Key result
M mode echocardiography is an adequate method to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy regression in hypertensive patients, though standardization is still required for two-dimensional echocardiography.
Why the study?
Is echocardiography an adequate method to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy regression in hypertensive patients?
Is echocardiography an adequate method to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy regression in hypertensive patients?
M mode echocardiography is a valid tool for assessing LVH regression in uncomplicated hypertension, while 2D echocardiography needs further standardization.
Supports M-mode echo for LVH monitoring in uncomplicated hypertension; leaves open rigorous standardization of serial measurements.
M mode echocardiography is certainly an adequate method to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) regression in hypertensive patients, provided that some important conditions are fulfilled. Left ventricular mass assessment can be made only with non-distorted ventricles, as usually encountered in non-complicated hypertensive patients. The main problem is to limit all sources of variability for serial measurements and all sources of subjectivity in their interpretation. So, we propose some guidelines that should be useful when designing and completing such studies. Two-dimensional echocardiography offers the potential advantage of allowing assessment of left ventricular mass even when the left ventricle is far from its usual shape. However, a standardization of methods and studies of its reproducibility are still required before this method could be recommended in studies of LVH regression.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gosse et al. (1990) conducted a review in Left ventricular hypertrophy in hypertensive patients. Echocardiography was evaluated. M mode echocardiography is an adequate method to evaluate left ventricular hypertrophy regression in hypertensive patients, though standardization is still required for two-dimensional echocardiography.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: