Literature DB >> 2007699

Comparison of cardiac catheterization and Doppler echocardiography in the decision to operate in aortic and mitral valve disease.

J Slater1, A J Gindea, R S Freedberg, L A Chinitz, P A Tunick, B P Rosenzweig, H E Winer, A Goldfarb, J L Perez, E Glassman.   

Abstract

Clinical decisions utilizing either Doppler echocardiographic or cardiac catheterization data were compared in adult patients with isolated or combined aortic and mitral valve disease. A clinical decision to operate, not operate or remain uncertain was made by experienced cardiologists given either Doppler echocardiographic or cardiac catheterization data. A prospective evaluation was performed on 189 consecutive patients (mean age 67 years) with valvular heart disease who were being considered for surgical treatment on the basis of clinical information. All patients underwent cardiac catheterization and detailed Doppler echocardiographic examination. Three sets of two cardiologist decision makers who did not know patient identity were given clinical information in combination with either Doppler echocardiographic or cardiac catheterization data. The combination of Doppler echocardiographic and clinical data was considered inadequate for clinical decision making in 21% of patients with aortic and 5% of patients with mitral valve disease. The combination of cardiac catheterization and clinical data was considered inadequate in 2% of patients with aortic and 2% of patients with mitral valve disease. Among the remaining patients, the cardiologists using echocardiographic or angiographic data were in agreement on the decision to operate or not operate in 113 (76% overall). When the data were analyzed by specific valve lesion, decisions based on Doppler echocardiography or catheterization were in agreement in 92%, 90%, 83% and 69%, respectively, of patients with aortic regurgitation, mitral stenosis, aortic stenosis and mitral regurgitation. Differences in cardiac output determination, estimation of valvular regurgitation and information concerning coronary anatomy were the main reasons for different clinical management decisions. These results suggest that for most adult patients with aortic or mitral valve disease, alone or in combination, Doppler echocardiographic data enable the clinician to make the same decision reached with catheterization data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 2007699     DOI: 10.1016/0735-1097(91)90825-t

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol        ISSN: 0735-1097            Impact factor:   24.094


  7 in total

Review 1.  How should we manage symptomatic aortic stenosis in the patient who is 80 or older?

Authors:  D C Sprigings; J C Forfar
Journal:  Br Heart J       Date:  1995-11

2.  New quantitative three-dimensional echocardiographic indices of mitral valve stenosis: new 3D indices of mitral stenosis.

Authors:  Gabriel Valocik; Otto Kamp; Herman F J Mannaerts; Cees A Visser
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2007-02-22       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Direction, site of origin and duration of jets: implications in the color Doppler assessment of valvar lesions. With emphasis on pure and combined mitral and bicuspid aortic lesions.

Authors:  C Veyrat; D Kalmanson
Journal:  Int J Card Imaging       Date:  1993-09

4.  Not all right-sided hearts are the same-the importance of identifying the correct diagnosis.

Authors:  Faisal Mujib Siddiqui; Edmundo Raul Rubio; Vishal M Patel; Sameh Aziz; Susanti Ie
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-05

5.  Mitral regurgitation determined by radionuclide cardiography: dependence on posture and exercise.

Authors:  H Kelbaek; J Aldershvile; K Skagen; P Hildebrandt; S L Nielsen
Journal:  Br Heart J       Date:  1994-08

Review 6.  The cumulative risks of prolapsing mitral valve. 40 years of follow-up.

Authors:  D W Chapman
Journal:  Tex Heart Inst J       Date:  1994

7.  Transesophageal echocardiographic detection of thoracic aortic plaque could noninvasively predict significant obstructive coronary artery disease.

Authors:  H Y Kim; C J Kim; T H Rho; H J Youn; S W Jin; H Y Rhim; J W Park; H K Jeon; J S Chae; J H Kim; S J Hong; K B Choi
Journal:  Korean J Intern Med       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.884

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.