Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Standard

Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography : comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. / Larsen, Linnea Hornbech; Kofoed, Klaus Fuglsang; Carstensen, Helle Gervig; Mejdahl, Mads Rams; Andersen, Mads Jønsson; Kjaergaard, Jesper; Nielsen, Olav Wendelboe; Køber, Lars; Møgelvang, Rasmus; Hassager, Christian.

I: International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, Bind 30, Nr. 1, 01.2014, s. 165-173.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftTidsskriftartikelForskningfagfællebedømt

Harvard

Larsen, LH, Kofoed, KF, Carstensen, HG, Mejdahl, MR, Andersen, MJ, Kjaergaard, J, Nielsen, OW, Køber, L, Møgelvang, R & Hassager, C 2014, 'Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography', International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, bind 30, nr. 1, s. 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6

APA

Larsen, L. H., Kofoed, K. F., Carstensen, H. G., Mejdahl, M. R., Andersen, M. J., Kjaergaard, J., Nielsen, O. W., Køber, L., Møgelvang, R., & Hassager, C. (2014). Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging, 30(1), 165-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6

Vancouver

Larsen LH, Kofoed KF, Carstensen HG, Mejdahl MR, Andersen MJ, Kjaergaard J o.a. Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging. 2014 jan.;30(1):165-173. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6

Author

Larsen, Linnea Hornbech ; Kofoed, Klaus Fuglsang ; Carstensen, Helle Gervig ; Mejdahl, Mads Rams ; Andersen, Mads Jønsson ; Kjaergaard, Jesper ; Nielsen, Olav Wendelboe ; Køber, Lars ; Møgelvang, Rasmus ; Hassager, Christian. / Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography : comparison with transthoracic echocardiography. I: International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging. 2014 ; Bind 30, Nr. 1. s. 165-173.

Bibtex

@article{de18d04826a94571bb1d8b9a6a51ce52,
title = "Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography: comparison with transthoracic echocardiography",
abstract = "To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of aortic valve area (AVA) assessment with 320-detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) compared to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a population with mild to severe aortic valve stenosis. AVA was estimated in 169 patients by planimetry on MDCT images (AVA(MDCT)) and by the continuity equation with TTE (AVA(TTE)). To generate a reference AVA (AVA(REF)) we used the stroke volume from MDCT divided by the velocity time integral from CW Doppler by TTE (according to the continuity equation: stroke volume in LVOT = stroke volume passing the aortic valve). AVA(REF) was used as the reference to compare both measures against, since it bypasses the assumption of LVOT being circular in the continuity equation and the potential placement error of PW Doppler in the LVOT. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 71 (±9) years, 113 (67%) were males. Mean AVA(TTE) was 0.93 (±0.33) cm(2), mean AVA(MDCT) was 0.99 (±0.36) cm(2) and mean AVA(REF) was 1.00 (±0.39) cm(2). The mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(MDCT) was -0.06 cm(2), p = 0.001, mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(REF) was -0.06 cm(2), p < 0.001, and mean difference between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF) was -0.01 cm(2), p = 0.60. Calcification of the aortic valve quantified by Agatston score, significantly decreased the correlation between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF), (r low Agatston = 0.90, r high Agatston = 0.57). MDCT measured AVA is slightly larger than AVA measured by TTE (0.06 cm(2)). The accuracy and precision errors on AVA measurements are comparable for MDCT and TTE. Valvular calcification may primarily affect the accuracy of AVA(MDCT).",
keywords = "Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aortic Valve, Aortic Valve Stenosis, Calcinosis, Echocardiography, Doppler, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Multidetector Computed Tomography, Predictive Value of Tests, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Severity of Illness Index",
author = "Larsen, {Linnea Hornbech} and Kofoed, {Klaus Fuglsang} and Carstensen, {Helle Gervig} and Mejdahl, {Mads Rams} and Andersen, {Mads J{\o}nsson} and Jesper Kjaergaard and Nielsen, {Olav Wendelboe} and Lars K{\o}ber and Rasmus M{\o}gelvang and Christian Hassager",
year = "2014",
month = jan,
doi = "10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "165--173",
journal = "International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging",
issn = "1569-5794",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Aortic valve area assessed with 320-detector computed tomography

