Abstract
Background: The mitral valve orifice area (MVOA) is difficult to assess accurately by 2D echocardiography because of geometric assumptions; therefore, 3D planimetry may offer advantages. We studied the differences in MVOA measurements between the most frequently used methods, to determine if 3D planimetry would result in the re-grading of severity in any cases, and whether it was a more accurate predictor of clinical outcomes.
Methods: This was a head-to-head comparison of the three most commonly used techniques to grade mitral stenosis (MS) by orifice area and to assess their impact on clinical outcomes. 2D measurements (pressure half-time (PHT), planimetry) and 3D planimetry were performed retrospectively on patients with at least mild MS. The clinical primary endpoint was defined as a composite of MV balloon valvotomy, mitral valve repair or replacement (MVR) and/or acute heart failure (HF) admissions.
Results: Forty-one consecutive patients were included; the majority were female (35; 85.4%), average age 55 (17) years. Mean and peak MV gradients were 9.4 (4) mmHg and 19 (6) mmHg, respectively. 2D and 3D measures of MVOA differed significantly; mean 2D planimetry MVOA was 1.28 (0.40) cm2, mean 3D planimetry MVOA 1.15 (0.29) cm2 (P = 0.003). Mean PHT MVOA was 1.43 (0.44) cm2 (P = 0.046 and P < 0.001 in comparison to 2D and 3D planimetry methods, respectively). 3D planimetry reclassified 7 (17%) patients from mild-tomoderate MS, and 1 (2.4%) from moderate to severe. Overall, differences between the two methods were significant (X2, P < 0.001). Only cases graded as severe by 3D predicted the primary outcome measure compared with mild or moderate cases (odds ratio 5.7).
Conclusion: 3D planimetry in MS returns significantly smaller measurements, which in some cases results in the reclassification of severity. Routine use of 3D may significantly influence the management of MS, with a degree of prediction of clinical outcomes.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, Iung B, Lancellotti P, Lansac E, Rodriguez Muñoz D, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. European Heart Journal 2017 2017 2739–2791. (https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391)
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, Fleisher LA, Jneid H, Mack MJ, McLeod CJ, O’Gara PT, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC focused update of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2017 2017 252–289. (https://doi.org/10.1161/CIR.0000000000000503)
Binder TM, Rosenhek R, Porenta G, Maurer G & Baumgartner H. Improved assessment of mitral valve stenosis by volumetric real-time three-dimensional echocardiography. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 2000 36 1355–1361. (https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(00)00852-4)
Hatle L, Angelsen B & Tromsdal A. Noninvasive assessment of atrioventricular pressure half-time by Doppler ultrasound. Circulation 1979 60 1096–1104. (https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.60.5.1096)
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL & MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. Journal of Chronic Diseases 1987 40 373–383. (https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9681(87)90171-8)
Quan H, Li B, Couris CM, Fushimi K, Graham P, Hider P, Januel JM & Sundararajan V. Updating and validating the Charlson comorbidity index and score for risk adjustment in hospital discharge abstracts using data from 6 countries. American Journal of Epidemiology 2011 173 676–682. (https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwq433)
Mahmood F, Owais K, Taylor C, Montealegre-Gallegos M, Manning W, Matyal R & Khabbaz KR. Three-dimensional printing of mitral valve using echocardiographic data. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging 2015 8 227–229. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2014.06.020)
Mahmoud Elsayed HM, Hassan M, Nagy M, Amin A, Elguindy A, Wagdy K & Yacoub M. A novel method to measure mitral valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis using three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography: feasibility and validation. Echocardiography 2018 35 368–374. (https://doi.org/10.1111/echo.13786)
Sampaio F, Ladeiras-Lopes R, Almeida J, Fonseca P, Fontes-Carvalho R, Ribeiro J & Gama V. Three-dimensional proximal flow convergence automatic calculation for determining mitral valve area in rheumatic mitral stenosis. Echocardiography 2017 34 1002–1009. (https://doi.org/10.1111/echo.13558)
de Agustin JA, Mejia H, Viliani D, Marcos-Alberca P, Gomez de Diego JJ, Nuñez-Gil IJ, Almeria C, Rodrigo JL, Luaces M, Garcia-Fernandez MA, et al. Proximal flow convergence method by three-dimensional color Doppler echocardiography for mitral valve area assessment in rheumatic mitral stenosis. Journal of the American Society of Echocardiography 2014 27 838–845. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.echo.2014.04.023)
Min S-Y, Song J-M, Kim Y-J, Park H-K, Seo M-O, Lee M-S, Kim DH, Kang DH & Song JK. Discrepancy between mitral valve areas measured by two-dimensional planimetry and three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography in patients with mitral stenosis. Heart 2013 99 253–258. (https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2012-302742)
Pérez de Isla L, Casanova C, Almería C, Rodrigo JL, Cordeiro P, Mataix L, Aubele AL, Lang R & Zamorano JL. Which method should be the reference method to evaluate the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis? Gorlin’s method versus 3D-echo. European Journal of Echocardiography 2007 8 470–473. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euje.2006.08.008)
Schlosshan D, Aggarwal G, Mathur G, Allan R & Cranney G. Real-time 3D transesophageal echocardiography for the evaluation of rheumatic mitral stenosis. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging 2011 4 580–588. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcmg.2010.12.009)
Hatle L, Brubakk A, Tromsdal A & Angelsen B. Noninvasive assessment of pressure drop in mitral stenosis by Doppler ultrasound. British Heart Journal 1978 40 131–140. (https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.40.2.131)
Thomas JD, Wilkins GT, Choong CY, Abascal VM, Palacios IF, Block PC & Weyman AE. Inaccuracy of mitral pressure half-time immediately after percutaneous mitral valvotomy. Dependence on transmitral gradient and left atrial and ventricular compliance. Circulation 1988 78 980–993. (https://doi.org/10.1161/01.CIR.78.4.980)
Funding
Supported in part by a National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centre award to Guy’s and St Thomas’ Hospital and King’s College London in partnership with King’s College Hospital.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Bleakley, C., Eskandari, M., Aldalati, O. et al. Impact of 3D echocardiography on grading of mitral stenosis and prediction of clinical events. Echo Res Pract 5, 105–111 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1530/ERP-18-0031
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/ERP-18-0031