Comparison of accuracy of aortic valve area assessment in aortic stenosis by real time three-dimensional echocardiography in biplane mode versus two-dimensional transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography

Our aim was to validate the clinical feasibility of assessment of the area of the aortic valve orifice (AVA) by real time three-dimensional echocardiography (RT3DE) in biplane mode by planimetry and to compare it with the echo-Doppler methods more commonly used to evaluate valvular aortic stenosis (AS).RT3DE in biplane mode is a novel technique that allows operators to visualize the aortic valve orifice anatomy in any desired plane orientation. Its usefulness and accuracy have not previously been established.Using this technique, we studied a series of patients with AS and compared the results with those obtained by two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) planimetry and two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography using the continuity equation (TTE-CE). RT3DE planimetries in biplane mode were measured by two independent observers. Bland-Altman analysis was used to compare these two methods.Forty-one patients with AS were enrolled in the study (15 women, 26 men, mean age 73.5 +/- 8.2 years). RT3DE planimetry was feasible in 92.7%. Average AVA determined by TTE-CE was 0.76 +/- 0.20 cm, by TEE planimetry 0.73 +/- 0.1 cm, and by RT3DE planimetry 0.76 +/- 0.20 cm(2). The average differences in AVA were-0.001 +/- 0.254 cm(2) and 0.03 +/- 0.155 cm(2) (RT3DE/TEE). The correlation coefficient for AVA (RT3DE/TTE-CE) was 0.82 and for AVA (RT3DE/TEE) it was 0.94, P < 0.0001. No significant intra- and interobserver variability was observed. In conclusion, RT3DE in biplane mode provides a feasible and reproducible method for measuring the area of the aortic valve orifice in aortic stenosis.     

Valve orifice area in aortic stenosis evaluated by planimetry, Gorlin and continuity equations: a prospective study.

In evaluation of the severity of aortic valve stenosis, multiple parameters can be determined. All of them, except valve orifice area, are influenced by other factors such as cardiac output, heart rate or aortic insufficiency. OBJECTIVES: This is a prospective study which proposes, in the determination of the valve orifice area in aortic stenosis, to evaluate the accuracy of and correlation between three methods--planimetry by multiplane transesophageal echocardiography, the continuity equation by transthoracic echocardiography, and invasive measurement using the Gorlin formula. METHODS: Forty-five patients with known calcified valvular aortic stenosis 27 men, mean age 70 +/- 10 years, (range 27-82), were studied. In all patients the area was determined by planimetry and by the continuity equation. In 25 (56%) patients invasive measurements were obtained using the Gorlin formula. RESULTS: Evaluation of the valve orifice area by planimetry was easily performed and did not prolong the duration of the exam, except in five patients (11%). The area determined by the continuity equation had a mean value of 0.74 +/- 0.25 cm2, by planimetry 0.74 +/- 0.24 cm2 and by the Gorlin formula 0.65 +/- 0.17 cm2. Correlations between areas obtained by the three methods used were: continuity equation and planimetry 0.82; continuity equation and Gorlin formula 0.51; and planimetry and Gorlin formula 0.80. Concordance analysis (Bland and Altman's method) gave mean (Mn) values for the differences in the areas determined by the Gorlin formula and the continuity equation of 0.01 +/- 0.15 cm2 (Mn - 2SD = -0.29, Mn + 2SD = 0.30). The estimated value by the Gorlin formula and planimetry was 0.02 +/- 0.10 (Mn - 2SD = -0.19, Mn + 2SD = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: 1) Planimetry of the valve orifice area by transesophageal echocardiography is feasible and does not prolong the duration of the exam in the majority of patients. 2) The strong correlation and the results of concordance analysis, in the determination of valve orifice area, between traditional invasive methods and planimetry, support the use of this noninvasive method in clinical practice.     

