| Literature DB >> 30126422 |
Tao Cong1, Jinping Gu2, Alex Pui-Wai Lee3, Zhijuan Shang4, Yinghui Sun4, Qiaobing Sun4, Hong Wei4, Na Chen4, Siyao Sun4, Tingting Fu4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) can result in atrial functional mitral regurgitation (MR), but the mechanism remains controversial. Few data about the relationship between the 3-dimensional morphology of the MV and the degree of MR in AF exist.Entities:
Keywords: Atrial fibrillation; Mitral regurgitation; Three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30126422 PMCID: PMC6102822 DOI: 10.1186/s12947-018-0131-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Ultrasound ISSN: 1476-7120 Impact factor: 2.062
Fig. 1Flow diagram of patients included in the analysis. AF, atrial fibrillation; MR, mitral regurgitation; TEE, transesophageal echocardiography
Fig. 2Parameters of 3-dimensional geometry of the mitral valve. A, Anteroposterior diameter (APD). B, Commissural width (CW). C, Annular circumference. D, Annular height (AH). E, Annular area on the projection plane. F and G, Areas of the exposed anterior leaflet (AL) and posterior leafet (PL) surfaces. H, Leaflet tenting volume
Baseline characteristics
| variable | Control ( | Patients with AF ( |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MR- Group (143) | MR+ Group (n = 25) | |||
| Age, years | 66 ± 7 | 62 ± 6 | 66 ± 7 | 0.20 |
| Women, n (%) | 12(48.9) | 68(47.8) | 11(46.9) | 0.96 |
| Body surface area, m2 | 1.88 ± 0.16 | 1.92 ± 0.18 | 1.87 ± 0.15 | 0.22 |
| Paroxysmal AF, n (%) | 83(58.2%) | 12(48.8%) | 0.12 | |
| Duration of AF, years | 4.3 ± 1.0 | 4.9 ± 0.5# | <0.01 | |
| History of Hypertension, n (%) | 14 (56%) | 90 (58%) | 16 (64%) | 0.55 |
| History of Diabetes Mellitus, n (%) | 5 (20%) | 32 (21%) | 4 (16%) | 0.6 |
| Status during echocardiography | ||||
| Sinus rhythm, n (%) | 25(100%) | 36(25.1%)* | 8(30.4%)* | <0.01 |
| Heart rate, (beats/min) | 84 ± 17 | 89 ± 16 | 92 ± 12 | 0.46 |
| Systolic blood pressure, mmHg | 128 ± 13 | 134 ± 12 | 132 ± 16 | 0.86 |
| Diastolic blood pressure, mmHg | 68 ± 9 | 77 ± 10 | 73 ± 8 | 0.59 |
*P <0.01 vs. controls, #P<0.01 vs. MR-Group
Measurements on Transthoracic Echocardiography
| variable | Control (n = 25) | Patients with AF (n = 168) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MR- Group (143) | MR+ Group (n = 25) | |||
| LV end-diastolic diameter, mm | 44 ± 2 | 46 ± 4 | 46 ± 3 | 0.17 |
| LV end-systolic diameter, mm | 30 ± 2 | 30 ± 3 | 31 ± 3 | 0.31 |
| LV end-diastolic volume, ml | 85 ± 8 | 87 ± 11 | 89 ± 12 | 0.20 |
| LV end-systolic volume, ml | 30 ± 4 | 32 ± 5 | 31 ± 5 | 0.30 |
| LV ejection fraction, % | 64 ± 5 | 64 ± 4 | 64 ± 2 | 0.66 |
| LA anterior-posterior Diameter, mm | 34 ± 2 | 39 ± 5* | 41 ± 4* | <0.01 |
| LA volume, ml | 57 ± 5 | 81 ± 18* | 98 ± 22*,# | <0.01 |
| E/E’ | 8.0 ± 0.9 | 8.2 ± 0.8 | 9.2 ± 1.2*# | <0.01 |
| Mitral regurgitation severity | ||||
| Regurgitation area, cm2 | 1.84 ± 0.52 | 4.37 ± 0.68# | <0.01 | |
| EROA, cm2 | 0.18 ± 0.07 | 0.47 ± 0.07# | <0.01 | |
LV left ventricle, LA left atrium, EROA effective regurgitant orifice area. *P <0.01 vs. controls, #P<0.01 vs. MR-Group
Three-Dimensional Mitral Valve Geometry
| variable | Control (n = 25) | Patients with AF (n = 168) |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MR- Group (143) | MR+ Group ( | |||
| Annulus | ||||
| Area cm2 | 8.86 ± 1.03 | 9.53 ± 1.42* | 12.66 ± 0.85*# | <0.01 |
| Circumference mm | 108 ± 9 | 115 ± 8* | 134 ± 13*# | <0.01 |
| Anteroposterior diameter mm | 30.6 ± 2.4 | 32.0 ± 20.4 | 32.9 ± 20.4 | 0.90 |
| Commissural width mm | 36.3 ± 2.3 | 38.3 ± 3.0* | 41.0 ± 3.8*# | <0.01 |
| High mm | 7.6 ± 2.0 | 6.3 ± 1.5* | 6.2 ± 2.2* | <0.01 |
| AHCWR % | 19.4 ± 4.3 | 17.3 ± 4.4† | 15.2 ± 5.1*‡ | <0.01 |
| Leaflet | ||||
| Anterior leaflet surface area cm2 | 5.38 ± 0.99 | 5.34 ± 1.81 | 6.81 ± 1.91*# | <0.01 |
| Posterior leaflet surface area cm2 | 5.96 ± 1.37 | 5.41 ± 1.49 | 6.14 ± 1.30‡ | 0.03 |
| MV tenting volume ml | 1.72 ± 0.73 | 1.72 ± 0.89 | 2.67 ± 1.07*# | <0.01 |
AHCWR annular height-to-commissural width ratio, MV mitral valve
†P <0.05 vs. controls, ‡P <0.05 vs. MR-Group. *P <0.01 vs. controls, #P <0.01 vs. MR-Group
Fig. 3Differences in the MV morphology between mild and severe atrial functional MR in patients with AF. A, Example of mild atrial MR with the annular area and leaflet tenting volume. B, Example of severe atrial functional MR with enlargement of the annular area and leaflet tenting volume
Fig. 4Correlation of the effective regurgitation orifice area (EROA) with the mitral annulus area
Fig. 5Correlation of the effective regurgitation orifice area (EROA) with the mitral annulus circumference