Comparison of Mitral Regurgitant Volume Assessment between Proximal Flow Convergence and Volumetric Methods in Patients with Significant Primary Mitral Regurgitation: An Echocardiographic and Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study

Abstract

Background: Discrepancies have been observed between transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) severity grading in primary mitral regurgitation (MR).

Objectives: We sought to compare mitral regurgitant volume (RVol) determined by the TTE proximal flow convergence (proximal isovelocity surface area [PISA]) method and by volumetric methods (TTE and CMR) and to study the relationship between left ventricle (LV) size and RVol obtained by either the PISA or volumetric methods.

Methods: Two centers prospectively recruited 188 patients with at least moderate to severe primary MR due to prolapse in sinus rhythm who underwent TTE and CMR examinations. Regurgitant volume was estimated by either PISA (PISA-RVol) or volumetric methods (LV total stroke volume-systolic aortic forward outflow volume) using either CMR (CMR-RVol) or TTE (TTE-RVol).

Results: The PISA-RVol was weakly correlated with CMR-RVol and TTE-RVol (r = 0.29 and 0.30, respectively; P < .001 for both). On multivariable analysis, smaller CMR-left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and absence of mitral annular disjunction independently correlated with increased magnitude of RVol difference between PISA and volumetric methods. While PISA-RVol and LVEDV were unrelated, CMR-RVol and TTE-RVol moderately correlated with LVEDV (r = 0.66 and 0.68, respectively; P < .001 for both). In contrast, LVEDV and regurgitant fraction (RVol/LV total stroke volume), assessed with either TTE or CMR, were poorly correlated (r = 0.17, P = .02; and r = 0.12, P = .10, respectively).

Conclusions: Mitral RVol values estimated by PISA and volumetric methods are not directly comparable. The expected proportional relationship between volumetric RVol and LV size, which was not observed with PISA-RVol, suggests that PISA-RVol would be inaccurate. Given that RVol assessed with volumetric methods depends on LV size, determination of a unique RVol threshold for severe MR is challenging. In contrast to RVol, calculating regurgitant fraction by volumetric methods allows the quantification of MR severity independently from LV size.

Keywords: Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging; Echocardiography; Primary mitral regurgitation; Regurgitant volume.