perhaps a TTE A5C view could have been the only way of correct LVOT gardient measurement in this case... of course with a presumption of an aortic valvular gradient lower than that of LVOT :-)
That TEE-study was a hard challenge for me. I couldn´t measure the LVOT-gradient exactely in the deep transgastric view: I measured a PG mean of 45 mmHg and you´re right, that the real PGmean is much higher with certainty. In continuous wave-mode I couldn´t separate exactely the gradient of aortic valve-prothesis and the LVOT, but we had a echocardiographic result before admission of january this year and that result told us, that there was only a PG-max. of 45 mmHg: now PG mean of 45!! I found it very hard to measure LVOT in TEE in a right way.
Hi,
perhaps a TTE A5C view could have been the only way of
correct LVOT gardient measurement in this case... of course with a
presumption of an aortic valvular gradient lower than that of LVOT
:-)
Regards,
bacman
Hello my freind!
That TEE-study was a hard challenge for
me. I couldn´t measure the LVOT-gradient exactely in the deep
transgastric view: I measured a PG mean of 45 mmHg and you´re right,
that the real PGmean is much higher with certainty. In continuous
wave-mode I couldn´t separate exactely the gradient of aortic
valve-prothesis and the LVOT, but we had a echocardiographic result
before admission of january this year and that result told us, that
there was only a PG-max. of 45 mmHg: now PG mean of 45!!
I found
it very hard to measure LVOT in TEE in a right way.
Best
greetings,
Jörg.
Of course Jörg...is very interesting case and clips are great.
/>
How much gradient in LVOT? it must be bigger...
/>Best
Pablo