| Literature DB >> 31659518 |
Hazem M A Farrag1, Amr M Setouhi2, Mustafa O El-Mokadem3, Mustafa A El-Swasany4, Khalid S Mahmoud2, Hesham B Mahmoud3, Alaa M Ibrahim2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Results of percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty (BMV) are basically dependent on suitable patient selection. Currently used two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography (2DE) scores have many limitations. Three-dimensional (3D) echocardiography (3DE)-based scores were developed for better patient selection and outcome prediction. We aimed to compare between 3D-Anwar and 2D-Wilkins scores in mitral assessment for BMV, and investigate the additive value of 3DE in prediction of immediate post-procedural outcome. Fifty patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis and candidates for BMV were included. Patients were subjected to 2D- and real-time 3D-transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) before and immediately after BMV for assessing MV area (MVA), 2D-Wilkins and 3D-Anwar score, commissural splitting, and mitral regurgitation (MR). Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) was also undertaken immediately before and intra-procedural. Percutaneous BMV was performed by either multi-track or Inoue balloon technique.Entities:
Keywords: Inoue balloon; Mitral stenosis; Mitral valve score; Multi-track balloon; Percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty; Three-dimensional echocardiography
Year: 2019 PMID: 31659518 PMCID: PMC6821434 DOI: 10.1186/s43044-019-0019-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Egypt Heart J ISSN: 1110-2608
Change in MV gradients, PSPAP, and MV area before and after BMV
| Pre-procedural | Post-procedural |
| ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MV Mean gradient | 19.8 ± 5.7 | 7.5 ± 3.8 | < 0.0001 | |||
| MV Max gradient | 31.1 ± 8.5 | 16.1 ± 6.4 | < 0.0001 | |||
| PSPAP | 57.6 ± 11.5 | 39.0 ± 8.3 | < 0.0001 | |||
| MV area | 2D PHT | 0.96 ± 0.16 | – | < 0.0001 | ||
| 2D planimetry | 0.92 ± 0.15 | 1.70 ± 0.29 | < 0.0001 | |||
| 3D planimetry | 0.97 ± 0.16 | 1.85 ± 0.36 | < 0.0001 | |||
MV mitral valve, PSPAP peak systolic pulmonary artery pressure, PHT pressure half-time, 2D 2-dimensional, 3D 3-dimensional, BMV balloon mitral valvuloplasty
Fig. 1Change in mitral regurgitation jet area before and after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty in each case
Comparison between 2D-Wilkins score and 3D=Anwar score in cases with post-procedural optimal results, suboptimal MV area, and significant MR
| 2D | 3D |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal post-procedural results ( | Mobility | 2.02 ± 0.51 | 2.29 ± 1.11 | 0.9 |
| Thickness | 1.88 ± 0.48 | 2.09 ± 0.74 | 0.5 | |
| Subvalvular apparatus | 1.82 ± 0.62 | 2.11 ± 1.12 | 0.7 | |
| Calcification | 0.79 ± 0.52 | 1.09 ± 1.37 | 0.1 | |
| Total score | 6.51 ± 0.87 | 7.58 ± 2.18 | 0.6 | |
| Suboptimal post-procedural MVA ( | Mobility | 1.83 ± 0.41 | 4.16 ± 0.91 | 0.02 |
| Thickness | 2.16 ± 0.41 | 4.66 ± 1.03 | 0.03 | |
| Subvalvular apparatus | 2.17 ± 0.41 | 7.01 ± 0.89 | 0.01 | |
| Calcification | 0.83 ± 0.75 | 3.33 ± 1.03 | 0.007 | |
| Total score | 6.99 ± 1.01 | 19.16 ± 3.86 | 0.008 | |
| Significant post-procedural MR ( | Mobility | 1.75 ± 0.71 | 3.37 ± 0.91 | 0.014 |
| Thickness | 1.88 ± 0.64 | 3.50 ± 0.53 | 0.001 | |
| Subvalvular apparatus | 1.75 ± 0.46 | 4.12 ± 0.64 | 0.01 | |
| Calcification | 1.25 ± 0.71 | 5.01 ± 0.75 | 0.01 | |
| Total score | 7.79 ± 1.12 | 16.0 ± 2.83 | 0.03 | |
2D 2-dimensional, 3D 3-dimensional, MV mitral valve, MR mitral regurgitation
P value for comparison between both scores was estimated by Z score
Fig. 2Pre-procedural 2D-Wilkins score and 3D-Anwar score in each case
Fig. 3Correlation between 3D-Anwar score and achieved post-procedural mitral valve area
Fig. 4Roc curve analysis for 3D-Anwar score and 2D-Wilkins score in predicting the occurrence of suboptimal results after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty
Pre-procedural commissural affection and post-procedural commissural splitting as estimated by 2D and 3D echocardiography
| Pre-procedural | Post-procedural | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2D | 3D |
| 2D | 3D |
| ||
| Anterior commissure | No | 46 (92%) | 47 (94%) | 0.93 | 8 (16%) | 4 (8%) | 0.18 |
| Partial | 4 (8%) | 3 (6%) | 0.6 | 28 (56%) | 24 (48%) | 0.4 | |
| Complete | 0 | 0 | – | 14(28%) | 22 (44%) | 0.9 | |
| Posterior commissure | No | 47 (94%) | 46 (92%) | 0.93 | 12 (24%) | 5 (10%) | 0.07 |
| Partial | 3 (6%) | 4 (8%) | 0.6 | 31 (62%) | 25 (50%) | 0.8 | |
| Complete | 0 | 0 | – | 7 (14.0%) | 20 (40%) | 0.004 | |
2D 2-dimensional, 3D 3-dimensional