Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Automated quantification of aortic regurgitant volume and regurgitant fraction using the digital colour Doppler velocity profile integration method in patients with aortic regurgitation
  1. Y Miyake1,
  2. T Hozumi2,
  3. I Mori3,
  4. K Sugioka2,
  5. A Yamamuro3,
  6. T Akasaka4,
  7. S Homma1,
  8. K Yoshida4,
  9. J Yoshikawa2
  1. 1Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Colombia University, New York, USA
  2. 2Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Osaka City University School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  3. 3Department of Cardiology, Kobe General Hospital, Kobe, Japan
  4. 4Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr Takeshi Hozumi, Department of Internal Medicine and Cardiology, Osaka City University School of Medicine, 1-4-3 Asahimachi Abenoku Osaka 545-8586, Japan;
    thozumi{at}med.osaka-cu.ac.jp

Abstract

Background: The recently introduced automated cardiac flow measurement (ACM) technique provides a quick and an accurate automated calculation of stroke volume and cardiac output. This is obtained by spatio-temporal integration of digital Doppler velocity profile data.

Objective: To evaluate the use of the ACM method in the non-invasive assessment of aortic regurgitant volume and per cent regurgitant fraction (%RF) in patients with aortic regurgitation.

Methods: Aortic outflow volume and mitral inflow volume were calculated by the ACM method in 22 patients with isolated aortic regurgitation. Aortic regurgitant volume and %RF were calculated using the following equations: aortic regurgitant volume = [aortic outflow volume] − [mitral inflow volume]; %RF = [aortic regurgitant volume]/[aortic outflow volume] × 100. The results were compared with those obtained using pulsed Doppler cross sectional echocardiography (PD-2D).

Results: Aortic regurgitant volumes measured by the ACM method showed a good correlation with the PD-2D measurements (r = 0.95, y = 0.9x + 3.9, SEE = 8.6 ml); the mean (SD) difference between the two methods was −1.5 (8.5) ml. %RF estimated by the ACM method also correlated well with the values obtained by the PD-2D method (r = 0.91, y = 0.9x + 4.9, SEE = 6.0%); the mean difference between the two methods was −1.5 (6.0)%. Total time required for aortic regurgitant volume (for one cardiac cycle) by the ACM method was significantly shorter than by the PD-2D method (130 (16) v 230 (32) s, p < 0.01).

Conclusions: The newly developed the ACM method is quick and accurate in the automated assessment of aortic regurgitant volume and per cent regurgitant fraction in patients with isolated aortic regurgitation.

  • echocardiography
  • valvar disease
  • flow volume
  • automated measurement
  • ACM, automated cardiac flow measurement
  • PD-2D, pulsed Doppler cross sectional echocardiography
  • RF, regurgitant fraction

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes