Literature DB >> 26601702

Normal Values and Differences in Ascending Aortic Diameter in a Healthy Population of Adults as Measured by the Pediatric versus Adult American Society of Echocardiography Guidelines.

Eduardo Bossone1, Eugene Yuriditsky2, Sameer Desale3, Francesco Ferrara1, Olga Vriz4, Federico M Asch5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of uniformity across echocardiographic society guidelines as to how the diameter of the ascending aorta is to be measured. The aims of this study were to compare measurements done using the diastolic leading edge-to-leading edge and systolic inner edge-to-inner edge (SIE) techniques in a large cohort of healthy adult individuals and to report the normal values for adults using the SIE technique.
METHODS: Aortic diameters obtained according to the two guideline recommendations at the aortic annuls, sinuses of Valsalva, sinotubular junction, and ascending aorta in 1,148 healthy adult volunteers were compared. Bland-Altman analysis, paired t tests, and intraclass correlation coefficients were evaluated at each segment. SIE values are reported as normative data, according to age, gender, and body surface area.
RESULTS: The diastolic leading edge-to-leading edge convention yielded smaller diameters (compared with SIE) at the aortic annulus and ascending aorta and larger diameters at the sinus of Valsalva and sinotubular junction (P < .001 for all). There was excellent correlation between these techniques, with intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.88 to 0.96. Interobserver variability was minimal and similar for both techniques. Using the SIE technique, diameters were larger for men and increased with age and larger body surface area.
CONCLUSIONS: Although there was a statistically significant difference in aortic diameter measures between the two conventions used, this difference was very small and correlations were excellent, suggesting that the difference has no clinical significance. The authors recommend that a standard convention be adopted within the American Society of Echocardiography and across all professional cardiovascular imaging societies for consistency and improved communication.
Copyright © 2016 American Society of Echocardiography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Aorta; Aortic systolic dimensions; Chamber quantification; Guidelines

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26601702     DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2015.09.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr        ISSN: 0894-7317            Impact factor:   5.251


  5 in total

1.  Measuring the aorta in the era of multimodality imaging: still to be agreed.

Authors:  Elena Díaz-Peláez; Manuel Barreiro-Pérez; Ana Martín-García; Pedro L Sanchez
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-05       Impact factor: 2.895

2.  Left Ventricular Dilation: When Pediatric Meet Adult Guidelines.

Authors:  Jill Harmon; Kacy Sisco; Marc Dutro; Clifford L Cua
Journal:  Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2017-09-07       Impact factor: 1.655

3.  Aortic size in children: Systolic measurements are different from diastolic measurements.

Authors:  Mohammad F Al-Mousily; Leo Lopez; Juan Carlos Muniz; Nao Sasaki; Irwin Seltzer; Joshua Gruber; Elizabeth Welch
Journal:  Ann Pediatr Cardiol       Date:  2021-03-26

Review 4.  Marfan syndrome.

Authors:  Dianna M Milewicz; Alan C Braverman; Julie De Backer; Shaine A Morris; Catherine Boileau; Irene H Maumenee; Guillaume Jondeau; Arturo Evangelista; Reed E Pyeritz
Journal:  Nat Rev Dis Primers       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 65.038

5.  Low correlation between biometric parameters, cardiovascular risk factors and aortic dimensions by computed tomography coronary angiography.

Authors:  Ernesto Forte; Bruna Punzo; Marco Salvatore; Erica Maffei; Stefano Nistri; Carlo Cavaliere; Filippo Cademartiri
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-08-28       Impact factor: 1.817

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.