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: Which method should be the reference method to evaluate the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis? Gorlin's method versus 3D-echo.
    Author: Pérez de Isla L, Casanova C, Almería C, Rodrigo JL, Cordeiro P, Mataix L, Aubele AL, Lang R, Zamorano JL.
    Journal: Eur J Echocardiogr; 2007 Dec; 8(6):470-3. PubMed ID: 17046330.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: Several studies have shown a wide variability among different methods to determine the valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis. Our aim was to evaluate if 3D-echo planimetry is more accurate than the Gorlin method to measure the valve area. METHODS: Twenty-six patients with mitral stenosis underwent 2D and 3D-echo echocardiographic examinations and catheterization. Valve area was estimated by different methods. A median value of the mitral valve area, obtained from the measurements of three classical non-invasive methods (2D planimetry, pressure half-time and PISA method), was used as the reference method and it was compared with 3D-echo planimetry and Gorlin's method. RESULTS: Our results showed that the accuracy of 3D-echo planimetry is superior to the accuracy of the Gorlin method for the assessment of mitral valve area. CONCLUSIONS: We should keep in mind the fact that 3D-echo planimetry may be a better reference method than the Gorlin method to assess the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]