Key result
Combined invasive and noninvasive methods for assessing serial pressure-volume relations yielded measurements that were not significantly different from contrast angiography (p > 0.05).
Why the study?
Does a combined invasive and noninvasive method accurately assess left ventricular pressure-volume relations compared to contrast angiography in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
Observational (n=10)
Does a combined invasive and noninvasive method accurately assess left ventricular pressure-volume relations compared to contrast angiography in patients undergoing cardiac catheterization?
p-value: p=>0.05
Combining micromanometer pressure recordings with radionuclide angiography and echocardiography provides an accurate, reproducible method for serial assessment of left ventricular pressure-volume relations without altering hemodynamics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
May support serial LV pressure-volume assessment in catheterization; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Magorien et al. (1983) conducted an observational in Patients undergoing cardiac catheterization (n=10). Combined invasive and noninvasive methods (gated radionuclide angiography, echocardiography, and micromanometer pressure recordings) vs. Contrast angiography was evaluated on Measurements of systolic and diastolic function (filling/ejection rates, ejection fraction, chamber stiffness, etc.) (p=>0.05). Combined invasive and noninvasive methods for assessing serial pressure-volume relations yielded measurements that were not significantly different from contrast angiography (p > 0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: