ライフサイエンスコーパス: regurgitant volume

1 ring effective regurgitant orifice [ERO] and regurgitant volume).

2 RO was not linked to outcome, in contrast to regurgitant volume.

3 regurgitant gradient, a notable increase in regurgitant volume.

4 ted by pulsed-Doppler technique to determine regurgitant volume.

5 for evaluating effective AR orifice area and regurgitant volume.

6 or determining effective AR orifice size and regurgitant volume.

7 red with those with no PPM (change in mitral regurgitant volume: -11+/-4 versus -17+/-5 mL, respectiv

8 /LA area 43 +/- 4% to 8 +/- 5%, p < 0.0001), regurgitant volume (14.7 +/- 2.1 ml to 3.1 +/- 0.5 ml, p

9 versus 426+/-50 ms; P<0.0001) yielded lower regurgitant volume (24.8+/-13.4 versus 48.6+/-25.6 mL; P

10 itutions and presenting moderate SMR (mitral regurgitant volume 30 to 45 mL/beat) not considered for

11 +/-0.5 cm versus 0.6+/-0.3 cm; P=0.001), and regurgitant volume (57.2+/-12.8 mL/beat versus 30.8+/-6.

12 ice were 43+/-37 mm and r=.79 (P<.0001); for regurgitant volume, 62+/-45 mL and r=.80 (P<.0001); and

13 tified according to current recommendations (regurgitant volume, 66+/-40 ml per beat; effective regur

14 had a mean ejection fraction 64 +/- 9%, mean regurgitant volume 67 +/- 31 ml, and low mean Charlson c

15 s, 60% men) in sinus rhythm with organic MR (regurgitant volume 68 +/- 42 ml/beat) and performed at b

16 ues for VCW (0.5 +/- 0.2 to 0.5 +/- 0.2 cm), regurgitant volume (69 +/- 47 to 69 +/- 56 ml) or effect

17 versus -37+/-21%), and percent mitral valve regurgitant volume (-99+/-2% versus -52+/-56%) for the X

18 al TEE demonstrates significant reduction of regurgitant volume after PMVR.

19 ht ventricular stroke volume minus pulmonary regurgitant volume) after BMS remained unchanged (33.8+/

20 fied an inflection point at which calculated regurgitant volume agreed best with invasive measurement

21 Mitral regurgitant volume and orifice area did not correlate wi

22 f the present study was to quantitate aortic regurgitant volume and regurgitant fraction in a chronic

23 raphic dimensions were determined as well as regurgitant volume and regurgitant orifice area derived

24 Regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions by the new

25 olor Doppler method provides accurate aortic regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions without cu

26 a promising method for determining pulmonary regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions.

27 locity-time integral was also used to obtain regurgitant volumes and regurgitant fractions.

28 Pulmonary regurgitant volumes and RV forward stroke volumes comput

29 es in effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume, and was not different between dynami

30 ce = 0.51 +/- 1.89 ml/beat for the pulmonary regurgitant volume; and r = 0.91, mean difference = -0.2

31 conditions) and grade III-IV regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat > 30 ml, eight conditions) were

32 Grade I regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat < 15 ml, six conditions), grade

33 ml, six conditions), grade II regurgitation (regurgitant volume/beat between 16 ml and 30 ml, five co

34 valve closure, increased the early systolic regurgitant volume before complete coaptation, and decre

35 Mitral valve regurgitant volume by color Doppler 3D TEE was determine

36 because the heart compensates for increasing regurgitant volume by left-atrial enlargement, causes le

37 orifice area was calculated by dividing the regurgitant volume by the continuous-wave Doppler veloci

38 e regurgitant orifice area (EROA) and aortic regurgitant volume by using the color Doppler-imaged ven

39 Mitral regurgitant volume calculated from R(calc) and R(meas) c

40 However, shorter MR yields lower regurgitant volume, consequences, and benign outcomes.

41 The mitral regurgitant volume decreased from 47+/-27 ml before ther

42 imal study, using strictly quantified aortic regurgitant volumes, demonstrated that the digital color

43 ric method consistently decreased after CRT: regurgitant volume from 40 +/- 20 ml to 24 +/- 17 ml and

44 h > or = 0.5 cm was always associated with a regurgitant volume > 60 mL and a regurgitant orifice are

45 without surgery compared with only 21% with regurgitant volume >55 mL (P<0.0001).

46 ) to be independently associated with mitral regurgitant volume improvement.

47 The added regurgitant volume in MR increases the left atrial to le

48 used to estimate regurgitant flow rates and regurgitant volumes in the presence of mitral regurgitat

49 As a result of reduced TR driving force, regurgitant volume increased less than effective regurgi

50 na contracta width < or = 0.3 cm predicted a regurgitant volume < 60 mL and a regurgitant orifice are

51 ndications for surgery: 91% of subjects with regurgitant volume </=55 mL survived to 5 years without

52 +/- 2.9 ml vs. 11 +/- 5.8 ml, p < 0.0001 for regurgitant volume; mean difference 1.2 +/- 7.6% vs. 19

53 In the patients, mitral regurgitant volume (MRV) by ACMm-ACMa agreed with PD-2D

54 color Doppler methods for determining mitral regurgitant volume (MRV) have prevented their widespread

55 sociated with postoperative change in mitral regurgitant volume on univariable analysis were entered

56 tive MR grade, correlated significantly with regurgitant volume or regurgitant orifice area in a mult

57 orifice velocity showed good agreement with regurgitant volumes per beat (r = .81, difference = 0.9

58 and agreements between peak and mean RFR and regurgitant volumes per beat as determined by Doppler ec

59 Rs varied from 0.7 to 4.9 (2.7+/-1.3) L/min, regurgitant volumes per beat varied from 7.0 to 48.0 (26

60 Peak and mean RFRs and regurgitant volumes per beat were calculated from vena c

61 ted in context, and in mid-late systolic MR, regurgitant volume provides information more reflective

62 width from apical views correlated well with regurgitant volume (r = .85, SEE = 19 mL) and regurgitan

63 asternal long-axis view correlated well with regurgitant volume (r = .85, SEE = 20 mL) and regurgitan

64 hepatic venous flow (r = 0.79, p < 0.0001), regurgitant volume (r = 0.77, p<0.0001) and right atrial

65 Regurgitant volumes ranged from 2 to 191 mL.

66 effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) area and regurgitant volume recorded by quantitative Doppler (r=0

67 on (grade 4) were 60 mL, 50%, and 40 mm2 for regurgitant volume, regurgitant fraction, and orifice, r

68 asurements of regurgitant fraction (RgF) and regurgitant volume (RgV).

69 All patients underwent MRI to quantify regurgitant volume (RV) of OMR by subtracting the aortic

70 In IMR patients, regurgitant volume (RVol) and effective regurgitant orif

71 We hypothesized that CMR measurement of regurgitant volume (RVol) is more reproducible than TTE.

72 area (EROA) of 0.4 to 0.2 cm(2), and from a regurgitant volume (RVol) of 60 to 30 ml.

73 , the effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume (RVol) were measured by the PISA tech

74 diographic methods allow the quantitation of regurgitant volume (RVol), regurgitant fraction (RF) and

75 Regurgitant volume was reduced from 84.1+/-38.3 mL prein

76 Mitral regurgitant volume was then calculated according to the

77 VCW, effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume were measured by quantitative Doppler