4.5 Article

Assessment of fetal atrioventricular time intervals by tissue Doppler and pulse Doppler echocardiography: normal values and correlation with fetal electrocardiography

Journal

HEART
Volume 92, Issue 12, Pages 1831-1837

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/hrt.2006.093070

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To establish gestational age-specific reference values of normal fetal atrioventricular (AV) time interval by spectral tissue Doppler imaging (TDI) and pulse-wave Doppler (PD) methods, and to assess their correlation with signal-averaged fetal PR intervals (ECG). Design: Cohort study. Setting: Tertiary centre for fetal cardiology. Patients and measures: 131 pregnant women between 14 and 42 weeks' gestation underwent 196 fetal echocardiograms and 158 fetal ECG studies. TDI-derived AV intervals were measured as the intervals from atrial contraction (Aa) to isovolumic contraction (IV) and from Aa to ventricular systole (Sa) at the right ventricular free wall. PD-derived AV intervals were measured from simultaneous left ventricular inflow/outflow (in/out) and superior vena cava/aorta (V/AO) recordings. Results: Measurements were possible by ECG in 61%, by TDI in 100%, by in/out in 100% and by V/AO in 97% of examinations. Aa-IV correlated significantly better with PR intervals (y = 0.67x + 38.29, R-2 = 0.15, p < 0.0001, mean bias 8.0 ms) than did in/out (R-2 = 0.10, p = 0.002, bias 18.7 ms) and V/AO (R-2 = 0.06, p = 0.02, bias 12.4 ms). Gestational age and AV intervals were positively correlated with all imaging modalities (R-2 = 0.19-0.31, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: This study showed the feasibility of fetal AV interval measurements by TDI, and established gestational age-specific reference data. TDI-derived Aa-IV intervals track ECG PR intervals more closely than PD-derived AV intervals and thus should be used as the ultrasound method of choice in assessing fetal AV conduction.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available