Copyright
©The Author(s) 2017.
World J Cardiol. Jun 26, 2017; 9(6): 481-495
Published online Jun 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i6.481
Published online Jun 26, 2017. doi: 10.4330/wjc.v9.i6.481
Criteria | Severe AS | Advantages | Disadvantages |
Aortic surface area | ≤ 1.0 cm2 | Measures effective AVA. However, this may also constitute a disadvantage because it does not measure anatomical AVA | Very sensitive to measurement errors |
Less flow-dependent compared with other measurements | |||
Indexed AVA to body surface area | ≤ 0.6 cm2/m2 | Useful for extreme heights/weights | Very sensitive to measurement errors |
Mean transaortic pressure gradient | ≥ 40 mmHg | Flow-dependent | |
Requires correct alignment of Doppler signal with the flow direction | |||
Peak transaortic flow velocity | ≥ 4.0 m/s | Measures instantaneous velocity | Flow-dependent |
Best predictor of adverse events | Requires correct alignment of Doppler signal with the flow direction | ||
Ratio between peak transaortic flow velocity and peak LVOT velocity | ≤ 1/4 | Good reproducibility (compared with AVA calculation) | Limited data on prognostic utility |
- Citation: Mǎrgulescu AD. Assessment of aortic valve disease - a clinician oriented review. World J Cardiol 2017; 9(6): 481-495
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1949-8462/full/v9/i6/481.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4330/wjc.v9.i6.481