Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2025

Author Spotlight: Development of a Minimally Invasive Large-Animal Model for Reliable and Reproducible Cardiovascular Research
Published on: October 20, 2023
Additive value of the right parasternal view for the assessment of aortic stenosis
Toshio Shimamura1, Masaki Izumo2, Yukio Sato2
1Ultrasound Center, St. Marianna University Hospital, Kawasaki, Japan.
Background:
Although Doppler evaluation using a multiplanar method is recommended to assess the severity of aortic stenosis (AS) with transthoracic echocardiography, evidence on the diagnostic significance of a non-apical method is limited. This study aimed to compare the use of the apical with the use of the right parasternal view (RPV) method to evaluate AS severity and to examine the diagnostic significance of performing the RPV method in addition to the apical method during the evaluation.
Methods:
This retrospective observational study included 276 consecutive patients (mean age: 79 ± 10 years; women, 56%) with severe AS (aortic valve area [AVA] ≤1.0cm2 ). The severity of AS according to the apical method and that according to the RPV for all subjects were compared, and the significance of performing the RPV method in addition to the apical method was examined. Furthermore, we compared the concordance group, in which the apical and RPV methods indicated matching in severity, and the discordant group, in which the apical and RPV methods did not indicate matching severity.
Results:
Peak velocity (Vmax ), mean pressure gradient (MG) were significantly higher and the AVA, AVAi, and Doppler velocity index (DVI) were significantly smaller when the RPV was added to the apical view. Performing the RPV method in addition to the apical method significantly decreased the number of low PG AS cases (MG < 40 mmHg) from 69.9% to 65.0% and it increased the number of very severe AS cases (Vmax ≥ 5 m/s) from 8.7% to 14.5%. Deviation of Doppler angle was significantly greater in the discordant group compared to the concordant group (22.5 ± .6 vs. 31.8 ± 1.7, p < .001).
Conclusions:
By performing the RPV method in addition to the apical method to determine AS severity, the diagnosis of AS to be resolved in approximately 10% of cases. These results suggest that AS severity may be underestimated by using the apical method alone.
More Related Videos
10:33Assessment of Right Ventricular Structure and Function in Mouse Model of Pulmonary Artery Constriction by Transthoracic Echocardiography
Published on: February 3, 2014
03:40Point-of-Care Ultrasound for Peripheral Veno-Arterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Without Left Ventricular Venting
Published on: January 17, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Aortic Regurgitation II: Clinical Features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Stenosis II: Clinical features and Diagnostic Tests
Mitral Stenosis I: Introduction
Aortic Regurgitation I: Introduction
Aortic Regurgitation III: Medical Management
Assessment of apical pulse
Assessing the apical pulse is a critical nursing procedure, particularly indicated for: