Skip to main content
. 2019 Mar 15;12(4):310–320. doi: 10.1007/s12265-019-09878-1

Table 1.

Cardiac magnetic resonance accuracy: Acquisition vs reference flow

Valve type Absolute Δ
Acquisitions vs reference (%) ± SD
p value of acquisitions vs reference PCC r (3)= p value of PCC p value of Δ AA level vs LVOT level
Antegrade flow
  Native valve
   Within valve 4.5 ± 3.0 0.028 0.999 < 0.001
  Sapien XT 0.022
   AA level 9.1 ± 4.0 0.007 1.000 < 0.001
   Within THV 20.9 ± 5.5 0.005 0.996 < 0.001
         LVOT level 4.6 ± 2.4 0.203 0.996 < 0.001
  CoreValve 0.009
          AA Level 18.7 ± 7.7 0.007 0.978 0.004
          Within THV 45.9 ± 18.5 0.005 0.713 0.176
          LVOT level 4.9 ± 4.4 0.959 0.994 0.001
Retrograde flow
  Sapien XT 0.037
          AA level 9.4 ± 7.0 0.017 0.994 < 0.001
          Within THV 68.8 ± 19.5 0.005 0.712 0.177
          LVOT level 16.5 ± 7.4 0.005 0.987 0.002
  CoreValve 0.005
          AA level 5.2 ± 1.6 0.005 1.000 < 0.001
          Within THV 70.7 ± 9.8 0.005 0.984 0.002
          LVOT level 14.2 ± 4.7 0.005 0.998 < 0.001

PCC Pearson correlation coefficient, AA ascending aorta, LVOT left ventricular outflow tract, THV transcatheter heart valve. Δ= difference. Italicized levels and values indicate best slice position