T2 - comparison with transthoracic echocardiography

AU - Larsen, Linnea Hornbech

AU - Kofoed, Klaus Fuglsang

AU - Carstensen, Helle Gervig

AU - Mejdahl, Mads Rams

AU - Andersen, Mads Jønsson

AU - Kjaergaard, Jesper

AU - Nielsen, Olav Wendelboe

AU - Køber, Lars

AU - Møgelvang, Rasmus

AU - Hassager, Christian

PY - 2014/1

Y1 - 2014/1

N2 - To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of aortic valve area (AVA) assessment with 320-detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) compared to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a population with mild to severe aortic valve stenosis. AVA was estimated in 169 patients by planimetry on MDCT images (AVA(MDCT)) and by the continuity equation with TTE (AVA(TTE)). To generate a reference AVA (AVA(REF)) we used the stroke volume from MDCT divided by the velocity time integral from CW Doppler by TTE (according to the continuity equation: stroke volume in LVOT = stroke volume passing the aortic valve). AVA(REF) was used as the reference to compare both measures against, since it bypasses the assumption of LVOT being circular in the continuity equation and the potential placement error of PW Doppler in the LVOT. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 71 (±9) years, 113 (67%) were males. Mean AVA(TTE) was 0.93 (±0.33) cm(2), mean AVA(MDCT) was 0.99 (±0.36) cm(2) and mean AVA(REF) was 1.00 (±0.39) cm(2). The mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(MDCT) was -0.06 cm(2), p = 0.001, mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(REF) was -0.06 cm(2), p < 0.001, and mean difference between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF) was -0.01 cm(2), p = 0.60. Calcification of the aortic valve quantified by Agatston score, significantly decreased the correlation between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF), (r low Agatston = 0.90, r high Agatston = 0.57). MDCT measured AVA is slightly larger than AVA measured by TTE (0.06 cm(2)). The accuracy and precision errors on AVA measurements are comparable for MDCT and TTE. Valvular calcification may primarily affect the accuracy of AVA(MDCT).

AB - To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of aortic valve area (AVA) assessment with 320-detector Computed Tomography (MDCT) compared to transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in a population with mild to severe aortic valve stenosis. AVA was estimated in 169 patients by planimetry on MDCT images (AVA(MDCT)) and by the continuity equation with TTE (AVA(TTE)). To generate a reference AVA (AVA(REF)) we used the stroke volume from MDCT divided by the velocity time integral from CW Doppler by TTE (according to the continuity equation: stroke volume in LVOT = stroke volume passing the aortic valve). AVA(REF) was used as the reference to compare both measures against, since it bypasses the assumption of LVOT being circular in the continuity equation and the potential placement error of PW Doppler in the LVOT. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 71 (±9) years, 113 (67%) were males. Mean AVA(TTE) was 0.93 (±0.33) cm(2), mean AVA(MDCT) was 0.99 (±0.36) cm(2) and mean AVA(REF) was 1.00 (±0.39) cm(2). The mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(MDCT) was -0.06 cm(2), p = 0.001, mean difference between AVA(TTE) and AVA(REF) was -0.06 cm(2), p < 0.001, and mean difference between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF) was -0.01 cm(2), p = 0.60. Calcification of the aortic valve quantified by Agatston score, significantly decreased the correlation between AVA(MDCT) and AVA(REF), (r low Agatston = 0.90, r high Agatston = 0.57). MDCT measured AVA is slightly larger than AVA measured by TTE (0.06 cm(2)). The accuracy and precision errors on AVA measurements are comparable for MDCT and TTE. Valvular calcification may primarily affect the accuracy of AVA(MDCT).

KW - Aged

KW - Aged, 80 and over

KW - Aortic Valve

KW - Aortic Valve Stenosis

KW - Calcinosis

KW - Echocardiography, Doppler

KW - Female

KW - Humans

KW - Male

KW - Middle Aged

KW - Multidetector Computed Tomography

KW - Predictive Value of Tests

KW - Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted

KW - Severity of Illness Index

U2 - 10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6

DO - 10.1007/s10554-013-0295-6

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 24126620

VL - 30

SP - 165

EP - 173

JO - International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging

JF - International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging

SN - 1569-5794

IS - 1

ER -

ID: 138729743