Why the study?
Do mechanocardiography and echocardiography accurately reflect hemodynamic severity in patients with mitral stenosis?
Do mechanocardiography and echocardiography accurately reflect hemodynamic severity in patients with mitral stenosis?
Systolic time intervals and echocardiographic parameters alone are of limited value for assessing hemodynamic status in mitral stenosis and should be combined with comprehensive clinical evaluation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Diastolic descent rate correlates modestly with hemodynamics in mitral stenosis; leaves open whether mechanocardiography or echocardiography accurately reflects severity.
The measurements of systolic time intervals and echocardiographic parameters were performed on 36 cases of mitral stenosis and the results were correlated with the hemodynamic observations.Increase in left ventricular ejection time (LVET), decrease in preejection period (PEP) and decrease in PEP/LVET were observed in about two thirds of the patients. The diastolic descent rate of the mitral valve (DDR) tended to be low, while the pulmonary artery wedge pressure (PAWP) tended to be high in the cases with increased PEP/LVET. However, there was no significant correlation between the systolic time intervals and the cardiac index or the calculated mitral valve area (MVA).A significant negative correlation was demonstrated between the DDR and the PAWP (r=-0.62, P<0.01), while a significant positive correlation was demonstrated between the DDR and the MVA (r+0.57, P<0.01). However, the correlation of the DDR with the cardiac index was not statistically significant.The above observations indicate that the measurements of systolic time intervals and the echocardiographic studies are of limited value for the assessment of hemodynamic status and the cardiac performance in mitral stenosis when used alone. A thorough analysis of all available clinical and laboratory informations is neccessary for the precise evaluation of the patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
SUGA et al. (1979) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: