Comparison of severity of aortic regurgitation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus transthoracic echocardiography

Ruvin S. Gabriel, Rahul Renapurkar, Michael A. Bolen, David Verhaert, Michael Leiber, Scott D. Flamm, Brian P. Griffin, Milind Y. Desai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Transthoracic echocardiography is the current standard for assessing aortic regurgitation (AR). AR severity can also be evaluated by flow measurement in the ascending aorta using cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR); however, the optimal site for flow measurement and the regurgitant fraction (RF) severity grading criteria that best compares with the transthoracic echocardiographic assessment of AR are not clear. The present study aimed to determine the optimal site and RF grading criteria for AR severity using phase-contrast flow measurements and CMR. A prospective observational study was performed of 107 consecutive patients who were undergoing CMR of the thoracic aorta. Using CMR, the AR severity and aortic dimensions were measured at 3 levels in the aorta (the sinotubular junction, mid-ascending aorta, and distal ascending aorta). The results were compared to the transthoracic echocardiographic grade of AR severity using multiple qualitative and quantitative criteria (grade 0, none; I+, mild; II+, mild to moderate; III+, moderate to severe; and IV+, severe). The mean RF values were significantly greater at the sinotubular junction than at the distal ascending aorta (13 ± 13.3% vs 9.4 ± 12.6%, respectively; p

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1014-1020
Number of pages7
JournalThe American Journal of Cardiology
Volume108
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2011
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of severity of aortic regurgitation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus transthoracic echocardiography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this