Refference Normal Values Of Morphologic And Functional

2d-echocardiographic Parameters Evaluated In A

Group Of Young Healt Adults

Authors: Al.Andritoiu, N.Gavrila

Military hospital CRAIOVA Romania

Introduction

Despite an over two decades experience in echo-

cardiography, Romanian cardiology do not knows

some reference studies involving health people

and also differing by age category

Romanian military cardiology also, needs some

modern studies based by evaluation with an actual

US- technique of the principal morphologic and

functional parameters, specific to the young adult

age

Objectives

determination by ultrasonographic investigation

of principal morphologic and functional cardiac

parameters, in a group of young adults without

heart diseases

need of reference standard values for our own

echo- laboratory and also in Romanian

cardiology literature

Method

SIEMENS SONOLINE Versa Plus-echocardiograph 2.5 MHz- electronic ultrasound probe Standard approach

- left parasternal LAX- view

- apical - 4 C and apical 5- C views the pacient positioned in left- lateral decubitus at an

angle of 90 degrees the measurements were made in 2D-Echo ASE recommendations were respected Spectral Doppler (PWD) with theta angle correction

The Study Group

N = 80 Males

Mean age (yr.)…….. 21.35+/-1.76 (18 - 29)

Height (cm)……….….175+/-6.35 (163 - 189)

Weight (kg)…………..72+/-13.75 ( 53 - 117)

BS Area (m2)...…..…1.86+/- 0.17 (1.56 - 2.41)

BMI (kg/m2)………..22.66+/- 3.68 ( 21 - 37 )

Statistics

The results were represented as:

- Mean value

- Standard deviation

- Maximal value

- Minimal value

The correlations were determined by Pearson

equation

Results 1. Morphologic Parameters

Aor Aov IVSd PWd LVd LVs RD LA RA

Mean 1.94 2.85 0.84 0.85 4.45 3.1 2. 2 2.62 3.28

Sd 0.17 0.26 0.06 0.06 0.36 0.38 0.33 0.42 0.32

Max 2.17 2.9 1 1 5.5 4.2 3 3.9 3.8

Min 1.6 2.1 0.7 0.7 3.4 2.5 1.6 1.9 2.8

Results are expressed in cm.

Results2. Lv Mass Indicators

LV Mass(g) =1.04((LVd+IVSd+PWd)3-LVd)3-14 (Devereux) Mean LV mass = 134 +/- 27,4 g Max. LV mass = 235 g Min. LV mass = 70 g

LV Mass Index = LV Mass (g) / BSA(m2)

Mean LVMIx = 71,54+/-14.2 g/m2

Max. LVMIx = 110 g/m2

Min. LVMIx = 45 g/m2

Results3. LV Diastolic Function

Pick E Pick A E/A IVRT EF-S (m/s) (m/s) (ms) (mm/s)

Mean 0.91 0.51 1.91 64.86 121.4

Sd 0.17 0.13 0.36 9.04 19.6

Max. 1.37 0.79 2.6 90 165

Min. 0.56 0.25 1.13 50 75

Results4. LV Systolic Function

(Evaluation by PWD in LV Ejection Tract)

Vmx ACC AT VTI LVET (m/s) (m/s) (ms) (cm) (ms)

Mean 1.11 15.81 75.14 19.4 267.5

Sd 0.19 2.02 8.22 3.7 28.36

Max. 1. 8 21.5 90 28 300

Min. 0. 8 12.12 50 14.5 180

Statistical Corelations

BSA vs LV Mass ; r = 0.51 (p<0.01)

BMI vs LV Mass ; r = 0.42 (p<0.01)

Conclusions

The morphologic parameters found in our study group are

similar with the literature data; they are related with

somatic indicators of the subjects which were studied

In young adults, LV systolic and diastolic functional

parameters appear with high amplitudes in compa-rison

with the values reported in health adults and olds; these

data are useful in a correct estimation of LV

hemodynamic performance