+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Angle of incidence does not affect accuracy of mitral stenosis area calculation by pressure half-time: application to Doppler transesophageal echocardiography

Angle of incidence does not affect accuracy of mitral stenosis area calculation by pressure half-time: application to Doppler transesophageal echocardiography

American Heart Journal 127(6): 1562-1572

Continuous wave Doppler transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) may allow the estimation of stenotic mitral valve area. Intuitively the posterolateral position of the transducer appears to limit the application of TEE for this purpose because of the excessive angle of incidence to mitral valve inflow. However, algebraic equations can be used to predict that the angle of incidence should not affect mitral valve area derived by using pressure half-time. To test the validity of this prediction and the potential application of Doppler TEE to estimate mitral valve area, 28 patients (21 women, 7 men) with a mean age of 59 +- 14 years with mitral stenosis were studied by continuous wave transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and TEE guided color flow Doppler. TTE was performed from the apical four-chamber (TEE-0) and a modified parasternal four-chamber (TTE-MAL) plane as a means of intentionally increasing the angle of incidence. TEE was done by using the horizontal (TEE-HAX) and vertical (TEE-VAX) planes. Mitral valve area was calculated by pressure half-time method. Mean mitral valve area did not differ (p = not significant (NS)) between TTE-0 (1.26 +- 0.84 cm-2), TTE-MAL (1.37 +- 0.94 cm-2), TEE-HAX (1.39 +- 0.92 cm-2), and TEE-VAX (1.35 +- 0.89 cm-2). The estimated mean angle of incidence during TTE-MAL was 45 +- 12 degrees (range 21 to 68 degrees). Six (21%) of 28 and 9 (32%) of 28 patients had an underestimation of transmitral peak velocities with TEE from the horizontal or vertical planes, respectively. However, excellent correlations were found between mitral valve area derived by using TEE-0 versus TTE-MAL (r = 0.97; SEE = 0.25 cm-2; intercept = 0.02 cm-2; slope = 1.08; and p = 0.0001), TEE-HAX (r = 0.91; SEE = 0.39 cm-2; intercept = 0.14 cm-2; slope = 1.00; and p = 0.0001) and TEE-VAX (r = 0.92; SEE = 0.36 cm-2; intercept = 0.13 cm-2; slope = 0.97; and p = 0.0001). These results are directly applicable to Doppler TEE in the determination of mitral stenosis area by pressure half-time, whereby 21% to 32% of patients using the horizontal or vertical transesophageal planes may have a significant angle of incidence leading to underestimation of transmitral valve velocities. Future studies comparing Doppler TEE with cardiac catheterization are of interest. However, the present study suggests that Doppler TEE will play an important role in the hemodynamic assessment of the severity of mitral valve stenosis.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 030085395

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 8197984

DOI: 10.1016/0002-8703(94)90387-5

Related references

Angle of incidence does not effect accuracy of mitral stenosis area calculation by pressure half-time. Clinical Research 41(3): 640A, 1993

Comparison of accuracy of mitral valve area in mitral stenosis by real-time, three-dimensional echocardiography versus two-dimensional echocardiography versus Doppler pressure half-time. American Journal of Cardiology 95(12): 1496-1499, 2005

Does chronic mitral regurgitation influence Doppler pressure half-time-derived calculation of the mitral valve area in patients with mitral stenosis?. American Heart Journal 148(4): 703-709, 2004

Transesophageal echocardiography during mitral valve repair underestimates mitral valve area by pressure half-time calculation. International Journal of Cardiology 108(2): 177-180, 2006

Calculation of mitral valve area in mitral stenosis using the proximal isovelocity surface area method. Comparison with two-dimensional planimetry and Doppler pressure half time method. Japanese Heart Journal 38(6): 811-819, 1997

Comparative accuracy of two-dimensional echocardiography and Doppler pressure half-time methods in assessing severity of mitral stenosis in patients with and without prior commissurotomy. Circulation 73(1): 100-107, 1986

Comparison of pressure half-time with proximal flow convergence and flow area method in evaluation of mitral stenosis by multiplane transesophageal echocardiography. Zhongguo Chaosheng Yixue Zazhi 14(8): 19-21, 1998

Loss of the correlation between transmit ral velocity and pressure half-times immediately after catheter balloon valvuloplasty for mitral stenosis is restored at 3 to 6 months despite persistent inaccuracy in Doppler half-time estimation of mitral valve area. Clinical Research 42(1): 39A, 1994

The effect of aortic insufficiency on doppler pressure half time calculations of mitral valve area in mitral stenosis. American Heart Association Monograph (124): II-217, 1986

Effect of aortic regurgitation on the assessment of mitral valve orifice area by Doppler pressure half-time in mitral stenosis. American Journal of Cardiology 60(4): 322-326, 1987

Assessment of accuracy of the Doppler pressure half-time method in the estimation of the mitral valve area immediately after balloon mitral valvuloplasty. European Heart Journal 18(3): 455-463, 1997

Comparison of hemodynamic pressure half-time method and Gorlin formula with Doppler and echocardiographic determinations of mitral valve area in patients with combined mitral stenosis and regurgitation. American Heart Journal 119(1): 121-129, 1990

Calculation of mitral valve area in patients with mitral stenosis by color doppler echocardiography method of the proximal isovelocity surface area. European Heart Journal 12(ABSTR Suppl.): 233, 1991

Doppler pressure half-time method of assessing mitral valve area: aortic insufficiency does not adversely affect validity. American Heart Journal 136(4 Pt 1): 718-723, 1998