Literature DB >> 25392817

A comparative analysis of ECG-gated steady state free precession magnetic resonance imaging versus transthoracic echocardiography for evaluation of aortic root dimensions.

Edward T D Hoey1, Vijaya Pakala1, Rahil H Kassamali1, Arul Ganeshan1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Accurate and reproducible measurement of aortic root dimensions is essential to inform clinical decision making. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the first line test for assessment of the aortic root but has potential limitations due to its limited field of view and restricted acoustic windows. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the "gold standard" technique for assessment of cardiac morphology and recently MRI reference ranges for aortic root dimensions have been published. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare aortic root measurements obtained from TTE with those derived from cardiac MRI.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight patients (40 males, 28 females) who had undergone both cardiac MRI and TTE imaging within a 4-month interval (mean 62 days) were included. Steady-state-free precession MRI cine imaging was performed with an acquisition plane perpendicular to the aortic root and through the true cross sectional aortic valve plane. A cusp-commissure dimension from inside wall to inside wall in end-diastole was recorded and compared with standardized TTE derived Valsalva sinus measurements. Pearson correlation coefficients and a paired t-test were used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: Mean aortic root dimension by TTE was 3.2±0.5 cm and MRI was 3.4±0.4 cm with a Pearson correlation coefficient of >0.7. Mean difference between TTE and MRI was 0.2±0.3 (P<0.001) with MRI producing a consistently higher measure. In four patients with a dilated aortic root by MRI the TTE measurement was within the normal reference range. In patients with a dilated aortic root (n=19) the mean difference was 0.2±0.4 cm (P<0.05) with MRI consistently producing the larger measure. In patients with a non-dilated aortic root t (n=49) the mean difference was 0.2±0.3 cm (P<0.05) with MRI consistently producing the larger measure.
CONCLUSIONS: There is a high level of correlation between TTE and MRI derived aortic root measurements at the Valsalva sinus level. MRI consistently measures the aortic root dimension higher than TTE which may under diagnose patients with a mildly dilated aortic root. Further investigation is required to properly integrate MRI into imaging assessment algorithms.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aortic root; magnetic resonance imaging (MRI); transthoracic echocardiography (TTE)

Year:  2014        PMID: 25392817      PMCID: PMC4213414          DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-4292.2014.10.06

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg        ISSN: 2223-4306


  10 in total

1.  Aortic root dilatation at sinuses of valsalva and aortic regurgitation in hypertensive and normotensive subjects: The Hypertension Genetic Epidemiology Network Study .

Authors:  V Palmieri; J N Bella; D K Arnett; M J Roman; A Oberman; D W Kitzman; P N Hopkins; M Paranicas; D C Rao; R B Devereux
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 2.  Structure and anatomy of the aortic root.

Authors:  Siew Yen Ho
Journal:  Eur J Echocardiogr       Date:  2009-01

Review 3.  What is new in dilatation of the ascending aorta? Review of current literature and practical advice for the cardiologist.

Authors:  Luc Cozijnsen; Richard L Braam; Reinier A Waalewijn; Marc A A M Schepens; Bart L Loeys; Matthijs F M van Oosterhout; Daniela Q C M Barge-Schaapveld; Barbara J M Mulder
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 4.  Evaluation of the aortic root with MRI and MDCT angiography: spectrum of disease findings.

Authors:  Edward T D Hoey; Arul Ganeshan; Sunil K Nadar; Gurpreet Singh Gulati
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Aortic root dilatation as a cause of isolated, severe aortic regurgitation. Prevalence, clinical and echocardiographic patterns, and relation to left ventricular hypertrophy and function.

Authors:  M J Roman; R B Devereux; N W Niles; C Hochreiter; P Kligfield; N Sato; M C Spitzer; J S Borer
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  2008 Focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 1998 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease): endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Authors:  Robert O Bonow; Blase A Carabello; Kanu Chatterjee; Antonio C de Leon; David P Faxon; Michael D Freed; William H Gaasch; Bruce W Lytle; Rick A Nishimura; Patrick T O'Gara; Robert A O'Rourke; Catherine M Otto; Pravin M Shah; Jack S Shanewise
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2008-09-26       Impact factor: 29.690

7.  The aortic root: comparison of measurements from ECG-gated CT angiography with transthoracic echocardiography.

Authors:  Iclal Ocak; Joan M Lacomis; Christopher R Deible; Karen Pealer; Yoav Parag; Friedrich Knollmann
Journal:  J Thorac Imaging       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.000

8.  Aortic root measurement by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: specification of planes and lines of measurement and corresponding normal values.

Authors:  Elisabeth D Burman; Jennifer Keegan; Philip J Kilner
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-07-30       Impact factor: 7.792

9.  Cine MR imaging of heart valve dysfunction with segmented true fast imaging with steady state free precession.

Authors:  Gabriele A Krombach; Harald Kühl; Arno Bücker; Andreas H Mahnken; Elmar Spüntrup; Claudia Lipke; Jörg Schröder; Rolf W Günther
Journal:  J Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2004-01       Impact factor: 4.813

Review 10.  Standardized cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) protocols, society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance: board of trustees task force on standardized protocols.

Authors:  Christopher M Kramer; Jorg Barkhausen; Scott D Flamm; Raymond J Kim; Eike Nagel
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Magn Reson       Date:  2008-07-07       Impact factor: 5.364

  10 in total
  3 in total

1.  Quantitative cardiovascular imaging.

Authors:  Zhonghua Sun
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2014-10

2.  Assessment of aortic diameter in Marfan patients: intraindividual comparison of 3D-Dixon and 2D-SSFP magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Felicia Wright; Malte Warncke; Martin Sinn; Inka Ristow; Alexander Lenz; Christoph Riedel; Bjoern P Schoennagel; Shuo Zhang; Michael G Kaul; Gerhard Adam; Yskert von Kodolitsch; Susanne Sehner; Peter Bannas
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2022-10-21       Impact factor: 7.034

3.  Comparison of cine cardiac magnetic resonance and echocardiography derived diameters of the aortic root in a large population-based cohort.

Authors:  Jan-Per Wenzel; Julius Nikorowitsch; Ramona Bei der Kellen; Luisa Dohm; Evaldas Girdauskas; Gunnar Lund; Peter Bannas; Stefan Blankenberg; Tilo Kölbel; Ersin Cavus; Kai Müllerleile; Michael Gerhard Kaul; Gerhard Adam; Julius Matthias Weinrich
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-09-12       Impact factor: 4.996

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.