Literature DB >> 29921479

A Comparative Assessment of Echocardiographic Parameters for Determining Primary Mitral Regurgitation Severity Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Reference Standard.

Seth Uretsky1, Edgar Argulian2, Azhar Supariwala3, Leo Marcoff4, Konstantinos Koulogiannis4, Lillian Aldaia4, Farooq A Chaudhry5, Steven D Wolff6, Linda D Gillam4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) guidelines suggest the use of several echocardiographic methods to assess mitral regurgitation severity using an integrated approach, without guidance as to the weighting of each parameter. The purpose of this multicenter prospective study was to evaluate the recommended echocardiographic parameters against a reference modality and develop and validate a weighting for each echocardiographic measure of mitral regurgitation severity.
METHODS: This study included 112 patients who underwent evaluation with echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Echocardiographic parameters recommended by the ASE were included and compared with MRI-derived regurgitant volume (MRI-RV).
RESULTS: Echocardiographic parameters that correlated best with MRI-RV were proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) radius (r = 0.65, P < .0001), PISA-derived effective regurgitant orifice area (r = 0.65, P < .0001), left ventricular end-diastolic volume (r = 0.56, P < .0001), and PISA-derived regurgitant volume (r = 0.52, P < .0001). In the linear regression models PISA-derived effective regurgitant orifice area, PISA-derived regurgitant volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume, and the presence of a flail leaflet independently predicted MRI-RV.
CONCLUSION: Echocardiographic parameters of mitral regurgitation as recommended by the ASE had moderate correlations with MRI-RV. The best predictors of MRI-RV were PISA-derived effective regurgitant orifice area, PISA-derived regurgitant volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume, and the presence of a flail leaflet, suggesting that these parameters should be weighted more heavily than other echocardiographic parameters in the application of the ASE-recommended integrated approach.
Copyright © 2018 American Society of Echocardiography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Echocardiography; Magnetic resonance imaging; Primary mitral regurgitation

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29921479     DOI: 10.1016/j.echo.2018.04.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Soc Echocardiogr        ISSN: 0894-7317            Impact factor:   5.251


  4 in total

1.  [Evaluation of mitral regurgitation : How much quantification do we need?]

Authors:  F Kreidel; T Ruf; A Tamm; M Geyer; T Emrich; R S von Bardeleben
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2019-11       Impact factor: 1.443

2.  Cardiac magnetic resonance assessment of mitral regurgitation severity appears better than echocardiographic imaging.

Authors:  Ayman K M Hassan; Magdy I Algowhary; Aya Y T Kishk; Amr Ahmed Aly Youssef; Nady A Razik
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-02-03       Impact factor: 2.357

3.  Impact of Mitral Regurgitation Severity and Cause on Effort Tolerance-Integrated Stress Myocardial Perfusion Imaging and Echocardiographic Assessment of Patients With Known or Suspected Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Exercise Treadmill Testing.

Authors:  Polydoros N Kampaktsis; Benjamin J Albert; Jiwon Kim; Lola X Xie; Lillian R Brouwer; Nathan H Tehrani; Michael Villanueva; Daniel Y Choi; Massimiliano Szulc; Mark B Ratcliffe; Robert A Levine; Richard B Devereux; Jonathan W Weinsaft
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 5.501

4.  Diagnostic value of mitral regurgitant jet volume in the assessment of mitral regurgitation severity by general imaging three-dimensional quantification.

Authors:  Wugang Wang; Yong Jiang; Junfang Li; Kun Gong; Liang Zhao; Guozhang Tang; Yuanyuan Meng; Zhibin Wang
Journal:  Int J Cardiovasc Imaging       Date:  2020-06-13       Impact factor: 2.357

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.