Improved assessment of mitral valve stenosis by volumetric real-time three-dimensional echocardiography

OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the feasibility, accuracy and reproducibility of real-time volumetric three-dimensional echocardiography (3-D echo) for the estimation of mitral valve area in patients with mitral valve stenosis. BACKGROUND: Planimetry of the mitral valve area (MVA) by two-dimensional echocardiography (2-D echo) requires a favorable parasternal acoustic window and depends on operator skill. Transthoracic volumetric 3-D echo allows reconstruction of multiple 2-D planes in any desired orientation and is not limited to parasternal acquisition, and could thus enhance the accuracy and feasibility of calculating MVA. METHODS: In 48 patients with mitral stenosis (40 women; mean age 61 +/- 13 years) MVA was determined by planimetry using volumetric 3-D echo and compared with measurements obtained by 2-D echo and Doppler pressure half-time (PHT). All measurements were performed by two independent observers. Volumetric data were acquired from an apical view. RESULTS: Although 2-D echo allowed planimetry of the mitral valve in 43 of 48 patients (89%), calculation of the MVA was possible in all patients when 3-D echo was used. Mitral valve area by 3-D echo correlated well with MVA by 2-D echo (r = 0.93, mean difference, 0.09 +/- 0.14 cm2) and by PHT (r = 0.87, mean difference, 0.16 +/- 0.19 cm2). Interobserver variability was significantly less for 3-D echo than for 2-D echo (SD 0.08cm2 versus SD 0.23cm2, p < 0.001). Furthermore, it was much easier and faster to define the image plane with the smallest orifice area when 3-D echo was used. CONCLUSIONS: Transthoracic real-time volumetric 3-D echo provides accurate and highly reproducible measurements of mitral valve area and can easily be performed from an apical approach.     

Comparison of direct planimetry of mitral valve regurgitation orifice area by three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography to effective regurgitant orifice area obtained by proximal flow convergence method and vena contracta area determined by color Doppler echocardiography

Direct measurement of anatomic regurgitant orifice area (AROA) by 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography was evaluated for analysis of mitral regurgitation (MR) severity. In 72 patients (age 70.6 ± 13.3 years, 37 men) with mild to severe MR, 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography and transthoracic color Doppler echocardiography were performed to determine AROA by direct planimetry, effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) by proximal convergence method, and vena contracta area (VCA) by 2-dimensional color Doppler echocardiography. AROA was measured with commercially available software (QLAB, Philips Medical Systems, Andover, Massachusetts) after adjusting the first and second planes to reveal the smallest orifice in the third plane where planimetry could take place. AROA was classified as circular or noncircular by calculating the ratio of the medial-lateral distance above the anterior-posterior distance (≤1.5 compared to >1.5). AROA determined by direct planimetry was 0.30 ± 0.20 cm2, EROA determined by proximal convergence method was 0.30 ± 0.20 cm2, and VCA was 0.33 ± 0.23 cm2. Correlation between AROA and EROA (r = 0.96, SEE 0.058 cm2) and between AROA and VCA (r = 0.89, SEE 0.105 cm2) was high considering all patients. In patients with a circular regurgitation orifice area (n = 14) the correlation between AROA and EROA was better (r = 0.99, SEE 0.036 cm2) compared to patients with noncircular regurgitation orifice area (n = 58, r = 0.94, SEE 0.061 cm2). Correlation between AROA and EROA was higher in an EROA ≥0.2 cm2 (r = 0.95) than in an EROA <0.2 cm2 (r = 0.60). In conclusion, direct measurement of MR AROA correlates well with EROA by proximal convergence method and VCA. Agreement between methods is better for patients with a circular regurgitation orifice area than in patients with a noncircular regurgitation orifice area.     

Determination of aortic valve orifice area in aortic valve stenosis by two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography

Two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography was used to measure aortic valve orifice area in 24 patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS) and 15 patients without aortic valve disease. Using transesophageal echocardiography, orifice area could be measured in 20 of 24 patients with AS. With transthoracic echocardiography, orifice area could be determined in only 2 of 24 patients. In patients with AS, orifice area determined by transesophageal echocardiography was 0.75 +/- 0.34 cm2 and that calculated with Gorlin's formula was 0.75 +/- 0.32 cm2. In normal aortic valves, orifice area was 3.9 +/- 1.2 cm2 by transesophageal echocardiography. A good correlation was demonstrated between aortic valve orifice area determined using transesophageal echocardiography and calculated orifice area using Gorlin's formula in patients with AS: r = 0.92, standard error of estimate = 0.14 cm2. The absolute difference between orifice area measured with both methods ranged from 0.0 to 0.4 cm2 (mean 0.09 +/- 0.1). In 4 patients orifice area could not be determined with transesophageal echocardiography. The orifice could not be identified in 2 patients because an appropriate cross-sectional view of the aortic valve could not be achieved and in 2 patients with pinhole stenosis (aortic valve orifice area 0.3 cm2). These data show that aortic valve orifice area can be measured reliably using 2-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography.     

Quantitative assessment of normal and stenotic aortic valve using transesophageal three-dimensional echocardiography

The present study demonstrates the feasibility of transesophageal three-dimensional reconstruction of normal, sclerotic, and stenotic aortic valves using a computed tomographic ultrasound system. The study also shows the potential clinical usefulness of this technique in delineating aortic valve morphology (extent and severity of valve thickening and calcification and size and number of cusps) and assessing aortic orifice areas by direct planimetry of the three-dimensional images.     

Three-dimensional echocardiography of normal and pathologic mitral valve: A comparison with two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography

Objectives. This study was done to ascertain whether three-dimensional echocardiography can facilitate the diagnosis of mitral valve abnormalities.Background. The value of the additional information provided by three-dimensional echocardiography compared with two-dimensional multiplane transesophageal echocardiography for evaluation of the mitral valve apparatus has not been assessed.Methods. Thirty patients with a variety of mitral valve pathologies (stenosis in 8, insufficiency in 12, prostheses in 10) and 20 subjects with a normal mitral valve were studied. Images were acquired using the rotational technique (every 2°), with electrocardiographic and respiratory gating. From the three-dimensional data sets, cut planes were selected and presented in both two-dimensional format (anyplane echocardiography) and volume-rendered dynamic display. The data were compared with the original multiplane two-dimensional images. Different features of the mitral valve apparatus were defined and graded by three observers for clarity of visualization and confidence of interpretation as 1) inadequate, 2) sufficient, or 3) excellent.Results. All the techniques provided good visualization of the mitral valve (mean global scores ± SD for multiplane, anyplane and volume-rendered echocardiography were 2.22 ± 0.34. 2.24 ± 0.26 and 2.30 ± 0.25, respectively). With volume-rendered echocardiography, the mitral valve apparatus was scored higher in pathologic than in normal conditions (2.38 ± 0.24 vs. 2.16 ± 0.21, p < 0.002). The spatial relationships between the mitral valve and when structures. Reaflet mobility, commissures and orifice were scored higher by volume-rendered echocardiography. Prostheses were evaluated equally well by the three methods. Multiplane and anyplane echocardiography were superior for the evaluation of leaflet thickness, subvalvular apparatus and annulus.Conclusions. Transesophageal three-dimensional echocardiography facilitates imaging of some features of the mitral valve apparatus and provides additional information for comprehensive assessment of mitral valve abnormalities.     

Comparison of 64-slice computed tomography planimetry and Doppler echocardiography in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis

BACKGROUND AND AIM of the study: The study aim was to compare, prospectively, the planimetry of aortic stenosis on 64-slice computed tomography (CT), with the area calculated by Doppler transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in symptomatic patients evaluated before potential aortic valve replacement. METHODS: Fifty-two consecutive patients (27 males, 25 females; mean age 74 +/- 10 years) admitted to the authors' institution during 2005 were evaluated with 64-slice CT and Doppler TTE. The time interval between the two evaluations was 2 +/- 1 weeks. Planimetry of the anatomic orifice area (AOA) drawn on 64-slice CT was compared to the effective area determined by Doppler TTE by Bland and Altman analysis, and the anatomic area threshold value corresponding to a significant effective aortic stenosis (50.75 cm2) was determined by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: The aortic orifice area measured by 64-slice CT correlated well with the effective area (r = 0.76; p <0.0001), but was significantly greater, with a systematic overestimation (0.132 cm(2)) and a variability of 0.239 cm(2). There was good agreement between planimetry determined by two independent radiologists (difference = 0.002, variability = 0.115 cm(2)). ROC analysis showed that a threshold value of 0.95 cm(2) as measured by 64-slice CT planimetry identifies significant aortic stenosis with sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive values of 82%, 77%, 81%, 91% and 59%, respectively. CONCLUSION: 64-slice CT is a reproducible and reliable non-invasive method to evaluate aortic valve stenosis compared to the reference method of Doppler TTE. Indeed, the CT approach could replace the latter evaluation when measurements used in the continuity equation are inadequate.     

