English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Background Echocardiography (ECHO) i su sed for diagnosis and management of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Morphologic diagnosis is based on the presence of myocardial thickness of >15mm in adults or a septum to posterior wall ratio of >1.5. Septal wall thickness (WT) >30 mm is one of several high risk features that are used to guide the decision for prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) placement. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) offers improved contrast resolution over ECHO and precisely defines myocardial WT in HCM.CMR is used in suspected HCM when ECHO is inconclusive for diagnosis or when additional information is needed. We tested the hypothesis that there are differences in maximal left ventricular myocardial WT as measured by CMR and ECHO in subjects with HCM due to asymmetric septal hypertrophy (ASH). Methods 64 subjects with HCM and ASH pattern (mean age 51 years, range 18-88 years), underwent ECHO and CMR within the same day. Maximal WT by ECHO was measured on parasternal long axis view in the anteroseptal and the basilar posterior wall. WT by CMR was measured on the short axis view manually to obtain maximal dimensions in the same segments as those obtained by ECHO. Results Overall, mean maximal septal WT for all patients was less by CMR compared with ECHO, but not statistically

Maximal left ventricular wall thickness: a comparison between CMR and echocardiography in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy