Aortic flow propagation velocity as an early predictor of high coronary risk in hypertensive patients.

AIM: To assess the value of aortic flow propagation velocity (Vp) in detecting hypertensive patients with coronary risk. METHODS: The study included 120 patients with hypertension. According to the 10-year risk of coronary heart disease the patients were categorized in the three groups: 10-year risk < 10% (I),10 - year risk=%10 - 20 (II), and 10-year risk > 20% (III). The aortic flow propagation velocity (Vp) was measured from descending aorta with color M-mode echoardiography. The slope of the first aliasing contour was accepted as Vp. It was compared with Framingham coronary risk score, carotid intima media thickness and high sensitive C-reactive protein. Twelve patients were excluded from the study due to poor acoustic window. RESULTS: The Vp was significantly lower (p<0.001), carotid intima media thickness and high sensitive C-reactive protein was significantly higher in group III (p=0.002 and p=0.014). The area under ROC curve of Vp, carotid intima media thickness and high sensitive C-reactive protein were 0.890, 0,700 and 0.664, respectively. There was a significant inverse relation between Vp and carotid intima media thickness (r=-0.37; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The aortic flow propagation velocity is a simple, feasible and reproducible marker of atherosoclerosis with an acceptable sensitivity and specificity. There is a need for longitudinal prospective studies to use it routinely.

A simplified proximal isovelocity surface area method for mitral valve area calculation in mitral stenosis: not requiring angle correction and calculator.

AIM: To simplify proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) method for mitral valve area (MVA) calculation that does not necessitate the usage of a calculator and angle correction, and to compare values estimated using this novel method with the values obtained by the conventional PISA, planimetry and pressure half-time (PHT) methods. METHODS: We evaluated patients with a wide range of mitral stenosis (MS) severity. The MVA was measured by the methods of PHT (MVA PHT), planimetry (MVApl), conventional PISA (MVAC-PISA) and the novel method of simple PISA (MVAS-PISA). Application of simple PISA was performed subsequently by division of the peak mitral inflow velocity by four; measurement of the radius by adjusting the aliasing velocity to this value; square of the radius gives the MVAS-PISA. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled in the study. Peak and mean pressure gradients of patients were 20 ± 6 mmHg and 10 ± 4 mmHg, respectively. The average values of MVApl, MVAPHT, MVAC-PISA, and MVA S-PISA were 1,54 ± 0,41, 1,65 ± 0,40, 1,58 ± 0,42, 1,57 ± 0,44 cm2, respectively. MVAS-PISA had a strong correlation with the MVAC-PISA, MVApl and MVAPHT . Furthermore, there was no significant difference between simple PISA and the other methods. The agreement between planimetry and simple PISA methods for detecting severe mitral stenosis (MVA <1.5 cm2) determined by ROC analysis was very good with a sensitivity and specificity of 100 % and 92%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Simple PISA is a user friendly method which does not take time and gives simple and correct results. If the diagnostic power of the technique is proven by more comprehensive studies, it can supersede the conventional PISA method.