Magnetic resonance to assess the aortic valve area in aortic stenosis: how does it compare to current diagnostic standards?

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate whether magnetic resonance (MR) planimetry of the aortic valve area (AVA) may prove to be a reliable, non-invasive diagnostic tool in the assessment of aortic valve stenosis, and how the results compare with current diagnostic standards.BACKGROUND: Current standard techniques for assessing the severity of aortic stenosis include transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) as well as transvalvular pressure measurements during cardiac catheterization. METHODS: Forty consecutive patients underwent cardiac catheterization, TEE, and MR. The AVA was estimated by direct planimetry (MR, TEE) or calculated indirectly via the peak systolic transvalvular gradient (catheter). Pressure gradients from cardiac catheterization and Doppler echocardiography were also compared. RESULTS: By MR, the mean AVA(max) was 0.91 +/- 0.25 cm(2); by TEE, AVA(max) was 0.89 +/- 0.28 cm(2); and by catheter, the AVA was calculated as 0.64 +/- 0.26 cm(2). Mean absolute differences in AVA were 0.02 cm(2) for MR versus TEE, 0.27 cm(2) for MR versus catheter, and 0.25 cm(2) for TEE versus catheter. Correlations for AVA(max) were r = 0.96 between MR and TEE, r = 0.47 between TEE and catheter, and r = 0.44 between MR and catheter. The correlation between Doppler and catheter gradients was r = 0.71. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic resonance planimetry of the AVA correlates well with TEE and less well with the catheter-derived AVA. Invasive and Doppler pressure correlated less well than those obtained from planimetric techniques. Magnetic resonance planimetry of the AVA may provide an accurate, non-invasive, well-tolerated alternative to invasive techniques and transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of aortic stenosis.     

Usefulness of three-dimensionally guided assessment of mitral stenosis using matrix-array ultrasound

Two-dimensional (2-D) planimetry is limited by the technical demands, time, and observer variability required to locate the minimal orifice area, limiting the confident clinical reporting of mitral valve area (MVA). In 27 consecutive patients, MVA was determined independently by 2 observers using the conventional 2-D method and a new 3-D-guided method. Using a matrix-array probe, the valve was visualized in a long-axis view and a cursor steered to intersect the leaflet tips and provide a perpendicular short-axis plane viewed side-by-side. Two-dimensional and 3-D-guided methods allowed planimetry in 24 patients. Consistent with better orifice localization, 3-D guidance eliminated the overestimation of internal orifice diameters in the planimetered short-axis view relative to the limiting diameter defined by the long-axis view (for 3-D guidance, 0.73 +/- 0.20 vs 0.73 +/- 0.21 cm, p = 0.98, vs 0.90 +/- 0.27 cm in the 2-D short-axis view, p <0.01). Accordingly, mean values for the smallest orifice area by 3-D guidance were less than by 2-D imaging (1.4 +/- 0.5 vs 1.5 +/- 0.5 cm(2), p <0.01), changing the clinical severity classification in 11 of 24 patients (46%). The 2-D method also overestimated MVA relative to 3-D guidance compared with Doppler pressure halftime and (n = 6) Gorlin areas. Phantom studies verified no differences in resolution for the 2 acquisition modes. Three-dimensional guidance reduced intraobserver variability from 9.8% to 3.8% (SEE 0.14 to 0.06 cm(2), p <0.01) and interobserver variability from 10.6% to 6.1% (SEE 0.15 to 0.09 cm(2), p <0.02). In conclusion, matrix-array technology provides a feasible and highly reproducible direct 3-D-guided method for measuring the limiting mitral orifice area.     

