Literature DB >> 14646414

The fetal Doppler mechanical PR interval: a validation study.

Julie Glickstein1, Jill Buyon, Mimi Kim, Deborah Friedman.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the accuracy of pulsed Doppler-derived fetal PR interval measurements obtained by physicians participating in a multicenter prospective fetal echocardiographic study.
METHODS: Echocardiograms on healthy fetuses were performed and evaluated by 15 pediatric cardiologists/perinatologists across the United States who are participating in a larger clinical trial involving fetuses at risk for autoantibody-associated congenital heart block. Prior to enrolling women in the main trial, each physician was provided with a teaching tape to demonstrate how the pulsed Doppler-derived PR interval is measured. The procedure involves placing a gated pulsed Doppler sample volume in the left ventricle at the junction of the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve and the left ventricular outflow tract in an apical 5-chamber view, and simultaneously obtaining left ventricular filling and emptying. Time intervals are measured from the onset of the mitral A wave (atrial systole) to the onset of the aortic pulsed Doppler tracing (ventricular systole). This represents the mechanical PR interval. Each physician measured the pulsed Doppler-derived fetal PR interval on 5 different subjects recruited from the physician's specific site. To validate each physician's technique, the tapes were sent to a central facility and the same intervals were remeasured by an experienced central reader (D.M.F.). A physician was determined to have adequate ability to measure the fetal PR interval if all 5 measurements were within +/- 30 ms of the central reader's measurements, where 30 ms corresponds to 25% of the mean observed in normative PR interval data. This difference was deemed to be the minimum clinically important difference in Doppler PR interval.
RESULTS: Fourteen of the 15 physicians were considered to have adequate ability to measure the fetal PR interval according to our established criterion. The overall mean difference between the physicians and the central reader's measurements was -0.26 +/- 11.04 ms (p = 0.84). In addition, 95% of the observed differences were included in the interval (-22.23 to 21.81), which is well within our clinically acceptable range of +/- 30 ms.
CONCLUSIONS: The pulsed Doppler assessment of the mechanical PR interval in the fetus can be accurately performed after minimal training. This technique may be a valuable tool for identification of early and potentially reversible conduction abnormalities in fetuses at risk for more advanced and permanent forms of heart block associated with maternal antibodies to SSA/Ro-SSB/La. Copyright 2004 S. Karger AG, Basel

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14646414     DOI: 10.1159/000074256

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fetal Diagn Ther        ISSN: 1015-3837            Impact factor:   2.587


  11 in total

1.  Doppler fetal mechanical PR interval prolongation with positive maternal anti-RNP but negative SSA/Ro and SSB/La auto-antibodies.

Authors:  Ruben J Acherman; Deborah M Friedman; Jill P Buyon; Joel Schwartz; William J Castillo; Robert C Rollins; William N Evans
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.050

2.  Assessment of atrioventricular conduction by echocardiography and magnetocardiography in normal and anti-Ro/SSA-antibody-positive pregnancies.

Authors:  B F Cuneo; S Bitant; J F Strasburger; A M Kaizer; R T Wakai
Journal:  Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 7.299

Review 3.  Finding the "PR-fect" solution: what is the best tool to measure fetal cardiac PR intervals for the detection and possible treatment of early conduction disease?

Authors:  Colin K L Phoon; Mimi Y Kim; Jill P Buyon; Deborah M Friedman
Journal:  Congenit Heart Dis       Date:  2012-04-12       Impact factor: 2.007

Review 4.  Perinatal arrhythmias: diagnosis and management.

Authors:  Janette F Strasburger; Bageshree Cheulkar; Heather J Wichman
Journal:  Clin Perinatol       Date:  2007-12       Impact factor: 3.430

5.  Prospective evaluation of fetuses with autoimmune-associated congenital heart block followed in the PR Interval and Dexamethasone Evaluation (PRIDE) Study.

Authors:  Deborah M Friedman; Mimi Y Kim; Joshua A Copel; Carolina Llanos; Claudine Davis; Jill P Buyon
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2009-03-04       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 6.  Epidemiology, etiology, detection, and treatment of autoantibody-associated congenital heart block in neonatal lupus.

Authors:  Deborah M Friedman; Ann Rupel; Jill P Buyon
Journal:  Curr Rheumatol Rep       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 4.592

7.  A review of congenital heart block.

Authors:  Dm Friedman; Lj Duncanson; J Glickstein; Jp Buyon
Journal:  Images Paediatr Cardiol       Date:  2003-07

Review 8.  Atrioventricular block during fetal life.

Authors:  Lindsey E Hunter; John M Simpson
Journal:  J Saudi Heart Assoc       Date:  2014-07-10

9.  The use of non-invasive fetal electrocardiography in diagnosing second-degree fetal atrioventricular block.

Authors:  Igor Lakhno; Joachim A Behar; Julien Oster; Vyacheslav Shulgin; Oleksii Ostras; Fernando Andreotti
Journal:  Matern Health Neonatol Perinatol       Date:  2017-08-03

Review 10.  Anti-SSA/Ro antibodies and the heart: more than complete congenital heart block? A review of electrocardiographic and myocardial abnormalities and of treatment options.

Authors:  Nathalie Costedoat-Chalumeau; Zahir Amoura; Elisabeth Villain; Laurence Cohen; Jean-Charles Piette
Journal:  Arthritis Res Ther       Date:  2005-01-25       Impact factor: 5.156

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.