PURPOSE: To evaluate if left ventricular outflow tract/aortic valve (LVOT/AO) diameter ratio measured by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is an accurate marker for LVOT obstruction in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) compared to Doppler echocardiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 92 patients with HCM were divided into three groups based on their resting echocardiographic LVOT pressure gradient (PG): <30 mmHg at rest (nonobstructive, n = 31), <30 mmHg at rest, >30 mmHg after provocation (latent, n = 29), and >30 mmHg at rest (obstructive, n = 32). The end-systolic dimension of the LVOT on 3-chamber steady-state free precession (SSFP) CMR was divided by the end diastolic aortic valve diameter to calculate the LVOT/AO diameter ratio. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the LVOT/AO diameter ratio among the three subgroups (nonobstructive 0.60 ± 0.13, latent 0.41 ± 0.16, obstructive 0.24 ± 0.09, P < 0.001). There was a strong linear inverse correlation between the LVOT/AO diameter ratio and the log of the LVOT pressure gradient (r = -0.84, P < 0.001). For detection of a resting gradient >30 mmHg, the LVOT/AO diameter ratio the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.97). For detection of a resting and/or provoked gradient >30 mmHg, the LVOT/AO diameter ratio area under the ROC curve was 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.96). CONCLUSION: The LVOT/AO diameter ratio is an accurate, reproducible, noninvasive, and easy to use CMR marker to assess LVOT pressure gradients in patients with HCM.
PURPOSE: To evaluate if left ventricular outflow tract/aortic valve (LVOT/AO) diameter ratio measured by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is an accurate marker for LVOT obstruction in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) compared to Doppler echocardiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In all, 92 patients with HCM were divided into three groups based on their resting echocardiographic LVOT pressure gradient (PG): <30 mmHg at rest (nonobstructive, n = 31), <30 mmHg at rest, >30 mmHg after provocation (latent, n = 29), and >30 mmHg at rest (obstructive, n = 32). The end-systolic dimension of the LVOT on 3-chamber steady-state free precession (SSFP) CMR was divided by the end diastolic aortic valve diameter to calculate the LVOT/AO diameter ratio. RESULTS: There were significant differences in the LVOT/AO diameter ratio among the three subgroups (nonobstructive 0.60 ± 0.13, latent 0.41 ± 0.16, obstructive 0.24 ± 0.09, P < 0.001). There was a strong linear inverse correlation between the LVOT/AO diameter ratio and the log of the LVOT pressure gradient (r = -0.84, P < 0.001). For detection of a resting gradient >30 mmHg, the LVOT/AO diameter ratio the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-0.97). For detection of a resting and/or provoked gradient >30 mmHg, the LVOT/AO diameter ratio area under the ROC curve was 0.90 (95% CI 0.84-0.96). CONCLUSION: The LVOT/AO diameter ratio is an accurate, reproducible, noninvasive, and easy to use CMR marker to assess LVOT pressure gradients in patients with HCM.
Authors: Perry M Elliott; Juan R Gimeno; María T Tomé; Jaymin Shah; Deirdre Ward; Rajesh Thaman; Jens Mogensen; William J McKenna Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2006-06-05 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Kieran R O'Brien; Brett R Cowan; Manali Jain; Ralph A H Stewart; Andrew J Kerr; Alistair A Young Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-07 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: A Selcuk Adabag; Barry J Maron; Evan Appelbaum; Caitlin J Harrigan; Jacqueline L Buros; C Michael Gibson; John R Lesser; Constance A Hanna; James E Udelson; Warren J Manning; Martin S Maron Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-04-08 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Thomas A Hope; Michael Markl; Lars Wigström; Marcus T Alley; D Craig Miller; Robert J Herfkens Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: R Romano; M A Losi; T Migliore; C Contaldi; L S Parrella; A Caputi; S Betocchi Journal: Minerva Cardioangiol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 1.347
Authors: Bradley D Allen; Lubna Choudhury; Alex J Barker; Pim van Ooij; Jeremy D Collins; Robert O Bonow; James C Carr; Michael Markl Journal: Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2014-08-09 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Andrew J Swift; Jim M Wild; Scott K Nagle; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Christopher J François; Sean Fain; Kevin Johnson; Dave Capener; Edwin J R van Beek; David G Kiely; Kang Wang; Mark L Schiebler Journal: J Thorac Imaging Date: 2014-03 Impact factor: 3.000