Measurement of the mitral area with three-dimensional cardiac echography

Two dimensional planimetry of mitral stenosis is sometimes difficult due to the complex morphology of the mitral valve. Three dimensional cardiac echography images the projected area of the mitral valve allowing precise planimetry of the orifice. Thirty patients with mitral stenosis were included in this study in order to obtain planimetry of the mitral orifice with two dimensional and three dimensional "freehand" mode transthoracic echocardiography. In 10 patients, the measurements were taken before and after percutaneous commissurotomy. The mitral area measured with three dimensional echography was 1.36+/-0.45 cm2 and 1.39+/-0.43 cm2 in two dimensional mode. The correlation between the 2 methods was good (y=1.01x - 0.08, r=0.92, p<0.001) but three dimensional echocardiography significantly underestimated the two dimensional planimetry by 0.05+/-0.27 cm2 (4+/-20%, p<0.05). The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of the three dimensional measurements were 0.95 and 0.91 respectively. Three dimensional free-hand mode cardiac echography allows precise measurement of the mitral orifice area in patients with mitral stenosis.     

Two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiographic determination of aortic valve area in adults with aortic stenosis

To determine if aortic stenosis severity could be accurately measured by two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), 62 adult subjects (mean age 66 +/- 12 years) with aortic stenosis had their aortic valve area (AVA) determined by direct planimetry using TEE, and with the continuity equation using combined transthoracic Doppler and two-dimensional echocardiography (TTE). Eighteen subjects had AVA calculated by the Gorlin method during catheterization. An excellent correlation (r = 0.93, SEE = 0.17 cm2) was found between AVA determined by TEE (mean 1.24 +/- 0.49 cm2; range 0.40 to 2.26 cm2) and TTE (mean 1.23 +/- 0.46 cm2; range 0.40 to 2.23 cm2). The absolute (0.13 +/- 0.12 cm2) and percent (10.8 +/- 8.9%) differences between AVA determined by TEE versus TTE were small. Excellent correlations between AVA by TEE and TTE were also found in subjects with normal systolic function (r = 0.95, SEE = 0.14 cm2; n = 38) and impaired function (r = 0.91, SEE = 0.21 cm2; n = 24). AVA determined by catheterization correlated better with AVA measured by TEE (r = 0.91, SEE = 0.15 cm2) than AVA measured with TTE (r = 0.84, SEE = 0.19 cm2). These data demonstrate that AVA can be accurately measured by direct planimetry using TEE in subjects with aortic stenosis. TEE may become an important adjunct to transthoracic echocardiography in the assessment of aortic stenosis severity.     

Transesophageal three-dimensional echocardiographic demonstration of Ebstein's anomaly

We report three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiographic findings in an adult patient with Ebstein's anomaly. Using the anyplane technique and multiple views, especially the short-axis view of tricuspid valve, three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography clearly demonstrated the intermittent tethering of all three leaflets of tricuspid valve to the right ventricular walls giving a "bubble-like" appearance. On the other hand, two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography demonstrated well the tethering of the septal tricuspid leaflet, but tethering of the other two leaflets was not well seen. To our knowledge, these findings have not been demonstrated by three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography before.     

Morphological analysis of aortic root in eccentric aortic regurgitation using anyplane two-dimensional images produced by transesophageal three-dimensional echocardiography

