Comparison of Accuracy of Aortic Valve Area Assessment in Aortic Stenosis by Real Time Three-Dimensional Echocardiography in Biplane Mode versus Two-Dimensional Transthoracic and Transesophageal Echocardiography

2007 ◽  
Vol 24 (10) ◽  
pp. 1065-1072 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie Blot-Souletie ◽  
Aurélien Hébrard ◽  
Philippe Acar ◽  
Didier Carrié ◽  
Jacques Puel
2008 ◽  
Vol 61 (5) ◽  
pp. 494-500 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leopoldo Pérez de Isla ◽  
José Zamorano ◽  
Rocío Pérez de la Yglesia ◽  
Sara Cioccarelli ◽  
Carlos Almería ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atsuko Furukawa ◽  
Yukio Abe ◽  
Chiharu Tanaka ◽  
Kazato Ito ◽  
Isao Tabuchi ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 4809
Author(s):  
M. A. Aripov ◽  
A. S. Kali ◽  
N. N. Tanaliev ◽  
A. A. Musaev ◽  
G. S. Rashbaeva ◽  
...  

Aim. To compare effectiveness of ultrasound, radiological and invasive methods for assessing aortic valve (AV) stenosis.Material and methods. This study included 33 patients with AV stenosis. The mean age of the patients was 71,8±6,8 years. All patients underwent standard and three-dimensional echocardiography, computed tomography, and cardiac catheterization.Results. According to two-dimensional echocardiography, the AV area averaged 0,58±0,21 mm2, according to cardiac catheterization — 0,61±0,17 mm2, according to three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography — 1,13±0,42 mm2, and according to multislice computed tomography 0,88±0,48 mm2. The difference between the values was significant (p<0,05).Conclusion. For routine diagnosis of AV stenosis, two-dimensional echocardiography is the optimal research method. With indications for radical treatment methods, three-dimensional echocardiography or multislice computed tomography should be performed.


1994 ◽  
Vol 128 (3) ◽  
pp. 526-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christophe Tribouilloy ◽  
Wei Feng Shen ◽  
Marcel Peltier ◽  
Anfani Mirode ◽  
Jean-Luc Rey ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document