Key result
3-D volume-rendered echocardiography significantly underestimated aortic valve orifice area compared to Doppler (0.54 vs 0.76 cm2, P<0.001), whereas 3-D anyplane echocardiography showed better agreement.
Why the study?
Does 3-D anyplane and volume-rendered echocardiography accurately measure aortic valve area compared to 2-D echocardiography and Doppler in patients with aortic stenosis?
Population
31 patients with aortic stenosis
Comparison
Three-dimensional anyplane and 3-D… vs Two-dimensional transesophageal planimetry and…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
3-D volume-rendered echocardiography may underestimate aortic valve area; cross-sectional data leaves open anyplane accuracy versus Doppler.
Cross-Sectional (n=31)
Does 3-D anyplane and volume-rendered echocardiography accurately measure aortic valve area compared to 2-D echocardiography and Doppler in patients with aortic stenosis?
Mean Difference: -0.23
Absolute Event Rate: 0.54% vs 0.76%
p-value: p=<0.001
3-D anyplane echocardiography provides accurate quantification of aortic stenosis comparable to 2-D and Doppler methods, while 3-D volume-rendered echocardiography tends to underestimate the orifice area.
Handke et al. (2002) conducted a cross-sectional in Aortic stenosis (n=31). 3-D anyplane and 3-D volume-rendered echocardiography vs. 2-D transesophageal planimetry and Doppler continuity equation was evaluated on Aortic valve orifice area (MD -0.23, p=<0.001). 3-D volume-rendered echocardiography significantly underestimated aortic valve orifice area compared to Doppler (0.54 vs 0.76 cm2, P<0.001), whereas 3-D anyplane echocardiography showed better agreement.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: