OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare velocity-encoded cine cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) with an established echocardiographic method for noninvasive measurement of aortic valve area (AVA) using the continuity equation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty consecutive young adults with stenotic bicuspid aortic valves were examined with CMR and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). CMR AVA was calculated by the continuity equation, dividing stroke volume by the aortic velocity-time integral (VTIAorta), the stroke volume measured both by ventricular volume analysis and by phase contrast velocity mapping at 4 levels (1 subvalvar and 3 supravalvar). Stroke volumes measured at all levels correlated well with those from volumetric analysis. The CMR AVAs calculated using volumetric analysis and VTIAorta from jet velocity mapping correlated and agreed well with TTE AVA measurements (R2 = 0.83). When CMR AVA was calculated more rapidly using volume flow and VTIAorta both measured from the same trans-jet velocity acquisition, R2 was 0.74, with a bias and limits of agreement of 0.02 (-0.44, 0.47) cm2. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity equation calculation of the AVA using CMR velocity mapping, with or without ventricular volumetric measurement, correlated and agreed well with the comparable and widely accepted TTE approach.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to compare velocity-encoded cine cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) with an established echocardiographic method for noninvasive measurement of aortic valve area (AVA) using the continuity equation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty consecutive young adults with stenotic bicuspid aortic valves were examined with CMR and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). CMR AVA was calculated by the continuity equation, dividing stroke volume by the aortic velocity-time integral (VTIAorta), the stroke volume measured both by ventricular volume analysis and by phase contrast velocity mapping at 4 levels (1 subvalvar and 3 supravalvar). Stroke volumes measured at all levels correlated well with those from volumetric analysis. The CMR AVAs calculated using volumetric analysis and VTIAorta from jet velocity mapping correlated and agreed well with TTE AVA measurements (R2 = 0.83). When CMR AVA was calculated more rapidly using volume flow and VTIAorta both measured from the same trans-jet velocity acquisition, R2 was 0.74, with a bias and limits of agreement of 0.02 (-0.44, 0.47) cm2. CONCLUSIONS: Continuity equation calculation of the AVA using CMR velocity mapping, with or without ventricular volumetric measurement, correlated and agreed well with the comparable and widely accepted TTE approach.
Authors: Julio Garcia; Michael Markl; Susanne Schnell; Bradley Allen; Pegah Entezari; Riti Mahadevia; S Chris Malaisrie; Philippe Pibarot; James Carr; Alex J Barker Journal: Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2014-04-24 Impact factor: 2.546
Authors: Alexia Rossi; Denise van der Linde; Sing Chien Yap; Thomas Lapinskas; Sharon Kirschbaum; Tirza Springeling; Maarten Witsenburg; Judith Cuypers; Adriaan Moelker; Gabriel P Krestin; Arie van Dijk; Mark Johnson; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Jolien W Roos-Hesselink Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-09-26 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Julio Garcia; Oscar R Marrufo; Alfredo O Rodriguez; Eric Larose; Philippe Pibarot; Lyes Kadem Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2012-04-06 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Juliana Serafim da Silveira; Matthew Smyke; Adam V Rich; Yingmin Liu; Ning Jin; Debbie Scandling; Jennifer A Dickerson; Carlos E Rochitte; Subha V Raman; Lee C Potter; Rizwan Ahmad; Orlando P Simonetti Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2017-03-07 Impact factor: 5.364
Authors: Kieran R O'Brien; Ruvin S Gabriel; Andreas Greiser; Brett R Cowan; Alistair A Young; Andrew J Kerr Journal: J Cardiovasc Magn Reson Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 5.364