...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of cardiology >Three-dimensional analysis of left ventricular geometry using magnetic resonance imaging: feasibility and comparison with echocardiographic analysis
【24h】

Three-dimensional analysis of left ventricular geometry using magnetic resonance imaging: feasibility and comparison with echocardiographic analysis

机译:使用磁共振成像对左心室几何结构进行三维分析:可行性和与超声心动图分析的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

OBJECTIVES: Reliability of left ventricular geometry assessed by echocardiography (Echo) using an assumed left ventricular mass (LVM) and one-dimensional eccentricity (relative wall thickness: RWT), remains questionable. This study evaluated the feasibility of three-dimensional left ventricular geometric analysis using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: Echocardiography and MRI were performed on 55 patients with hypertension. LVM was calculated using 0.8 (American Society of Echocardiography-cube LVM) + 0.6 g for Echo and the slice summation method for MRI. Eccentricity was determined by RWT (septal wall thickness + posterior wall thickness/left ventricular inner diameter) for Echo and LVM/1.05/left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) ratio [MRI-mass volume/cavity (M/C) ratio] for MRI. Left ventricular geometry was classified into four patterns according to the presence/absence of left ventricular hypertrophy and abnormalormal eccentricity (partition value: RWT = 0.44, MRI; M/C ratio = 2.0), and the patient distribution was compared between the two methods. RESULTS: Although the mean values for LVM were similar, the mean value for LVEDV by echocardiography was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) and the mean M/C ratio was significantly lower (r = 0.004) than those by MRI. There were widely dispersed LVM values at higher underlying values of LVM and significant correlations between MRI-LVEDV and MRI-LVM (r = 0.87) and between Echo-LVEDV and Echo-LVM (r = 0.75). There was a significant difference in patient distribution according to left ventricular geometric pattern between the two methods (p < 0.01). Concentric (n = 18) and eccentric hypertrophy (n = 12) were dominant patterns in Echo analysis, and concentric hypertrophy (n = 23) and concentric remodeling (n = 21) were dominant in MRI analysis. The left ventricular geometric patterns were different in 32 patients (58.0%). Inadequate LVEDV values in Echo were the primary cause of this phenomenon. CONCLUSIONS: Left ventricular geometric analysis by Echo results in inaccurate values. Three-dimensional left ventricular geometric analysis using MRI provides more accurate information about left ventricular geometry.
机译:目的:超声心动图(Echo)使用假定的左心室质量(LVM)和一维偏心率(相对壁厚:RWT)评估的左心室几何形状的可靠性仍然值得怀疑。这项研究评估了使用磁共振成像(MRI)进行三维左心室几何分析的可行性。方法:对55例高血压患者行超声心动图和MRI检查。使用0.8(美国超声心动图立方LVM学会)+ 0.6 g Echo和MRI切片求和方法计算LVM。通过RWT(隔壁厚度+后壁厚度/左心室内径)确定Echo和LVM / 1.05 /左心室舒张末容积(LVEDV)的比[MRI质量/容积(M / C)的比]用于MRI。根据左心室肥大的存在与否和异常/正常的偏心率(分配值:RWT = 0.44,MRI; M / C比= 2.0)将左心室的几何形状分为四种类型,并比较两者的患者分布方法。结果:尽管LVM的平均值相似,但超声心动图显示的LVEDV平均值显着高于MRI(p <0.0001),平均M / C比显着更低(r = 0.004)。在较高的LVM基础值处存在广泛分散的LVM值,并且MRI-LVEDV与MRI-LVM之间(r = 0.87)以及Echo-LVEDV与Echo-LVM之间具有显着相关性(r = 0.75)。两种方法之间,根据左心室几何图案的患者分布差异显着(p <0.01)。在Echo分析中,同心肥大(n = 18)和偏心肥大(n = 12)是主要模式,在MRI分析中同心肥大(n = 23)和同心重塑(n = 21)。 32例患者的左心室几何形态不同(58.0%)。回声中的LVEDV值不足是此现象的主要原因。结论:回声对左心室的几何分析结果不准确。使用MRI的三维左心室几何分析可提供有关左心室几何形状的更准确信息。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号