Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:12707790rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0025663lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12707790lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0018787lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12707790lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0455825lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12707790lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0024485lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:issue4lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:dateCreated2003-4-22lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:abstractTextThe echocardiographic determination of left ventricular mass (LVM) and volume is of importance for the interpretation of cardiac adaptations and risk-stratification. In pathologically hypertrophied hearts, conventional one- and two-dimensional echocardiographic methods tend to overestimate LVM. For the athlete's heart, a comparison between different echocardiographic methods and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has not been performed so far. 23 healthy male endurance-athletes (28+/-4 yr) with athlete's heart (A) and 26 healthy untrained males (U; 26+/-4 yr) were examined by MRI and the following echocardiographic methods: ASE-Cube (ASE), Devereux (DEV), Troy (TRO), Teichholz (TEI), Reichek (REI) and Dickhuth (DIC). Indexed LVM were: MRI: 107+/-6 g/m(2) (A), 79+/-7 g/m(2) (U); ASE: 170+/-20 g/m(2) (A), 119+/-14 g/m(2) (U); DEV: 134+/-16 g/m(2) (A), 95+/-11 g/m(2) (U); TRO: 134+/-16 g/m(2) (A), 92+/-12 g/m(2) (U); TEI: 115+/-10 g/m(2) (A), 91+/-8 g/m(2) (U); REI: 114+/-14 g/m(2) (A), 89+/-11 g/m(2) (U); DIC: 110+/-14 g/m(2) (A); 80+/-9 g/m(2) (U). In A and U, LVM is significantly overestimated by ASE, DEV, TRO, TEI, and REI compared to MRI (p<0.05), but not by DIC. Although coefficients of correlation were similar, only DIC revealed acceptable limits of agreement (ASE: +20 to +172 g; DEV: -13 to +93 g; TRO: -18 to +92 g; TEI: -17 to +53 g; REI: -25 to +57 g; DIC: -37 to +45 g). Depending on the used method, LVM upper limits range between 93 (MRT) and 146 g/m(2) (ASE) in U, and 119 (MRT) and 209 g/m(2) (ASE) in A. CONCLUSION: Compared to MRI, DIC is the most accurate conventional echocardiographic method to determine LVM in U and A. For a correct interpretation of LVM, differences of the echocardiographic methods have to be considered.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:languagegerlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:monthAprlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:issn0300-5860lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KindermannWWlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:SchneiderGGlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:KramannBBlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:UrhausenAAlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:ScharhagJJlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorpubmed-author:RochetteVVlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:volume92lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:pagination309-18lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12707790...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:year2003lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:articleTitle[Left ventricular mass in endurance-athletes with athlete's heart and untrained subjects--comparison between different echocardiographic methods and MRI].lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:affiliationInstitut für Sport- und Präventivmedizin, Bereich Klinische Medizin, Universität des Saarlandes, Postfach 151150, 66041 Saarbrücken, Germany. j.scharhag@mx.uni-saarland.delld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:publicationTypeComparative Studylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12707790pubmed:publicationTypeEnglish Abstractlld:pubmed