Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2026
2025
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
CPC 2025
CPC 2026
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
Aortic Valve Area Determination by Planimetry: Comparison of Two-Dimensional and Three-Dimensional Transesophageal Echocardiography – a systematic review and Meta-analysis
Session:
Sessão de Posters 22 - Imagem em hemodinâmica complexa e doença valvular
Speaker:
Paula Fazendas
Congress:
CPC 2026
Topic:
B. Imaging
Theme:
03. Imaging
Subtheme:
03.1 Echocardiography
Session Type:
Posters Eletrónicos
FP Number:
---
Authors:
Paula Fazendas; Daniel Caldeira; Hélder Pereira; Ana G. Almeida
Abstract
<p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Introduction: Accurate quantification of aortic valve area (AVA) is essential in the evaluation of aortic stenosis (AS), particularly for guiding clinical decisions regarding intervention. While two-dimensional (2D) Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is widely used for AVA planimetry, three-dimensional (3D) TEE may offer superior accuracy due to improved anatomical visualization. We aimed to compare AVA measurements by 2D versus 3D TEE in patients with AS. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies reporting AVA measurements using both 2D and 3D TEE in adult patients with AS. Paired measurements, means and standard deviations, or correlations between techniques were extracted. The primary outcome was the mean difference in AVA (cm²) between modalities. Secondary outcomes included pooled correlation coefficients and assessment of heterogeneity. Analyses were performed using random-effects models.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Eight studies comprising 381 patients were included. The pooled mean absolute difference between 2D and 3D TEE was 0.16 cm² (95% CI 0.09–0.23; <em>p</em> < 0.001), indicating that 3D TEE yielded slightly smaller AVA measurements overall (Figure: forest plot). Heterogeneity was low, and sensitivity analyses excluding older equipment showed consistent findings. Most studies demonstrated low risk of bias in patient selection and flow/timing, with some concerns regarding index-test and reference-standard domains.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12pt"><span style="font-family:Calibri,sans-serif">Conclusions: 3D TEE provides slightly smaller AVA measurements than 2D TEE, with low heterogeneity and acceptable study quality. While both modalities may be clinically useful, 3D TEE may offer more accurate anatomical assessment. Standardized imaging protocols and multicenter validation are warranted to enhance reproducibility and ensure consistent evaluation of aortic stenosis severity.</span></span></p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site