Grading mitral regurgitation using 4D flow CMR: comparison to transthoracic echocardiography. (14th October 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ribeyrolles, S; Monin, J L; Rohnean, A; Diakov, C; Caussin, C; Monnot, S; Paul, J F
• Is Part Of: European heart journal. Volume 42(2021)Supplement 1
• Publication Date: 2021-10-14
• Subjects: Valvular Heart Disease; Cardiology -- Periodicals; Heart -- Diseases -- Periodicals; 616.12005
• DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab724.0174
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0195-668X

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Mitral Regurgitation (MR) is currently primarily assessed using multiple transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) parameters. Two-dimensional Cardiac Magnetic Resonance (CMR) can be used in difficult cases but has limited agreement with TTE for quantifying MR. We hypothesized that 4D Flow CMR may help to quantify MR. Purpose: To determine the 4D Flow CMR thresholds that achieve the best agreement with TTE for grading MR. Methods: We conducted a single-center prospective study of patients evaluated for chronic primary MR in 2016–2020. MR was evaluated blindly by TTE and 4D Flow CMR respectively by two cardiologists and two radiologists with decades of experience. MR was graded with both methods as mild, moderate or severe. 4D Flow CMR measurements included MR regurgitant volume per beat (RV) and mitral anterograde flow per beat (MF). RF was obtained as the ratio RV/MF. Additionally, MF was compared to left ventricular stroke volume (LVSV) by cine-CMR. Results: We included 33 patients in the initial cohort and 33 in the validation cohort. Inter-observer agreement was good for TTE and excellent for 4D Flow CMR. Agreement between MF and LVSV was excellent. Using recommended TTE thresholds (30 mL, 60 mL, 30%, 50%), agreement was moderate for RV and RF. The best agreement between 4D Flow CMR and TTE was obtained with CMR thresholds of 20 mL and 40 mL for RV (κ=0.93; 95% CI, 0.8–1) and 20% and 37% for RF (κ=0.90; 95% CI, 0.7–0.9). In the validation cohort, agreement between TTE and 4D Flow CMR was good with the optimal thresholds (κ= 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61–0.94). Conclusion: We propose CMR thresholds that provide a good agreement between TTE and CMR for grading MR. Further studies are needed to fully validate 4D-Flow CMR accuracy for primary MR quantification. Funding Acknowledgement: Type of funding sources: None.