Personne :
Guzzetti, Ezequiel

En cours de chargement...
Photo de profil
Adresse électronique
Date de naissance
Projets de recherche
Structures organisationnelles
Fonction
Nom de famille
Guzzetti
Prénom
Ezequiel
Affiliation
Université Laval
ISNI
ORCID
Identifiant Canadiana
ncf13671164
person.page.name

Résultats de recherche

Voici les éléments 1 - 4 sur 4
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Usefulness of energy loss index for adjudication of low-gradient aortic stenosis severity
    (Oxford University Press, 2020-04-07) Guzzetti, Ezequiel; Pibarot, Philippe; Clavel, Marie-Annick
    Up to 40% of patients with aortic stenosis (AS) present with a low gradient (i.e., a mean transvalvular gradient [MG] <40 mmHg) despite a small aortic valve area (AVA≤1 cm2) at echocardiography or cardiac catheterization. This ‘discordant grading’ situation raises uncertainty about the true severity of AS and therefore about therapeutic decision making (1). A thorough, integrative approach including assessment of flow status and quantitation of aortic valve calcium score by multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) has been proposed in the 2017 European guidelines for discriminating true versus pseudo-severe AS in the patients with low-gradient AS (2). It is, indeed, estimated that 50 to 70% of patients with low-gradient AS have a true-severe AS and thus an indication (Class I or IIa) for aortic valve replacement. However, it remains crucial to identify patients with pseudo-severe AS, who should be managed conservatively.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Normal-flow low-gradient severe aortic stenosis is a frequent and real entity
    (Oxford University Press, 2019-08-22) Guzzetti, Ezequiel; Pibarot, Philippe; Clavel, Marie-Annick
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Importance of flow in risk stratification of aortic stenosis.
    (Elsevier, 2020-01-01) Guzzetti, Ezequiel; Pibarot, Philippe; Clavel, Marie-Annick
  • Publication
    Restreint
    Estimation of stroke volume and aortic valve area in patients with aortic stenosis : a comparison of echocardiography versus cardiovascular magnetic resonance
    (Elsevier, 2020-06-21) Guzzetti, Ezequiel; Garcia, Julio; Larose, Éric; Le Ven, Florent; Capoulade, Romain; Pibarot, Philippe; Bédard, Élisabeth; Clavel, Marie-Annick; Tastet, Lionel; Arsenault, Marie
    Background: In aortic stenosis, accurate measurement of left ventricular stroke volume (SV) is essential for the calculation of aortic valve area (AVA) and the assessment of flow status. Current American Society of Echocardiography and European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging guidelines suggest that measurements of left ventricular outflow tract diameter (LVOTd) at different levels (at the annulus vs 5 or 10 mm below) yield similar measures of SV and AVA. The aim of this study was to assess the effect of the location of LVOTd measurement on the accuracy of SV and AVA measured on transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) compared with cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). Methods: One hundred six patients with aortic stenosis underwent both TTE and CMR. SV was estimated on TTE using the continuity equation with LVOTd measurements at four locations: at the annulus and 2, 5, and 10 mm below annulus. SV was also determined on CMR using phase contrast acquired in the aorta (SVCMR-PC), and a hybrid AVACMR-PC was calculated by diving SVCMR-PC by the transthoracic echocardiographic Doppler aortic velocity-time integral. Comparison between methods was made using Bland-Altman analysis. Results: Compared with the referent method of phase-contrast CMR for the estimation of SVCMR-PC and AVACMR-PC (SVCMR-PC 83 6 16 mL, AVACMR-PC 1.27 6 0.35 cm2 ), the best agreement was obtained by measuring LVOTd at the annulus or 2 mm below (P = NS), whereas measuring 5 and 10 mm below the annulus resulted in significant underestimation of SV and AVA by up to 15.9 6 17.3 mL and 0.24 6 0.28 cm2 , respectively (P < .01 for all). Accuracy for classification of low flow was best at the annulus (86%) and 2 mm below (82%), whereas measuring 5 and 10 mm below the annulus significantly underperformed (69% and 61%, respectively, P < .001). Conclusions: Measuring LVOTd at the annulus or very close to it provides the most accurate measures of SV and AVA, whereas measuring LVOTd 5 or 10 mm below significantly underestimates these parameters and leads to significant overestimation of the severity of aortic stenosis and prevalence of low-flow status.