【摘要】：目的:研究速度向量成像技術(shù)(VVI)新參數(shù)評估左心室舒張功能障礙及嚴(yán)重程度的可行性;探討新參數(shù)評估左心室舒張功能障礙的診斷效能;并進(jìn)一步研究診斷效能較好的參數(shù)測量位置的選擇及新參數(shù)與影響因素年齡的相關(guān)性。方法:納入因心血管癥狀就診于我院的門診及住院患者共129例,根據(jù)2016年由ASE和EACVI聯(lián)合發(fā)布的左心室舒張功能評估指南分為兩組,即左心室舒張功能正常組(30例)和左心室舒張功能障礙組(99例),后者根據(jù)嚴(yán)重程度又細(xì)分為左心室舒張功能I級障礙組57例、II級障礙組37例、III級障礙組5例。同期選取就診我院的健康體檢者124例作為對照組。所有受試者行超聲心動圖檢查,留存心尖四腔心、三腔心及兩腔心二維動態(tài)圖像,利用機器內(nèi)置的VVI軟件進(jìn)行后處理。記錄左心室縱向心肌層相應(yīng)指標(biāo):舒張早期左心室縱向各節(jié)段心肌峰值速度(Ev)的平均值(G-MEv)、二尖瓣環(huán)6個心肌節(jié)段Ev的平均值(6MEv)、心尖四腔心切面二尖瓣環(huán)側(cè)壁Ev和室間隔Ev及兩者的平均值(2MEv),并記錄舒張早期二尖瓣環(huán)6個心肌節(jié)段峰值應(yīng)變率(Esr)的平均值(6MEsr),根據(jù)舒張早期二尖瓣口血流峰值速度(E),6MEv,6MEsr,計算E/6MEv和E/6MEsr。結(jié)果:1.左心室舒張功能障礙組的6MEv和6MEsr均較對照組減小(P0.05),但上述參數(shù)在左心室舒張功能I級障礙組、II級障礙組、III級障礙組兩兩間比較差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。左心室舒張功能III級障礙組的E/6MEv和E/6MEsr均較對照組、I級障礙組、II級障礙組增大(P0.05),左心室舒張功能II級障礙組的E/6MEv和E/6MEsr也均較對照組、I級障礙組增大(P0.05),但左心室舒張功能I級障礙組的E/6MEv和E/6MEsr與對照組比較差異無統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。與對照組比較,左心室舒張功能障礙組(合計值)、左心室舒張功能正常組的6MEv和6MEsr均減小,E/6MEv和E/6MEsr均增大(P0.05)。2.6MEv、6MEsr、E/6MEv和E/6MEsr的ROC曲線下面積分別為0.95、0.80、0.79、0.62,P均0.05。6MEv診斷舒張功能障礙的閾值為4.9cm/s;6MEsr診斷舒張功能障礙的閾值為1.3s-1;E/6MEv和E/6MEsr診斷II級障礙及以上的閾值分別為17、53cm,診斷III級障礙的閾值分別為21、77cm。3.6MEv、6MEsr、E/6MEv、E/6MEsr與左心室舒張功能障礙的相關(guān)系數(shù)rp分別為-0.77、-0.52、0.51、0.20,P均0.01。4.左心室舒張功能障礙組的側(cè)壁Ev、室間隔Ev、2MEv、6MEv和G-MEv與對照組比較均具有差異性(P0.05),但上述參數(shù)在左心室舒張功能I級障礙組、II級障礙組、III級障礙組兩兩間比較差異均不具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。5.側(cè)壁Ev、室間隔Ev、2MEv、6MEv及G-MEv的ROC曲線下面積分別為0.85、0.87、0.89、0.95、0.95,P均0.0001;相應(yīng)的診斷舒張功能障礙的閾值分別為4.6cm/s、5.8cm/s、4.9cm/s、4.9cm/s、4.0cm/s。6.在對照組中,6MEv、6MEsr、E/6MEv與年齡均有不同程度的相關(guān)性(P0.05);但在左心室舒張功能障礙組中,三者與年齡的相關(guān)性均不具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。而在兩組中,E/6MEsr與年齡的相關(guān)性均不具有統(tǒng)計學(xué)意義。結(jié)論:1.VVI新參數(shù)在左心室舒張功能評估方面具有臨床應(yīng)用價值,能早期識別心肌功能異常。2.6MEv或6MEsr僅能評估左心室舒張功能障礙,如若進(jìn)一步評價其嚴(yán)重程度,需要結(jié)合E/6MEv或E/6MEsr綜合評定。3.6MEv相對于6MEsr、E/6MEv、E/6MEsr是一個較好的指標(biāo),診斷左心室舒張功能障礙效能較優(yōu)。4.2MEv是一個相對較好反映左心室舒張功能的測量位點;但當(dāng)多節(jié)段心肌功能異常時,G-MEv是較好的測量位點。5.在評價左心室舒張功能時,應(yīng)注意年齡對VVI新參數(shù)的影響。
[Abstract]:Objective: To study the feasibility of new parameters of velocity vector imaging (VVI) in assessing left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and severity, to explore the diagnostic efficacy of new parameters in assessing left ventricular diastolic dysfunction, and to further study the choice of parameters with better diagnostic efficacy and the correlation between new parameters and influencing factors. A total of 129 outpatients and inpatients with cardiovascular symptoms were enrolled in our hospital. According to the assessment guidelines of left ventricular diastolic function issued jointly by ASE and EACVI in 2016, they were divided into two groups: normal left ventricular diastolic function group (30 cases) and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction group (99 cases). The latter was further divided into left ventricular diastolic function I according to the severity. Fifty-seven patients with grade I disorder, 37 patients with grade II disorder and 5 patients with grade III disorder were enrolled in the study. 