Acta Med. 2008, 51: 197-200
https://doi.org/10.14712/18059694.2017.24
Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Cardiac Catheterization in Patients with Suspected Severe Aortic Stenosis
References
1. RO, Carabello B, de LeonJr. AC et al. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on practice guidelines (Committee on management of patients with valvular heart disease). J Am Coll Cardiol 1998; 32(5):1486–582.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(98)00454-9>
2. SD, Lin SJ, Brown P et al. Practical Value of Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Clinical Quantification of Aortic Valve Stenosis: Comparison With Echocardiography. Circulation 2003; 108(18):2236–43.
<https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.0000095268.47282.A1>
3. R, Nordrehaug JE, Stangeland L, Vik-Mo H. Limitations in assessing the severity of aortic stenosis by Doppler gradients. Br Heart J 1988; 59(5):551–5.
<https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.59.5.551>
<PubMed>
4. K, Djavidani B, Seitz J et al. Planimetry of aortic valve area in aortic stenosis by magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 2005; 40(10):631–6.
<https://doi.org/10.1097/01.rli.0000178362.67085.fd>
5. MG, Schulz-Menger J, Poetsch T, Pilz B, Uhlich F, Dietz R. Quantification of valvular aortic stenosis by magnetic resonance imaging. Am Heart J 2002; 144(2):329–34.
<https://doi.org/10.1067/mhj.2002.124057>
6. R, GORLIN SG. Hydraulic formula for calculation of the area of the stenotic mitral valve, other cardiac valves, and central circulatory shunts. I. Am Heart J 1951; 41(1):1–29.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-8703(51)90002-6>
7. MJ, Carey C, Coltart DJ, Jenkins BS, Webb-Peploe MM. Inaccuracies in using aortic valve gradients alone to grade severity of aortic stenosis. Br Heart J 1989; 62(5):372–8.
<https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.62.5.372>
<PubMed>
8. AS, Dill T, Brandt RR et al. Magnetic resonance to assess the aortic valve area in aortic stenosis: How does it compare to current diagnostic standards? J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 42(3):519–26.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(03)00707-1>
9. AH, West J, Papouchado M, Rozkovec A. Direct Fick cardiac output: are assumed values of oxygen consumption acceptable? Eur Heart J 1988; 9(3):337–42.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a062505>
10. C, Honold M, Meinhardt G et al. Evaluation of aortic stenosis by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging: comparison with established routine clinical techniques. Heart 2004; 90(8):893–901.
<https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.2003.022376>
<PubMed>
11. M, Kupari M, Heikkila J, Tilvis R. Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly: an echocardiographic study of a random population sample. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21(5):1220–5.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(93)90249-Z>
12. Y, Pandian NG. Role of echocardiography in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with aortic stenosis. Curr Opin Cardiol 2003; 18(5):327–33.
<https://doi.org/10.1097/00001573-200309000-00001>
13. S. Perspective on valvular heart disease: an update. J Am Coll Cardiol 1989; 14(1):1–23.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(89)90047-8>
14. BF, Siscovick D, Lind BK et al. Clinical factors associated with calcific aortic valve disease. Cardiovascular Health Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997; 29(3):630–4.
<https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(96)00563-3>
15. J, Hess O, Sepulcri F, Krayenbuehl H. Spontaneous course of aortic valve disease. Eur Heart J 1987; 8(5):471–83.
<https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.eurheartj.a062307>
16. A, Baumgartner H, Bax J et al. Guidelines on the management of valvular heart disease: The Task Force on the Management of Valvular Heart Disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J 2007; 28(2):230–68.
17. AE, Scherrer-Crosbie M. Aortic stenosis: physics and physiology—what do the numbers really mean? Rev Cardiovasc Med 2005; 6(1):23–32.
