4.8 Article

A novel method of expressing left ventricular mass relative to body size in children

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 117, 期 21, 页码 2769-2775

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.741157

关键词

left ventricular hypertrophy; pediatrics; echocardiography; reference standards

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-Left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy (LVH) in children is widely defined as a left ventricular mass index (LVMI, g/m(2.7)) > 95th percentile. However, LVMI increases with decreasing height in young children; thus, the 95th percentile LVMI will depend on the height distribution of the reference population. The objective of this study was to compare the performance of a novel method of expressing LV mass relative to body size (centile curves) with the LVMI method. Methods and Results-LV mass was estimated by M-mode echocardiography in 440 healthy nonobese reference children (birth to 21 years) and 239 children at risk for LVH; the LVMI was calculated for all children. Three samples of 270 children, each with different height distributions, were drawn from the reference population. A sample-specific 95th percentile LVMI was determined for each reference sample. At-risk children were classified as having LVH or not based on each sample-specific 95th percentile. Four LV mass-for-height centile curves were constructed with the Cole lambda-mu-sigma method and data from each reference sample. At-risk children were each assigned an LV mass-for-height percentile with these curves and were reclassified as having LVH if LV mass-for-height was > 95th percentile. The centile method provided a stable estimate of the proportion of at-risk children with LVH regardless of reference group, whereas proportion estimates varied significantly depending on the reference population when the LVMI method was used. Conclusions-LV mass-for-height centile curves are superior to LVMI as a method of normalizing LV mass to body size in children.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据