JACC
HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Am Coll Cardiol, 1999; 33:1655-1661
© 1999 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baumgartner, H.
Right arrow Articles by Maurer, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Baumgartner, H.
Right arrow Articles by Maurer, G.

"overestimation" of catheter gradients by doppler ultrasound in patients with aortic stenosis: a predictable manifestation of pressure recovery

Helmut Baumgartner, MD, FACCa, Thomas Stefenelli, MD, FACCa, Julia Niederberger, MDa, Heinrich Schima, PhD* and Gerald Maurer, MD, FACCa

a Department of Cardiology, Vienna General Hospital, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
* Center of Biomedical Research/Ludwig Boltzmann Research Institute of Cardiac Surgery, Vienna General Hospital, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria



View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 1 Differences between peak Doppler and peak catheter gradients versus average peak gradient by Doppler and catheter technique. Mean difference ±2 SD are represented by the dashed lines. Data of patients with a diameter of the ascending aorta ≤3 cm are indicated by filled circles, whereas open circles represent data from patients with a diameter of the aorta >3 cm.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 2 Differences between mean Doppler and mean catheter gradients versus average mean gradient by Doppler and catheter technique. Mean difference ±2 SD are represented by the dashed lines. Data of patients with a diameter of the ascending aorta ≤3 cm are indicated by filled circles, whereas open cicles represent data from patients with a diameter of the aorta >3 cm.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 3 Differences between Doppler predicted (i.e., pressure recovery) and observed Doppler-catheter gradient differences (peak gradient) versus average peak gradient differences by prediction and observation. Mean difference ±2 SD are indicated by the dashed lines.

 


View larger version (20K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 4 Differences between Doppler predicted (i.e., pressure recovery) and observed Doppler-catheter gradient differences (mean gradient) versus average mean gradient differences by prediction and observation. Mean difference ±2 SD are indicated by the dashed lines.

 


View larger version (31K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 5 Peak Doppler gradients (open circles) and Doppler predicted peak catheter gradients (filled circles) versus observed peak catheter gradients (dashed line = line of identity).

 


View larger version (32K):

[in a new window]
  		Figure 6 Mean Doppler gradients (open circles) and Doppler predicted mean catheter gradients (filled circles) versus mean catheter gradients (dashed line = line of identity).

 




HOME SUBSCRIPTIONS CURRENT ISSUE PAST ISSUES CARDIOSOURCE SEARCH HELP FEEDBACK
Copyright © 1999 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.