aortic stenosis: an in vitro study in a pulsatile flow model. Voelker W, Reul H, Stelzer T, Schmidt A, Karsch KR, J Am Coll Cardiol 1992 20 1585 1593 10.1016/0735-1097(92)90454-U 1452933 (Pubitemid 23007514)
19. " Overestimation " of catheter gradients by doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery. Baumgartner H, Stefenelli T, Niederberger J, Schima H, Maurer G, J Am Coll Cardiol 1999 33 1655 1661 10.1016/S0735-1097(99)00066-2 10334438
20. 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. Niederberger J, Schima H, Maurer G, Baumgartner H, Circulation 1996 94 1934 1940 10.1161/01.CIR.94.8.1934 8873671 (Pubitemid 26349308)
21. Assessment of aortic valve stenosis severity a new index based on the energy loss concept. Garcia D, Pibarot P, Dumesnil JG, Sakr F, Durand L-G, Circulation 2000 101 765 771 10.1161/01.CIR.101.7.765 10683350 (Pubitemid 30100083)
22. Impact of pressure recovery on echocardiographic assessment of asymptomatic aortic stenosis: a SEAS substudy. Bahlmann E, Cramariuc D, Gerdts E, et al. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2010 3 555 562 10.1016/j.jcmg.2009.11.019 20541709
23. Flow-dependent changes in Doppler-derived aortic valve effective orifice area are real and not due to artifact. Kadem L, Rieu R, Dumesnil JG, Durand L-G, Pibarot P, J Am Coll Cardiol 2006 47 131 137 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.05.100 16386676 (Pubitemid 43005176)
24. Ueber eine besondere Art der Tonerregung. Strouhal V, Annalen der Physik und Chemie 1878 241 216 251 10.1002/andp.18782411005
25. Echocardiographic assessment of valve stenosis: EAE/ASE recommendations for clinical practice. Baumgartner H, Hung J, Bermejo J, et al. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2009 22 1 23 10.1016/j.echo.2008.11.029 19130998
26. In vivo velocity and flow errors quantification by phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging. Garcia J, Kadem L, Larose E, Pibarot P, Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2008 2008 1377 1380 19162924
27. Improvements on the accuracy of derivative estimation from DPIV velocity measurements. Etebari A, Vlachos PP, Exp Fluids 2005 39 1040 1050 10.1007/s00348-005-0037-1 (Pubitemid 41690288)
28. On the evaluation of vorticity using cardiovascular magnetic resonance velocity measurements. Garcia J, Larose É Pibarot P, Kadem L, J Biomech Eng 2013 doi: 10.1115/1.4025385
29. 4D flow jet shear layer detection method for the measurement of effective orifice area and assessment of aortic stenosis severity. Garcia J, Barker AJ, Schnell S, Entezari P, Mahadevia R, Pibarot P, Carr JC, Markl M, J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2013 15 Suppl 1 241
30. Hydraulic formula for calculation of the area of the stenotic mitral valve, other cardiac valves, and central circulatory shunts. Gorlin R, Gorlin S, Am Heart J 1951 41 1 29 10.1016/0002-8703(51)90002-6 14799435
31. Measuring distributions of diffusivity in turbulent fluids with magnetic-resonance imaging. Kuethe DO, Phys Rev A 1989 40 4542 4551 10.1103/PhysRevA.40.4542 9902697
32. Turbulent fluctuation velocity: the most significant determinant of signal loss in stenotic vessels. Oshinski JN, Ku DN, Pettigrew RI, Magn Reson Med 1995 33 193 199 10.1002/mrm.1910330208 7707909
33. Discrepancies between catheter and Doppler estimates of valve effective orifice area can be predicted from the pressure recovery phenomenon. Garcia D, Dumesnil JG, Durand L-G, Kadem L, Pibarot P, J Am Coll Cardiol 2003 41 435 442 12575972
34. Potential role of Reynolds number in resolving Doppler- and catheter-based transvalvular gradient discrepancies in aortic stenosis. Adams JC, Jiamsripong P, Belohlavek M, et al. J Heart Valve Dis 2011 20 159 164 21560814
35. Turbulent/viscous interactions control Doppler/catheter pressure discrepancies in aortic stenosis. The role of the Reynolds number. Cape EG, Jones M, Yamada I, VanAuker MD, Valdes-Cruz LM, Circulation 1996 94 2975 2981 10.1161/01.CIR.94.11.2975 8941129 (Pubitemid 26411768)
36. Theoretical and practical differences between the Gorlin formula and the continuity equation for calculating aortic and mitral valve areas. Dumesnil J, Yoganathan AP, Am JCardiol 1991 67 1268 1272 10.1016/0002-9149(91)90939-I
37. What our eyes see is not necessarily what our heart feels. Pibarot P, Larose E, Cardiology 2008 109 122 125 10.1159/000105553 17713327
38. Magnetic resonance measurement of turbulent kinetic energy for the estimation of irreversible pressure loss in aortic stenosis. Dyverfeldt P, Hope MD, Tseng EE, Saloner D, JACC. Cardiovasc imaging 2013 6 64 71 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.07.017 23328563
39. Viscous energy loss in aortic valve disease patients. Barker AJ, van Ooij P, Bandi K, Garcia J, Mccarthy P, Carr J, Malaisrie C, Markl M, Proceedings of the ASME Summer Bioengineering Conference Sunriver, USA 2013 14142
40. A novel method for the assessment of valve effective orifice area using 4D flow shear layer detection method in patients with aortic stenosis. Garcia J, Markl M, Schnell S, Entezari P, Mahadevia R, Wu C, Malaisrie SC, Pibarot P, Carr J, Barker AJ, Proceedings of the 21th Annual Meeting of ISMRM Salt Lake City, USA 2013 1329
41. Bicuspid aortic valve is associated with altered wall shear stress in the ascending aorta. Barker AJ, Markl M, Bürk J, Lorenz R, Bock J, Bauer S, Schulz-Menger J, von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff F, Circulation cardiovasc imaging 2012 5 457 466 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.112.973370
42. Aortic dilation in bicuspid aortic valve disease: flow pattern is a major contributor and differs with valve fusion type. Bissell MM, Hess AT, Biasiolli L, et al. Circulation cardiovasc imaging 2013 6 499 507 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.113. 000528
43. Assessment of Transvalvular Flow Jet Eccentricity in Aortic Stenosis. Garcia J, Kadem L, Larose É Pibarot P, Proceedings of 20th Annual Meeting of ISMRM Melbourne, Australia 2012 1186
44. Time-resolved, 3-dimensional magnetic resonance flow analysis at 3 T: visualization of normal and pathological aortic vascular hemodynamics. Frydrychowicz A, Harloff A, Jung B, et al. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2007 31 9 15 10.1097/01.rct.0000232918.45158.c9 17259827 (Pubitemid 46183336)
45. Emerging trends in CV flow visualization. Sengupta PP, Pedrizzetti G, Kilner PJ, Kheradvar A, Ebbers T, Tonti G, Fraser AG, Narula J, JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2012 5 305 316 10.1016/j.jcmg.2012.01.003 22421178