Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 21(7): 805-813, 2020 07 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31501858

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Wave intensity analysis (WIA) in the aorta offers important clinical and mechanistic insight into ventriculo-arterial coupling, but is difficult to measure non-invasively. We performed WIA by combining standard cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) flow-velocity and non-invasive central blood pressure (cBP) waveforms. METHODS AND RESULTS: Two hundred and six healthy volunteers (age range 21-73 years, 47% male) underwent sequential phase contrast CMR (Siemens Aera 1.5 T, 1.97 × 1.77 mm2, 9.2 ms temporal resolution) and supra-systolic oscillometric cBP measurement (200 Hz). Velocity (U) and central pressure (P) waveforms were aligned using the waveform foot, and local wave speed was calculated both from the PU-loop (c) and the sum of squares method (cSS). These were compared with CMR transit time derived aortic arch pulse wave velocity (PWVtt). Associations were examined using multivariable regression. The peak intensity of the initial compression wave, backward compression wave, and forward decompression wave were 69.5 ± 28, -6.6 ± 4.2, and 6.2 ± 2.5 × 104 W/m2/cycle2, respectively; reflection index was 0.10 ± 0.06. PWVtt correlated with c or cSS (r = 0.60 and 0.68, respectively, P < 0.01 for both). Increasing age decade and female sex were independently associated with decreased forward compression wave (-8.6 and -20.7 W/m2/cycle2, respectively, P < 0.01) and greater wave reflection index (0.02 and 0.03, respectively, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This novel non-invasive technique permits straightforward measurement of wave intensity at scale. Local wave speed showed good agreement with PWVtt, and correlation was stronger using the cSS than the PU-loop. Ageing and female sex were associated with poorer ventriculo-arterial coupling in healthy individuals.


Subject(s)
Aorta , Pulse Wave Analysis , Adult , Aged , Aorta/diagnostic imaging , Blood Flow Velocity , Blood Pressure , Female , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy , Male , Middle Aged , Predictive Value of Tests , Young Adult
2.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging ; 17(suppl_2): ii95-ii102, 2016 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28415097

ABSTRACT

Asymptomatic patients may exhibit symptoms during objective exercise testing, but whether symptoms are due to the obstructively of the valve (typified by the mean gradient) or underlying ventricular function remains unknown. While the mean gradient is an easy parameter to measure no consensus about the measurement of contractile reserve exists. Longitudinal abnormalities may occur in the presence of a normal ejection fraction and the augmentation of these parameters is poorly described. To obtain an objective regarding patients exercise ability is best determined using cardiopulmonary exercise testing. We therefore examined echocardiographic predictors of exercise ability during cardiopulmonary exercise testing.24 asymptomatic patients with moderate to severe or severe aortic stenosis and preserved ejection fraction underwent stress echocardiography with simultaneous cardiopulmonary exercise testing. The primary assessment of exercise ability was the VO2peak and OUES. Echocardiography was measured at rest and during maximal exercise (defined as RER > 1)OUES and VO2peak showed a poor relationship with conventional parameters of severity including peak and mean gradients, AVA and dimensionless index, resting systolic function (by EF and TDI). During exercise systolic augmentation had a good relationship with exercise ability but the exercise mean gradient and exercise LVEF did not.Longitudinal systolic function and particularly systolic augmentation is the strongest predictor of exercise ability when compared to conventional measures of severity.VO2peakOUESS' exerciseRho=0.69 (p=0.001)R= 0.71 (p=0.001)S' restRho=0.52 (p=0.01)R= 0.44 (p=ns)Rest AV max VRho= 0.09 (p=ns)R= -0.08 (p=ns)Rest AV mean PGRho= 0.34 (p=ns)R=-0.10 (p=ns)Exercise AV max VRho=0.43 (p=0.05)R=0.23 (p=ns)Exercise AVmean PGRho= 0.51 (p=0.001)R=0.26 (p=ns)Rest AVARho=0.40 (p=ns)Rho=0.46 (p=0.04)Dimensionless indexRho=0.15 (p=ns)R=0.13 (p=ns)LVEF restRho=-0.18 (p=ns)R=-0.32 (p=ns)LVEF exerciseRho=0.18 (p=ns)R=0.17 (p=ns)S' - systolic velocity; V - velocity; AV - aortic valve; AVA- aortic valve area; LVEF - left ventricular ejection fraction.


Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Echocardiography, Stress/methods , Exercise Tolerance/physiology , Myocardial Contraction/physiology , Stroke Volume/physiology , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/diagnostic imaging , Adult , Aged , Aortic Valve Stenosis/physiopathology , Case-Control Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Oxygen Consumption/physiology , Reference Values , Severity of Illness Index , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/physiopathology , Ventricular Function, Left
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL