Cited 87 times since 2009 (6 per year) source: EuropePMC JACC. Cardiovascular imaging, Volume 2, Issue 11, 1 1 2009, Pages 1245-1252 Quantification of functional mitral regurgitation by real-time 3D echocardiography: comparison with 3D velocity-encoded cardiac magnetic resonance. Marsan NA, Westenberg JJ, Ypenburg C, Delgado V, van Bommel RJ, Roes SD, Nucifora G, van der Geest RJ, de Roos A, Reiber JC, Schalij MJ, Bax JJ
Objectives
The aim of this study was to evaluate feasibility and accuracy of real-time 3-dimensional (3D) echocardiography for quantification of mitral regurgitation (MR), in a head-to-head comparison with velocity-encoded cardiac magnetic resonance (VE-CMR).
Background
Accurate grading of MR severity is crucial for appropriate patient management but remains challenging. VE-CMR with 3D three-directional acquisition has been recently proposed as the reference method.
Methods
A total of 64 patients with functional MR were included. A VE-CMR acquisition was applied to quantify mitral regurgitant volume (Rvol). Color Doppler 3D echocardiography was applied for direct measurement, in "en face" view, of mitral effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA); Rvol was subsequently calculated as EROA multiplied by the velocity-time integral of the regurgitant jet on the continuous-wave Doppler. To assess the relative potential error of the conventional approach, color Doppler 2-dimensional (2D) echocardiography was performed: vena contracta width was measured in the 4-chamber view and EROA calculated as circular (EROA-4CH); EROA was also calculated as elliptical (EROA-elliptical), measuring vena contracta also in the 2-chamber view. From these 2D measurements of EROA, the Rvols were also calculated.
Results
The EROA measured by 3D echocardiography was significantly higher than EROA-4CH (p < 0.001) and EROA-elliptical (p < 0.001), with a significant bias between these measurements (0.10 cm(2) and 0.06 cm(2), respectively). Rvol measured by 3D echocardiography showed excellent correlation with Rvol measured by CMR (r = 0.94), without a significant difference between these techniques (mean difference = -0.08 ml/beat). Conversely, 2D echocardiographic approach from the 4-chamber view significantly underestimated Rvol (p = 0.006) as compared with CMR (mean difference = 2.9 ml/beat). The 2D elliptical approach demonstrated a better agreement with CMR (mean difference = -1.6 ml/beat, p = 0.04).
Conclusions
Quantification of EROA and Rvol of functional MR with 3D echocardiography is feasible and accurate as compared with VE-CMR; the currently recommended 2D echocardiographic approach significantly underestimates both EROA and Rvol.
