Is cardiac magnetic resonance imaging as accurate as echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis?

Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

Volumn 22, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 480-487

  Wong, Sophia ^a   Spina, Roberto ^b   Toemoe, Sianne ^c   Dhital, Kumud ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b ST VINCENT S HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

Author keywords

Aortic stenosis; Aortic valve; Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; Transoesophageal echocardiography; Transthoracic echocardiography; Valvular disease

Indexed keywords

AORTA STENOSIS; AORTA VALVE STENOSIS; ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC TEST ACCURACY STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; HEART CATHETERIZATION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RELIABILITY; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TRANSESOPHAGEAL ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; TRANSTHORACIC ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; AGED; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; BENCHMARKING; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DOPPLER ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PREDICTIVE VALUE; PROGNOSIS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; STRESS ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY;

AGED; AORTIC VALVE; AORTIC VALVE STENOSIS; BENCHMARKING; CARDIAC CATHETERIZATION; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, DOPPLER; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, STRESS; ECHOCARDIOGRAPHY, TRANSESOPHAGEAL; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; PROGNOSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX;

EID: 84965102992     PISSN: 15699293     EISSN: 15699285     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivv362     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Dunning J, Prendergast B, Mackway-Jones K. Towards evidence-based medicine in cardiothoracic surgery: best BETS. Interact CardioVasc Thorac Surg 2003;405-9.
2. Caruthers S, Lin S, Brown P, Watkins M, Williams T, Lehr K et al. Practical value of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging for clinical quantification of aortic valve stenosis: comparison with echocardiography. Circulation 2003;108:2236-43.
3. Kupfahl C, Honold M, Meinhardt G, Vogelsberg H, Wagner A, Mahrholdt H et al. Evaluation of aortic stenosis by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with established routine clinical techniques. Heart 2004;90:893-901.
4. Debl K, Djavidani B, Seitz J, Nitz W, Schmid F, Muders F et al. Planimetry of aortic valve area in aortic stenosis by magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2005;40:631-6.
5. Reant P, Lederlin M, Lafitte S, Serri K, Montaudon M, Corneloup O et al. Absolute assessment of aortic valve stenosis by planimetry using cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with transesophageal echocardiography, transthoracic echocardiography, and cardiac catheterisation. Eur J Radiol 2006;59:276-83.
6. Garcia J, Kadem L, Larose E, Clavel MA, Pibarot P. Comparison between cardiovascular magnetic resonance and transthoracic Doppler echocardiography for the estimation of effective orifice area in aortic stenosis. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson 2011;13:25.
7. Jabbour A, Ismail T, Moat N, Gulati A, Roussin I, Alpendurada F et al. Multimodality imaging in transcatheter aortic valve implantation and post-procedural aortic regurgitation: comparison among cardiovascular magnetic resonance, cardiac computed tomography, and echocardiography. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011;58:2165-73.
8. Paelinck B, Van Herck P, Rodrigus I, Claeys M, Laborde JC, Parizel P et al. Comparison of magnetic resonance imaging of aortic valve stenosis and aortic root to multimodality imaging for selection of transcatheter aortic valve implantation candidates. Am J Cardiol 2011;108:92-8.
9. Defrance C, Bollache E, Kachenoura N, Perdrix L, Hrynchyshyn N, Bruguiere E et al. Evaluation of aortic valve stenosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparison of an original semiautomated analysis of phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance with Doppler echocardiography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2012;5:604-12.
10. Pontone G, Andreini D, Bartorelli A, Bertella E, Mushtaq S, Gripari P et al. Comparison of accuracy of aortic root annulus assessment with cardiac magnetic resonance versus echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol 2013;112:1790-9.
11. Barone-Rochette G, Pierard S, Seldrum S, de Meester de Ravenstein C, Melchior J, Maes F et al. Aortic valve area, stroke volume, left ventricular hypertrophy, remodeling, and fibrosis in aortic stenosis assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: comparison between high and low gradient and normal and low flow aortic stenosis. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging 2013;6:1009-17.
12. Chin C, Khaw H, Luo E, Tan S, White A, Newby D et al. Echocardiography underestimates stroke volume and aortic valve area: implications for patients with small-area low-gradient aortic stenosis. Can J Cardiol 2014; 30:1064-72.
13. Speiser U, Quick S, Haas D, Youssef A, Waessnig N, Ibrahim K et al. 3-T magnetic resonance for determination of aortic valve area: A comparison to echocardiography. Scand Cardiovasc J 2014;48:176-83.