These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Comparison of low-volume versus standard-volume left ventriculography.
    Author: Hodges MC, Rollefson WA, Sample SA, Rubal BJ, Stajduhar KC.
    Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv; 2001 Mar; 52(3):314-9. PubMed ID: 11246243.
    Abstract:
    Left ventriculography provides useful information about cardiac function, wall motion, and mitral regurgitation (MR). However, standard volumes of contrast agent frequently are associated with ventricular ectopy. This study compares the use of low-volume (Low-vol) ventriculography to standard volume (Std-vol) ventriculography. Left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF), changes in LV end-diastolic pressure (LVEDP), the incidence of ectopy, and > 2+ MR were prospectively determined from the random order use of standard (15 mL/ second for 3 sec) and low-volume (15 mL/sec for 1 sec) contrast agents in 102 patients. Each patient served as his or her own control. Twenty-seven percent of the 204 ventriculograms were not interpretable due to ectopy. Ectopy > or = 3 beats was more common with Std-vol angiograms (41% vs. 14%, P < 0.001). Post-injection LVEDP increased from baseline after both Std-vol and Low-vol injections (P < 0.001). In patients for whom both angiograms could be interpreted (n = 58), no differences were noted between planimetered EFs (Low-vol = 61 +/- 20% vs. Std-vol = 62 +/- 20%, with r = 0.87; P < 0.001). A Bland-Altman test of agreement indicated a mean difference +/- 95% CI = -2 +/- 19%. Low-volume ventriculography reduces contrast load and ectopy while providing similar estimates of EF compared with standard volumes.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]