Evaluation of tricuspid and pulmonary valves using epicardial and transesophageal echocardiography--a comparative study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare measurements obtained by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and epicardial echocardiography (EE) for evaluation of the tricuspid valve (TV) and pulmonary valve (PV). DESIGN: Prospective observational. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting with or without aortic valve replacement. INTERVENTIONS: After routine intraoperative TEE, EE was performed to compare measurements obtained by the 2 methods. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After institutional review board approval, 25 patients >18 years old were recruited. Biases with EE versus TEE for E and A waves were 11.9 cm/second (95% confidence interval [CI], 48.2 to -24.4) and 6.8 cm/second (95% CI, 28 to -15), respectively, and for E/A ratio was 0.08 (95% CI, 1.2 to -1). Pulmonary velocity bias was 57.94 cm/second (95% CI, 192.9 to -76.98), with higher values using EE. Bias for pulmonary trunk diameter was -0.31 cm (95% CI, 1.5 to -2.1). For quality of images, means were 2.4 (standard deviation [SD], 1.0) for EE and 2.3 (SD, 0.57) with TEE for TV and 2.4 (SD, 1.0) with EE and 2.5 (SD, 1.0) with TEE for PV. For the number of leaflets visualized, means were 2.2 (SD, 1.0) with EE and 2.5 (SD, 0.5) with TEE for TV and 2.5 (SD, 0.5) for EE and 1.3 (SD, 1.1) with TEE for PV. CONCLUSIONS: There was good agreement for Doppler measurements across TVs; however, measurements across PVs were significantly higher with EE versus TEE. TV Doppler measurements were difficult to acquire even for surgeons experienced in epiaortic scanning.

The role of epicardial echocardiography in the measurement of transvalvular flow velocities during aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare transvalvular flow velocities obtained by transesophageal echocardiography and epicardial echocardiography (EE) during aortic valve replacement (AVR). DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: University hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing AVR for aortic stenosis. INTERVENTIONS: After institutional review board approval, 17 patients undergoing AVR consented. Deep transgastric (deep TG LAX) and transgastric long-axis (TG LAX) views and epicardial aortic valve long-axis views (S8 probe) were obtained on a SONOS 5500 (Phillips Medical Systems, Bothell, WA) before and after AVR. Transvalvular flow velocity and velocity time integral (VTI) were recorded via each technique. Measurements were made offline by 2 independent reviewers. Agreement between measurements made by different views was evaluated by using Bland-Altman analysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The epicardial probe was well tolerated. Quality images were obtained in all patients with TEE and 30 of 34 studies via epicardial scanning. The mean bias for peak velocities derived through EE and deep TG LAX was 96.3 cm/s (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.1-141.4) before AVR and 58 cm/s (95% CI, 32.4-83.7) after AVR. The mean bias for peak velocities between EE and TG LAX was 70 cm/s (95% CI, 31.1-108.9) before and 84.7 cm/s (95% CI, 55.6-113.7) after AVR. Similar results were obtained for VTI. CONCLUSIONS: Peak transaortic valve velocities and VTI measured with epicardial echocardiography are higher in comparison to measurements via TEE in patients undergoing AVR. The precise role of epicardial echocardiography in the comprehensive echocardiographic examination of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement needs further evaluation.