124 healthy subjects were selected as the control group. All subjects were examined by echocardiography, and two-dimensional dynamic images of apical four-chamber, three-chamber and two-chamber heart were preserved. Corresponding indices: Mean value of peak velocity (Ev) of left ventricular longitudinal segments (G-MEv), mean value of six segments of mitral annulus (6MEv), mean value of side wall Ev of mitral annulus (Ev) and mean value of ventricular septum Ev (2MEv) of both (2MEv) on apical four-chamber view, and peak strain rate (Esr) of six segments of mitral annulus in early diastolic period were recorded. E/6MEv and E/6MEsr were calculated according to the peak velocity of mitral orifice flow (E), 6MEv and 6MEsr. Results: 1. The 6MEv and 6MEsr in the left ventricular diastolic dysfunction group were significantly lower than those in the control group (P 0.05), but the above parameters were not statistically significant in the left ventricular diastolic dysfunction group I, II and III. The E/6MEv and E/6MEsr of the patients with grade III left ventricular diastolic dysfunction were both higher than those of the control group, the E/6MEv and E/6MEsr of the patients with grade I left ventricular diastolic dysfunction were higher than those of the control group (P 0.05), but the E/6MEv and E/6MEsr of the patients with grade I left ventricular diastolic dysfunction were higher than those of the control group (P 0.05). Compared with the control group, left ventricular diastolic dysfunction group (total value), left ventricular diastolic function group 6MEv and 6MEsr decreased, E/6MEv and E/6MEsr increased (P 0.05). 2.6MEv, 6MEsr, E/6MEv and E/6MEsr ROC curves below the integral were 0.95, 0.80, 0.79, 0.62, P 0.05.6MEv diagnostic threshold for diastolic dysfunction. The diagnostic thresholds of E/6MEsr and E/6MEsr were 17,53 cm and above, respectively. The diagnostic thresholds of E/6MEsr and E/6MEsr were 21,77 cm.3.6 MEv, 6 MEsr, E/6MEsr, and the correlation coefficients of E/6MEsr with left ventricular diastolic dysfunction RP were - 0.77, - 0.52, 0.51, 0.20, P 0.01.4, respectively. Side wall Ev, interventricular septum Ev, 2MEv, 6MEv and G-MEv in the diastolic dysfunction group were significantly different from those in the control group (P 0.05), but the above parameters were not statistically significant in the left ventricular diastolic dysfunction group I, II and III. The corresponding thresholds for diastolic dysfunction were 4.6 cm/s, 5.8 cm/s, 4.9 cm/s, 4.0 cm/s, and 4.0 cm/s, respectively. The correlation between E/6MEsr and age was not statistically significant in both groups. Conclusion: 1. The new parameters of VVI have clinical value in assessing left ventricular diastolic function and can identify early abnormal myocardial function. Combined with E/6MEv or E/6MEsr, 3.6MEv was a better index for diagnosing left ventricular diastolic dysfunction than 6MEsr, E/6MEsr and E/6MEsr. 4.2MEv was a relatively good site for measuring left ventricular diastolic function, but G-MEv was a better site for evaluating left ventricular diastolic function in patients with multi-segmental abnormalities. In diastolic function, we should pay attention to the effect of age on new parameters of VVI.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽醫(yī)科大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：R541.6;R540.45

