1985
DOI: 10.1016/0002-9149(85)90418-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validation of instantaneous pressure gradients measured by continuous-wave Doppler in experimentally induced aortic stenosis

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
11
2

Year Published

1986
1986
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
3
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
1
11
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, energy loss across the central orifice is reduced and pressure recovery increased, causing a steep decay of the pressure gradient ( Figure 4A). In the present study, the observed decrease of pressure gradient between 5 …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…Therefore, energy loss across the central orifice is reduced and pressure recovery increased, causing a steep decay of the pressure gradient ( Figure 4A). In the present study, the observed decrease of pressure gradient between 5 …”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 64%
“…However, those studies were limited in sample size and provided only simple correlations between these two modalities. [7][8][9][10] In addition, the previous studies did not examine the reasons why the calculation of LVMI using TTE measurements tends to overestimate LV mass. Especially given that LVMI is a critical prognostic factor in patients with AS undergoing surgical correction, 11 whether the current status of calculating LVMI using echocardiographic measurements matches that of other modalities requires more validation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, replacing the SV in the CE by MRI derived SV measurement may be more accurate in situations where significant flow acceleration is present in the LVOT. On the other hand, Doppler-derived gradients correlate well with invasively measured pressure gradients as it has been demonstrated in the experimental and in the clinical setting 11,12 . Therefore, combining measurements of SV by MRI with measurements of VTI across the aortic valve by echocardiography in hybrid approach 2 takes advantages of both methods.…”
mentioning
confidence: 52%