Standard and emerging CMR methods for mitral regurgitation quantification

There are several methods to quantify mitral regurgitation (MR) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). The interoperability of these methods and their reproducibility remains undetermined. To determine the agreement and reproducibility of different MR quantification methods by CMR across all ae...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:International journal of cardiology 2021-05, Vol.331, p.316-321
Hauptverfasser: Fidock, Benjamin, Archer, Gareth, Barker, Natasha, Elhawaz, Alaa, Al-Mohammad, Abdallah, Rothman, Alexander, Hose, Rod, Hall, Ian R., Grech, Ever, Briffa, Norman, Lewis, Nigel, van der Geest, Rob J., Zhang, Jun-Mei, Zhong, Liang, Swift, Andrew J., Wild, James M., De Gárate, Estefania, Bucciarelli-Ducci, Chiara, Bax, Jeroen J., Plein, Sven, Myerson, Saul, Garg, Pankaj
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:There are several methods to quantify mitral regurgitation (MR) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). The interoperability of these methods and their reproducibility remains undetermined. To determine the agreement and reproducibility of different MR quantification methods by CMR across all aetiologies. Thirty-five patients with MR were recruited (primary MR = 12, secondary MR = 10 and MVR = 13). Patients underwent CMR, including cines and four-dimensional flow (4D flow). Four methods were evaluated: MRStandard (left ventricular stroke volume - aortic forward flow by phase contrast), MRLVRV (left ventricular stroke volume - right ventricular stroke volume), MRJet (direct jet quantification by 4D flow) and MRMVAV (mitral forward flow by 4D flow - aortic forward flow by 4D flow). For all cases and MR types, 520 MR volumes were recorded by these 4 methods for intra−/inter-observer tests. In primary MR, MRMVAV and MRLVRV were comparable to MRStandard (P > 0.05). MRJet resulted in significantly higher MR volumes when compared to MRStandard (P 
ISSN:0167-5273
1874-1754
DOI:10.1016/j.ijcard.2021.01.066