RESUMO
We replaced Doppler-derived stroke volume in the continuity equation (method A) by either right heart catheterization-derived stroke volume (method B) or cardiovascular magnetic resonance-derived stroke volume (method C) to calculate aortic valve area in 20 consecutive patients with moderate or severe aortic stenosis. Comparison of both hybrid methods (methods B and C) by Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean difference near zero, a spread within two standard deviations and very similar limits of agreement. More importantly, all patients were classified into the same category of severity by both methods.
Assuntos
Anatomia Transversal/métodos , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico , Ecocardiografia Doppler/métodos , Aumento da Imagem/métodos , Interpretação de Imagem Assistida por Computador/métodos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética/métodos , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Cateterismo Cardíaco , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Variações Dependentes do Observador , Técnica de SubtraçãoRESUMO
Intracoronary stents have been shown to reduce the rate of restenosis when compared with balloon angioplasty, but in-stent restenosis continues to be an important clinical problem. It was therefore the aim of this registry to identify procedural and angiographic predictors for the occurrence of in-stent restenosis. We analyzed 368 patients with 421 lesions who underwent coronary stent implantation between January 1998 and February 2000. Indications for the placement of a coronary stent were severe dissections (37%), suboptimal angiographic results (38%), restenotic lesions (20%), and graft lesions (4%). Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 270 patients (73%) with 293 lesions after 6 months. Clinical and angiographic variables were analyzed by univariate and multivariate models for the ability to predict the occurrence of in-stent restenosis, defined as a diameter stenosis >50%. In-stent restenosis was angiographically documented in 67 patients and 68 lesions (23%). Under all tested variables the reference luminal diameter before stent implantation (p = 0.006) and diabetes mellitus (p = 0.023) were identified as independent predictors for the occurrence of in-stent restenosis. The comparison of diabetic and nondiabetic patients according to vessel size revealed a 2 times higher rate of in-stent restenosis in small vessels (44% vs 23%, p = 0.002), whereas in vessels >3.0 mm the rate of in-stent restenosis was not significantly different between the 2 groups. In this registry, the clinical variable diabetes and the procedural variable reference vessel size were independent predictors for the occurrence of in-stent restenosis. In these patients, the rate of in-stent restenosis was as high as 45%.