Literature DB >> 33778527

Left Ventricular Mid-Diastolic Wall Thickness: Normal Values for Coronary CT Angiography.

Jeroen Walpot1, Daniel Juneau1, Samia Massalha1, Girish Dwivedi1, Frank J Rybicki1, Benjamin J W Chow1, João R Inácio1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To generate normal reference values for left ventricular mid-diastolic wall thickness (LV-MDWT) measured by using CT angiography.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: LV-MDWT was measured in 2383 consecutive patients, without structural heart disease, undergoing prospective electrocardiographically (ECG) triggered mid-diastolic coronary CT angiography. LV-MDWT was manually measured on automatically segmented short-axis images according to the American Heart Association's 17-segment model. Commercially available automatic software was used to calculate the left ventricular (LV) mass.
RESULTS: Among the 2383 patients, average LV-MDWT was 7.24 mm ± 1.86 (standard deviation [SD]), with the basal anteroseptal segment being the thickest wall (8.71 mm ± 2.19) and the apical inferior segment being the thinnest wall (5.9 mm ± 1.58; P < .001). Over all LV segments, the maximum upper limit, as defined as 2 SD above the mean, was 13.6 mm for men (LV1) and 11.2 mm for women. For men, only the basal anterior segment was above 13 mm. There was a significant difference in average LV-MDWT between women and men with 6.47 mm ± 1.07 and 7.90 mm ± 1.24, respectively (P < .001). Significant differences in LV-MDWT were found in the subgroups aged less than 65 years and greater than or equal to 65 years (P < .001). There was a strong correlation between LV-MDWT and LV mass (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: Normal sex- and age-specific reference ranges for LV-MDWT in prospective ECG-triggered mid-diastolic coronary CT angiography have been provided. These benchmarks may expand the diagnostic and prognostic roles of CT angiography, beyond its role in the identification of coronary artery disease.© RSNA, 2019. 2019 by the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 33778527      PMCID: PMC7977927          DOI: 10.1148/ryct.2019190034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Cardiothorac Imaging        ISSN: 2638-6135


  22 in total

Review 1.  Standardized myocardial segmentation and nomenclature for tomographic imaging of the heart. A statement for healthcare professionals from the Cardiac Imaging Committee of the Council on Clinical Cardiology of the American Heart Association.

Authors:  Manuel D Cerqueira; Neil J Weissman; Vasken Dilsizian; Alice K Jacobs; Sanjiv Kaul; Warren K Laskey; Dudley J Pennell; John A Rumberger; Thomas Ryan; Mario S Verani
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2002-01-29       Impact factor: 29.690

2.  Cardiac CT assessment of left ventricular mass in mid-diastasis and its prognostic value.

Authors:  Ran Klein; Emmanuelle S Ametepe; Yeung Yam; Girish Dwivedi; Benjamin J Chow
Journal:  Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 6.875

3.  Recommendations for chamber quantification: a report from the American Society of Echocardiography's Guidelines and Standards Committee and the Chamber Quantification Writing Group, developed in conjunction with the European Association of Echocardiography, a branch of the European Society of Cardiology.

Authors:  Roberto M Lang; Michelle Bierig; Richard B Devereux; Frank A Flachskampf; Elyse Foster; Patricia A Pellikka; Michael H Picard; Mary J Roman; James Seward; Jack S Shanewise; Scott D Solomon; Kirk T Spencer; Martin St John Sutton; William J Stewart
Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 5.251

4.  Head-to-head comparison of left ventricular function assessment with 64-row computed tomography, biplane left cineventriculography, and both 2- and 3-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography: comparison with magnetic resonance imaging as the reference standard.

Authors:  Johannes Greupner; Elke Zimmermann; Andrea Grohmann; Hans-Peter Dübel; Till F Althoff; Till Althoff; Adrian C Borges; Wolfgang Rutsch; Peter Schlattmann; Bernd Hamm; Marc Dewey
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 24.094

5.  Left ventricular and left atrial dimensions and volumes: comparison between dual-source CT and echocardiography.

Authors:  Paul Stolzmann; Hans Scheffel; Pedro Trigo Trindade; André R Plass; Lars Husmann; Sebastian Leschka; Michele Genoni; Borut Marincek; Philipp A Kaufmann; Hatem Alkadhi
Journal:  Invest Radiol       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 6.016

6.  MDCT coronary angiography vs 2D echocardiography for the assessment of left ventricle functional parameters.

Authors:  R Malagò; D Tavella; W Mantovani; M D'Onofrio; G Caliari; A Pezzato; L Nicolì; P Benussi; R Pozzi Mucelli
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2011-01-12       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  Incremental prognostic value of estimated LV end-diastolic volume by cardiac CT.

Authors:  Kevin E Boczar; Mohammed Alam; Benjamin J W Chow; Girish Dwivedi
Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2014-12

8.  Mid-diastolic left ventricular volume and mass: Normal values for coronary computed tomography angiography.

Authors:  Daniel Juneau; Fernanda Erthal; Owen Clarkin; Atif Alzahrani; Ali Alenazy; Alomgir Hossain; Joao R Inacio; Girish Dwivedi; Alexander J Dick; Frank J Rybicki; Benjamin J W Chow
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr       Date:  2017-02-10

9.  Narrowing the phase window width in prospectively ECG-gated single heart beat 320-detector row coronary CT angiography.

Authors:  Michael L Steigner; Hansel J Otero; Tianxi Cai; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Leelakrishna Nallamshetty; Amanda G Whitmore; Hale Ersoy; Noah A Levit; Marcelo F Di Carli; Frank J Rybicki
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 2.357

Review 10.  Multimodality Imaging for Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Severity Grading: A Methodological Review.

Authors:  Maaike Alkema; Ernest Spitzer; Osama I I Soliman; Christian Loewe
Journal:  J Cardiovasc Ultrasound       Date:  2016-12-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.