Why the study?
Does a semi-automated method for quantifying LV diastolic inflow propagation speed by MR phase velocity mapping differentiate between older volunteers and aortic stenosis patients?
Does a semi-automated method for quantifying LV diastolic inflow propagation speed by MR phase velocity mapping differentiate between older volunteers and aortic stenosis patients?
A semi-automated method for quantifying LV inflow propagation speed by MR phase velocity mapping can identify diastolic dysfunction in aortic stenosis patients.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports semi-automated MR propagation speed to detect diastolic dysfunction in AS; hypothesis-generating pending prospective validation.
A new method of analysis was used for clinical magnetic resonance phase velocity mapping (PVM) to quantify propagation speed (PS) of early diastolic left ventricular (LV) inflow. A group of older volunteers (OV; n = 21, age 58+/-11 years) and a group of aortic stenosis patients (AS; n = 21, age 69+/-8 years) were studied. PVM was used to measure diastolic inflow in the LV outflow tract plane. PS was quantified by a semi-automated method (Auto) and by an operator (Manual). The mean+/-SD PS was 0.71+/-0.21 (Auto) and 0.67+/-0.23 (Manual) m/sec in the OV group, versus 0.49+/-0.28 (Auto) and 0.43+/-0.18 m/sec (Manual) in the AS group. There were no differences in peak transmitral E-wave (P = 0.70) between OV and AS. However, there were differences in PS-Auto (P = 0.0079) and PS-Manual (P = 0.0007) between the two groups. PS is a promising index for identifying diastolic LV dysfunction in AS patients. The semi-automated technique is a practical approach for quantifying LV filling.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Milet et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: