This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Boonyaratavej, S. Articles by Seward, J. B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Boonyaratavej, S. Articles by Seward, J. B.

Comparison of mitral inflow and superior vena cava Doppler velocities in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and constrictive pericarditis

^a Division of Cardiovascular Diseases and Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic and Mayo Foundation, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
^* Division of Cardiovascular Diseases, Mayo Clinic Scottsdale, Scottsdale, Arizona, USA

View larger version (70K): [in a new window]   Figure 1 Mitral inflow Doppler from patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (top) or constrictive pericarditis (bottom) showing respiratory variation in mitral E velocity (arrows). ins, inspiration; exp, expiration.

View larger version (62K): [in a new window]   Figure 2 Superior vena cava Doppler from a patient with constrictive pericarditis shows little respiratory changes in systolic forward flow velocity (bottom) from inspiration to expiration (arrows), in contrast to marked phasic inspiratory augmentation of forward flow velocity in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (top). S, systolic forward flow; D, diastolic forward flow; ins, inspiration; exp, expiration.

View larger version (19K): [in a new window]   Figure 3 Difference between inspiratory and expiratory systolic forward flow velocity (left) and diastolic forward flow velocity (right) in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and constrictive pericarditis patients. SVC, superior vena cava.