March 1, 1985Circulation
Determination of parameters of left ventricular diastolic filling with pulsed Doppler echocardiography: comparison with cineangiography.
Key result
Pulsed Doppler echocardiography showed no significant differences compared to cineangiography for peak filling rate (296 vs 283 ml/sec), normalized peak filling rate, and half filling fraction.
Why the study?
Does pulsed Doppler echocardiography accurately measure left ventricular diastolic filling parameters compared to cineangiography?
Population
30 patients
Comparison
Two-dimensional echocardiography combined with… vs Left ventricular cineangiography
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Discussion
Loading...
Member takes
Implication
Supports noninvasive pulsed Doppler echocardiography for LV diastolic filling; leaves open prospective validation versus cineangiography.
Study Design
Type
Observational (n=30)
Structured PICO
Does pulsed Doppler echocardiography accurately measure left ventricular diastolic filling parameters compared to cineangiography?
P
Population
30 patients
I
Intervention
Two-dimensional echocardiography combined with pulsed Doppler echocardiography
C
Comparator
Left ventricular cineangiography
O
Outcome
Relationship between Doppler-derived flow velocity through the mitral anulus and angiographic parameters of left ventricular filling (peak filling rate, normalized peak filling rate, half filling fraction)surrogate
Main Result
Absolute Event Rate: 296% vs 283%
Pulsed Doppler echocardiography provides comparable measurements of left ventricular diastolic filling parameters to invasive cineangiography.
Cite This Study
Rokey et al. (1985) conducted an observational in Left ventricular filling assessment (n=30). Pulsed Doppler echocardiography vs. Cineangiography was evaluated on Peak filling rate. Pulsed Doppler echocardiography showed no significant differences compared to cineangiography for peak filling rate (296 vs 283 ml/sec), normalized peak filling rate, and half filling fraction.