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 羅發(fā)瑞;;左心室舒張功能差的原因和調(diào)治[J];老友;2012年12期

2 覃麗君,歐陽靜萍,張有為,楊小武,王險峰,宋金萍,孫鳳蘭;兒童病毒性心肌炎左心室舒張功能與心肌損傷關(guān)系的研究[J];中華超聲影像學(xué)雜志;2003年09期

3 徐大地;應(yīng)用多普勒超聲對正常嬰兒左心室舒張功能發(fā)育成熟過程的研究[J];國外醫(yī)學(xué).心血管疾病分冊;2005年04期

4 申鳳芹;趙敬國;;運動對左心室舒張功能的影響[J];吉林體育學(xué)院學(xué)報;2007年05期

5 嚴(yán)益民,張鶴年,吳林根;“益心飲”對原發(fā)性高血壓左心室舒張功能的影響[J];上海中醫(yī)藥雜志;1999年07期

6 佟艷明;李治安;何怡華;陳倬;谷孝艷;薛超;;漩渦參數(shù)在左心室舒張功能評價中的應(yīng)用[J];中華醫(yī)學(xué)超聲雜志(電子版);2013年03期

7 楊正修，都鵬飛，汪太平，，楊世寬;小兒病毒性心肌炎左心室舒張功能測定[J];中國循環(huán)雜志;1994年03期

8 郭憶;楊婭;李治安;劉望彭;欒姝蓉;;組織多普勒成像與全方位M-型超聲評價左心室舒張功能的臨床研究[J];心肺血管病雜志;2007年03期

9 歐穎;張小兵;鄭鳴之;包家立;陳瑩瑩;沈岳;;左心室舒張功能評價方法的研究[J];生物醫(yī)學(xué)工程學(xué)雜志;2010年02期

10 隋成龍;尹立雪;;影響左心室舒張功能因素計算模型的研究進(jìn)展[J];生物醫(yī)學(xué)工程學(xué)雜志;2013年02期

相關(guān)會議論文 前6條

1 余蕾;蒲朝霞;吉日;劉夏天;鮑曉峰;;實時三維超聲心動圖評價左心室舒張功能的初步研究[A];2008年浙江省超聲醫(yī)學(xué)學(xué)術(shù)年會論文匯編[C];2008年

2 趙希剛;李坤成;華琦;李永忠;;MRI流速電影法評價高血壓患者左心室舒張功能與超聲心動圖的比較研究[A];中華醫(yī)學(xué)會第十三屆全國放射學(xué)大會論文匯編（下冊）[C];2006年

3 丁五麟;張小杭;信穎;劉惠蘭;魏若耆;;血液透析前后左心室舒張功能變化的探討[A];第四屆全國心功能學(xué)術(shù)研討會論文摘要集[C];1994年

4 李建輝;鄭隆權(quán);覃麗虹;;多普勒組織成像評價冠心病左心室舒張功能的應(yīng)用價值[A];第九屆全國超聲心動圖學(xué)術(shù)會議論文集[C];2007年

5 張芳;;超聲心動圖檢查冠心病患者左心室舒張功能的價值[A];全國醫(yī)學(xué)影像技術(shù)學(xué)術(shù)會議（CMIT-2004）論文匯編[C];2004年

6 孫璐t

本文編號：2182491