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Evaluation of leaflet dysfunction in aortic valve repair is important. In eccentric aortic regurgitation (AR), it is unclear whether leaflet dysfunction other than prolapse exists. The study aim was to validate the hypothesis that eccentric AR correlates with leaflet dysfunction. METHODS: Both anyplane 2-D images produced by a 3-D reconstruction system and surgical views for 21 patients with eccentric AR (11 with aortic valve prolapse, group A; 10 without prolapse, group B) were analyzed prospectively. Vertical height from annulus to coaptation point (termed AC), and distance from coaptation point to sinotubular junction (CS) were measured at early diastole. RESULTS: For group A, AC and CS values were 1.3 +/- 2.2 mm and 25.9 +/- 3.4 mm respectively for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin, and 3.8 +/- 0.4 mm and 22.7 +/- 2.1 mm for other leaflets. For group B, AC and CS values were 4.7 +/- 0.9 mm and 39.8 +/- 7.0 mm for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin, and 7.8 +/- 0.9 mm and 31.9 +/- 5.7 mm for other leaflets. The AC for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin was smaller than AC for other leaflets (p < 0.01) between both groups. There was no difference between CS for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin and other leaflets in group A, but CS for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin was larger than for other leaflets in group B (p <0.01). AC and CS values for leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin in group B were larger than those for group A. Leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin were always shifted toward the direction of the base in the anyplane images, and elongated in the surgical view. CONCLUSION: Anyplane 2-D images obtained by 3-D echocardiography showed that aortic leaflets of eccentric AR jet origin shifted towards the direction of the base with or without prolapse, and were accompanied by dysfunction. Color flow Doppler determination of the eccentricity of AR jet origin was useful in predicting aortic valve dysfunction.     

Planimetry and Transthoracic Two-Dimensional Echocardiography in Noninvasive Assessment of Aortic Valve Area in Patients With Valvular Aortic Stenosis

Objectives. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of transthoracic two-dimensional echocardiography in measuring aortic valve area (AVA) by planimetry.Background. Planimetry of AVA using two-dimensional transesophageal echocardiographic images has been reported to be a reliable method for measuring AVA in patients with aortic stenosis. Recent advances in resolution of two-dimensional echocardiography permit direct visualization of an aortic valve orifice from the transthoracic approach more easily than before.Methods. Forty-two adult patients with valvular aortic stenosis were examined. A parasternal short-axis view of the aortic valve was obtained with transthoracic two-dimensional echocardiography. AVA was measured directly by planimetry of the inner leaflet edges at the time of maximal opening in early systole. AVA was also measured by planimetry using transesophageal echocardiography, by the continuity equation and by cardiac catheterization (Gorlin formula).Results. In 32 (76%) of the 42 study patients, AVA could be detected by using the transthoracic planimetry method. There were good correlations between results of transthoracic two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry and the continuity equation (y = 0.90x + 0.09, r = 0.90, p < 0.001, SEE = 0.09 cm²), transesophageal echocardiographic planimetry (y = 1.05x − 0.02, r = 0.98, p < 0.001, SEE = 0.04 cm²) and the Gorlin formula (y = 1.02x + 0.05, r = 0.89, p < 0.001, SEE = 0.10 cm²).Conclusions. Transthoracic two-dimensional echocardiography provides a feasible and reliable method in measuring AVA in patients with aortic stenosis.     

Reproducibility of Doppler echocardiographic quantification of aortic and mitral valve stenoses: comparison between two echocardiography centers

Doppler echocardiography has been widely used as a noninvasive method to quantify valvular heart diseases. This study assessed the variability between 2 echocardiography centers concerning 2-dimensional and Doppler echocardiographic results in the quantification of mitral and aortic valve stenoses. Forty-two patients were studied by 2 different echocardiography centers in a blinded, independent fashion. In patients with aortic and mitral valve stenosis, mean and maximal flow velocities were measured. The aortic valve orifice area was calculated according to the continuity equation. Mitral valve orifice area was determined by direct planimetry and by pressure half-time. In patients with an aortic valve stenosis, a close relation between the 2 centers was found for the maximal and mean flow velocities (coefficient of correlation, r = 0.72 to 0.92; coefficient of variation, 3.7 to 7.7%). A close correlation and a small observer variability was found for the flow velocity ratio determined by flow velocities measured in the left ventricular outflow tract and over the stenotic valve (r = 0.88; coefficient of variation, 0.01 +/- 0.009). In contrast, there was a poor correlation between the diameter of the left ventricular outflow tract and the aortic orifice area (r = 0.36 and 0.59, respectively). In patients with a mitral valve stenosis, mean and maximal velocities were closely correlated (r = 0.85 and 0.77, respectively). Velocities were not found to be significantly different between the 2 centers. Variability between the 2 centers for the mitral valve orifice area was 9.8% (2-dimensional echocardiography) and 5.7% (pressure half-time).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Effect of three-dimensional valve shape on the hemodynamics of aortic stenosis: three-dimensional echocardiographic stereolithography and patient studies

