91 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17381640)
1. Validation of the peak to mean pressure decrease ratio as a new method of assessing aortic stenosis using the Gorlin formula and the cardiovascular magnetic resonance-based hybrid method.
Haghi D; Kaden JJ; Suselbeck T; Fluechter S; Breithardt OA; Poerner T; Kalmar G; Borggrefe M; Papavassiliu T
Echocardiography; 2007 Apr; 24(4):335-9. PubMed ID: 17381640
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Evaluation of aortic valve stenosis using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: comparison of an original semiautomated analysis of phase-contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance with Doppler echocardiography.
Defrance C; Bollache E; Kachenoura N; Perdrix L; Hrynchyshyn N; Bruguière E; Redheuil A; Diebold B; Mousseaux E
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging; 2012 Sep; 5(5):604-12. PubMed ID: 22798520
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Aortic valve area discrepancy by Gorlin equation and Doppler echocardiography continuity equation: relationship to flow in patients with valvular aortic stenosis.
Burwash IG; Dickinson A; Teskey RJ; Tam JW; Chan KL
Can J Cardiol; 2000 Aug; 16(8):985-92. PubMed ID: 10978934
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Reliability of new and old Doppler echocardiographic indexes of the severity of aortic stenosis in patients with a low cardiac output.
Antonini-Canterin F; Huang G; Cervesato E; Faggiano P; Pavan D; Piazza R; Burelli C; Cassin M; Macor F; Zardo F; Nicolosi GL
Ital Heart J; 2002 Apr; 3(4):248-55. PubMed ID: 12025374
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. Usefulness of 3-Tesla cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the assessment of aortic stenosis severity in routine clinical practice.
Levy F; Iacuzio L; Civaia F; Rusek S; Dommerc C; Hugues N; Alexandrescu C; Dor V; Tribouilloy C; Dreyfus G
Arch Cardiovasc Dis; 2016 Nov; 109(11):618-625. PubMed ID: 27692661
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Evaluation of aortic valve stenosis using a hybrid approach of Doppler echocardiography and inert gas rebreathing.
Hamm K; Trinkmann F; Heggemann F; Gruettner J; Schmid-Bindert G; Borggrefe M; Haghi D; Saur J
In Vivo; 2012; 26(6):1027-33. PubMed ID: 23160688
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Evaluation of aortic stenosis severity: role of contrast echocardiography in comparison with conventional echocardiography and cardiac catheterization.
Almeida AG; Sargento L; Gabriel HM; da Costa JM; Morais J; Madeira F; David C; Oliveira J; da Cunha JC; Vagueiro MC
Rev Port Cardiol; 2002 May; 21(5):555-72. PubMed ID: 12174519
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Validation of conventional and simplified methods to calculate projected valve area at normal flow rate in patients with low flow, low gradient aortic stenosis: the multicenter TOPAS (True or Pseudo Severe Aortic Stenosis) study.
Clavel MA; Burwash IG; Mundigler G; Dumesnil JG; Baumgartner H; Bergler-Klein J; Sénéchal M; Mathieu P; Couture C; Beanlands R; Pibarot P
J Am Soc Echocardiogr; 2010 Apr; 23(4):380-6. PubMed ID: 20362927
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Assessment of aortic valve area combining echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging.
Nickl W; Füth R; Smettan J; Köhler T; Lankisch M; Kramer F; Krahn T; Barroso MC; Klein RM; Dinh W
Arq Bras Cardiol; 2012 Mar; 98(3):234-42. PubMed ID: 22370613
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Doppler derived aortic valve resistance in aortic stenosis: its hemodynamic validation.
Ho PP; Pauls GL; Lamberton DF; Portnoff JS; Pai RG; Shah PM
J Heart Valve Dis; 1994 May; 3(3):283-7. PubMed ID: 8087265
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Invasive assessment of doubtful aortic stenosis by measuring simultaneous transaortic gradient with a pressure wire.
Chopard R; Meneveau N; Plastaras P; Janin S; Seronde MF; Ecarnot F; Schiele F
Am J Cardiol; 2013 Jun; 111(12):1772-7. PubMed ID: 23540549
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Aortic valve stenotic area calculation from phase contrast cardiovascular magnetic resonance: the importance of short echo time.
O'Brien KR; Gabriel RS; Greiser A; Cowan BR; Young AA; Kerr AJ
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 2009 Nov; 11(1):49. PubMed ID: 19925667
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Assessment of left ventricular outflow tract geometry in non-stenotic and stenotic aortic valves by cardiovascular magnetic resonance.
Burgstahler C; Kunze M; Löffler C; Gawaz MP; Hombach V; Merkle N
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 2006; 8(6):825-9. PubMed ID: 17060105
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Prediction of the severity of aortic stenosis by Doppler aortic valve area determination: prospective Doppler-catheterization correlation in 100 patients.
Oh JK; Taliercio CP; Holmes DR; Reeder GS; Bailey KR; Seward JB; Tajik AJ
J Am Coll Cardiol; 1988 Jun; 11(6):1227-34. PubMed ID: 3366997
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Transaortic flow velocity from dual-source MDCT for the diagnosis of aortic stenosis severity.
Schultz CJ; Papadopoulou SL; Moelker A; Nuis RJ; Ten Kate GJ; Mollet NR; Geleijnse ML; de Feyter P; de Jaegere P; Serruys PW
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2011 Jul; 78(1):127-35. PubMed ID: 21681900
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cardiovascular magnetic resonance assessment of the aortic valve stenosis: an in vivo and ex vivo study.
Buchner S; Debl K; Schmid FX; Luchner A; Djavidani B
BMC Med Imaging; 2015 Aug; 15():34. PubMed ID: 26306577
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Precision of forty slice spiral computed tomography for quantifying aortic valve stenosis: comparison with echocardiography and validation against cardiac catheterization.
Lembcke A; Thiele H; Lachnitt A; Enzweiler CN; Wagner M; Hein PA; Eddicks S; Kivelitz DE
Invest Radiol; 2008 Oct; 43(10):719-28. PubMed ID: 18791414
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Grading of aortic valve stenosis at 64-slice spiral computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography and calibration against cardiac catheterization.
Lembcke A; Woinke M; Borges AC; Dohmen PM; Lachnitt A; Westermann Y; Geigenmueller A; Hermann KG; Butler C; Thiele H; Kivelitz DE
Invest Radiol; 2009 Jun; 44(6):360-8. PubMed ID: 19412115
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. In-vivo analysis of the instantaneous transvalvular pressure difference-flow relationship in aortic valve stenosis: implications of unsteady fluid-dynamics for the clinical assessment of disease severity.
Bermejo J; Antoranz JC; Burwash IG; Alvarez JL; Moreno M; García-Fernández MA; Otto CM
J Heart Valve Dis; 2002 Jul; 11(4):557-66. PubMed ID: 12150306
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Usefulness of the right parasternal view and non-imaging continuous-wave Doppler transducer for the evaluation of the severity of aortic stenosis in the modern area.
de Monchy CC; Lepage L; Boutron I; Leye M; Detaint D; Hyafil F; Brochet E; Iung B; Vahanian A; Messika-Zeitoun D
Eur J Echocardiogr; 2009 May; 10(3):420-4. PubMed ID: 19036750
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
