title: Doppler versus contrast echocardiography for diagnosis of tricuspid regurgitation.
abstract: Sixty-eight patients (mean age 49 years) were studied with contrast echocardiography (CE) and Doppler echocardiography (DE) to evaluate both methods for detecting and grading tricuspid regurgitation (TR). In all patients, right ventricular (RV) angiography was performed. The severity of TR was graded on a 4-point scale. Only 68 of 88 patients who underwent RV angiography (77%) could be evaluated, but 65 of 68 patients who underwent CE (96%) and all 68 who underwent DE (100%) could be evaluated. TR was present in 33 patients as seen on RV angiography. CE and DE correctly diagnosed 27 and 30 patients, respectively, corresponding to a sensitivity of 82% for CE and 91% for DE. Specificity was 100% for CE and 86% for DE. CE and DE grading, respectively, of TR vs RV angiographic grading showed no difference in 50 and 47 patients, a 1-level difference in 8 and 13 and a 2-level difference in 7 and 5 cases. (CE-RV angiography, r = 0.84, p less than 0.001; DE-RV angiography, r = 0.82, p less than 0.001). Thus, CE and DE are accurate methods for routine diagnosis of TR, with DE having higher sensitivity and easier grading. Considering the possibility of false-positive findings of our standard RV angiography, sensitivity and specificity of CE and DE could be even higher.
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D004452:Echocardiography / Q000379:methods*; D005188:False Negative Reactions; D005189:False Positive Reactions; D005260:Female; D006352:Heart Ventricles / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011859:Radiography; D012016:Reference Values; D014262:Tricuspid Valve Insufficiency / Q000175:diagnosis*