OBJECTIVES: This study tested the hypothesis that the impact of a stenotic aortic valve depends not only on the cross-sectional area of its limiting orifice but also on three-dimensional (3D) valve geometry. BACKGROUND: Valve shape can potentially affect the hemodynamic impact of aortic stenosis by altering the ratio of effective to anatomic orifice area (the coefficient of orifice contraction [Cc]). For a given flow rate and anatomic area, a lower Cc increases velocity and pressure gradient. This effect has been recognized in mitral stenosis but assumed to be absent in aortic stenosis (constant Cc of 1 in the Gorlin equation). METHODS: In order to study this effect with actual valve shapes in patients, 3D echocardiography was used to reconstruct a typical spectrum of stenotic aortic valve geometrics from doming to flat. Three different shapes were reproduced as actual models by stereolithography (computerized laser polymerization) with orifice areas of 0.5, 0.75, and 1.0 cm(2) (total of nine valves) and studied with physiologic flows. To determine whether valve shape actually influences hemodynamics in the clinical setting, we also related Cc (= continuity/planimeter areas) to stenotic aortic valve shape in 35 patients with high-quality echocardiograms. RESULTS: In the patient-derived 3D models, Cc varied prominently with valve shape, and was largest for long, tapered domes that allow more gradual flow convergence compared with more steeply converging flat valves (0.85 to 0.90 vs. 0.71 to 0.76). These variations translated into differences of up to 40% in pressure drop for the same anatomic area and flow rate, with corresponding variations in Gorlin (effective) area relative to anatomic values. In patients, Cc was significantly lower for flat versus doming bicuspid valves (0.73 +/- 0.14 vs. 0.94 +/- 0.14, p < 0.0001) with 40 +/- 5% higher gradients (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional valve shape is an important determinant of pressure loss in patients with aortic stenosis, with smaller effective areas and higher pressure gradients for flatter valves. This effect can translate into clinically important differences between planimeter and effective valve areas (continuity or Gorlin). Therefore, valve shape provides additional information beyond the planimeter orifice area in determining the impact of valvular aortic stenosis on patient hemodynamics.     

Doppler assessment of prosthetic valve orifice area. An in vitro study.

BACKGROUND. Although Doppler echocardiography has been shown to be accurate in assessing stenotic orifice areas in native valves, its accuracy in evaluating the prosthetic valve orifice area remains undetermined. METHODS AND RESULTS. Doppler-estimated valve areas were studied for their agreement with catheter-derived Gorlin effective orifice areas and their flow dependence in five sizes (19/20-27 mm) of St. Jude, Medtronic-Hall, and Hancock aortic valves using a pulsatile flow model. Doppler areas were calculated three ways: using the standard continuity equation; using its simplified modification (peak flow/peak velocity); and using the Gorlin equation with Doppler pressure gradients. The results were compared with Gorlin effective orifice areas derived from direct flow and catheter pressure measurements. Excellent correlation between Gorlin effective orifice areas and the three Doppler approaches was found in all three valve types (r = 0.93-0.99, SEE = 0.07-0.11 cm2). In Medtronic-Hall and Hancock valves, there was only slight underestimation by Doppler (mean difference, 0.003-0.25 cm2). In St. Jude valves, however, all three Doppler methods significantly underestimated effective orifice areas derived from direct flow and pressure measurements (mean difference, 0.40-0.57 cm2) with differences as great as 1.6 cm2. In general, the modified continuity equation calculated the largest Doppler areas. When orifice areas were calculated from the valve geometry using the area determined from the inner valve diameter reduced by the projected area of the opened leaflets, Gorlin effective orifice areas were much closer to the geometric orifice areas than Doppler areas (mean difference, 0.40 +/- 0.31 versus 1.04 +/- 0.20 cm2). In St. Jude and Medtronic-Hall valves, areas calculated by either technique did not show a consistent or clinically significant flow dependence. In Hancock valves, however, areas calculated by both the continuity equation and the Gorlin equation decreased significantly (p less than 0.001) with low flow rates. CONCLUSIONS. Doppler echocardiography using either the continuity equation or Gorlin formula allows in vitro calculation of Medtronic-Hall and Hancock effective valve orifice areas but underestimates valve areas in St. Jude valves. This phenomenon is due to localized high velocities in St. Jude valves, which do not reflect the mean velocity distribution across the orifice. Valve areas are flow independent in St. Jude and Medtronic-Hall prostheses but decrease significantly with low flow in Hancock valves, suggesting that bioprosthetic leaflets may not open fully at low flow rates.     

