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 two-dimensional and real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve area.
    Author: Furukawa A, Abe Y, Tanaka C, Ito K, Tabuchi I, Osawa K, Kino N, Nakagawa E, Komatsu R, Haze K, Yoshiyama M, Yoshikawa J, Naruko T, Itoh A.
    Journal: J Cardiol; 2012 May; 59(3):337-43. PubMed ID: 22402417.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: The accuracy of two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (2D-TEE) for the measurement of aortic valve area (AVA) in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) depends upon the cross-section selected for imaging. Real-time three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE) may overcome this limitation of 2D-TEE. The goal of this study was to compare 3D-TEE with 2D-TEE for the measurement of AVA. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with AS underwent TEE. In 2D-TEE, the aortic valve image was obtained at the orifice level in the short-axis view, and AVA was measured by planimetry of the acquired images (2D-AVA). In 3D-TEE, 3D data containing the entire aortic valve were obtained. Then, a short-axis cross-section containing the smallest orifice in mid-systole was cut from the 3D data during image postprocessing, and the AVA was measured by planimetry (3D-AVA). The 3D-AVA was significantly smaller than the 2D-AVA (0.79±0.35cm(2) vs. 0.93±0.40cm(2), p<0.0001), but there was a strong correlation between 3D-AVA and 2D-AVA (R=0.94). Although the frame rate was lower in 3D-TEE than in 2D-TEE (17±6Hz vs. 58±16Hz), the 3D-AVA determined at each frame during systole showed that the difference between 3D-AVA and 2D-AVA was not explained by the lower frame rate. The time required for image acquisition of the aortic valve was shorter with 3D-TEE than with 2D-TEE (p=0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: The geometric AVA is smaller with 3D-TEE than with 2D-TEE, and the difference is not due to the lower frame rate of 3D-TEE. The improved accuracy of 3D-TEE along with reduced image acquisition time indicates that 3D-TEE is superior to 2D-TEE for the assessment of AVA.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]