Quantification of rheumatic mitral stenosis severity with three‐dimensional vena contracta area

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 370-375 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gülay Gök ◽  
Tufan Çınar ◽  
Nurten Sayar
2006 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 793-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dasan E. Velayudhan ◽  
Todd M. Brown ◽  
Navin C. Nanda ◽  
Vinod Patel ◽  
Andrew P. Miller ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 34 (7) ◽  
pp. 1002-1009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Sampaio ◽  
Ricardo Ladeiras-Lopes ◽  
João Almeida ◽  
Paulo Fonseca ◽  
Ricardo Fontes-Carvalho ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 368-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hani M. Mahmoud Elsayed ◽  
Mohamed Hassan ◽  
Michael Nagy ◽  
Alaaeldin Amin ◽  
Ahmed Elguindy ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 29
Author(s):  
Mehrnoush Toufan ◽  
Dina Ashouri

Dear Editor, Two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography is a powerful tool for assessment of mitral regurgitation (MR) [1]. However, it bears several major disadvantages. Evidence suggests that measurement of the vena contracta area (VCA) via a three-dimensional (3D) method is significantly more accurate than 2D methods in the quantification of MR since the 2D method is not sufficiently reliable in calculation of VC diameter because of  circular assumption of VC area [2]. VCA direct planimetry (DP) and multiplanar reconstruction (MPR)-derived VCA are direct and reliable methods to quantify MR severity, and their results are comparable with those of 2D integrative method [2, 3]. It is strongly recommended that these methods especially DP can replace 2D methods in the quantification of MR in the clinical practice, as it is more accurate and easy to perform [3].


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document