Calculation of left ventricular outflow tract area using three-dimensional echocardiography

In 23 patients with aortic valve stenosis (14 male, 9 female, mean age 66 ± 21.5 years) left ventricular outflow tract cross-sectional area was determined in planimetric fashion using three-dimensional echocardiography. The 3-D data-set for each patient had been acquired in the course of a multiplane transesophageal examination. Aortic valve area was determined using the continuity equation. Results obtained were compared to those calculated by continuity equation using to the conventionally determined LVOT area (a = [d/2]2). As reference method the results were compared to invasive measurements. 3-D planimetric determination of LVOT cross-sectional area was possible in 20 of 23 patients. In three patients, this method failed due to artefacts. The mean difference to the conventionally calculated LVOT area amounted to 0.18 cm2 (SD = 0.46). The comparison of AVA determined by continuity equation and by invasive measurement showed a mean difference of –0.074 cm2 (SD = 0.21) for the conventionally calculated LVOT area; for the planimetrically determined LVOT area the mean difference of AVA amounted to –0.03 cm2 (SD = 0.14) (p < 0.05). Planimetric determination of LVOT area using 3-D echocardiography improves the agreement of the continuity equation with invasive measurement.     

Long-Term Follow-Up and Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography of 19-mm Prosthetic Heart Valves

BACKGROUND: In patients with a small aortic root, the use of 19-mm valve prostheses for valve replacement is controversial because of the small orifice area of these valves. METHODS: To assess stress hemodynamics in patients with 19-mm valve prostheses, to find predictors of unfavorable hemodynamics, and to document the long-term follow-up, we examined 30 patients (age, 64 +/- 19 years; 27 women and 3 men; follow-up, 38 +/- 50 months) clinically and with the use of dobutamine stress echocardiography. A history was taken, and a physical examination was performed. At rest and during dobutamine stress, Doppler echocardiography was performed. RESULTS: At rest, transprosthetic gradients were moderately elevated with mean and peak gradients of 15 +/- 7 and 32 +/- 14 mmHg, and effective orifice areas were small (0.91 +/- 0.31 cm(2)). Gradients rose markedly during stress (mean, 37 +/- 14 mmHg; peak, 83 +/- 41 mmHg). Predictors of high transprosthetic gradients were larger body surface area, younger age, and valve type. Mean and peak gradients were lower with St. Jude Medical Hemodynamic Plus valves than with standard St. Jude Medical (P < 0.05) and other valves, and the effective orifice area was highest (1.07 +/- 0.29 cm(2); P < 0.05 versus standard St. Jude Medical) in this valve model. Sixty percent of patients developed significant dynamic subvalvular or intraventricular gradients (84 +/- 41 mmHg) during dobutamine stress. CONCLUSIONS: After aortic valve replacement with 19-mm prostheses in patients with a small aortic root, dobutamine stress leads to high transvalvular gradients, which are dependent on valve model, age, and body surface area. In addition, 60% of patients develop significant dynamic outflow obstructions. These findings and the persistence of some degree of exercise-induced symptoms in 70% of patients suggest that alternative surgical techniques should be considered if the size of the aortic annulus demands a 19-mm valve, especially if the patient seeks physical activity, is young, or is of larger body size.