El Mathari Sulayman, Bhoera Rahul A, Hopman Luuk H G A, Heidendael Josephine, Malekzadeh Arjan, Nederveen Aart, van Ooij Pim, Götte Marco J W, Kluin Jolanda
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Department of Cardiology, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Room D3-221, Meibergdreef 9, 1105 AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2025 Apr;41(4):647-658. doi: 10.1007/s10554-024-03280-y. Epub 2024 Nov 5.
Primary mitral regurgitation (MR) is a prevalent valvular heart disease. Therapy stratification for MR depends on accurate assessment of MR severity and left ventricular (LV) dimensions. While trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE) has been the standard/preferred assessment method, cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) has gained recognition for its superior assessment of LV dimensions and MR severity. Both imaging modalities have their own advantages and limitation for therapy guidance. However, the differences between the two modalities for assessing/grade severity and clinical impact of MR remains unclear. This systematic review aims to evaluate the differences between TTE and CMR in quantifying MR severity and LV dimensions, providing insights for optimal clinical management. A literature search was performed from inception up to March 21st 2023. This resulted in 2,728 articles. After screening, 22 articles were deemed eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. The included study variables were, mitral valve regurgitation volume (MR), regurgitation fraction (MR), LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV), LV end-systolic volume (LVESV), LV stroke volume (LVSV), and LV ejection fraction (LVEF). TTE showed a significant higher MR (10.4 ml, I = 88%, p = 0.002) and MR (6.3%, I = 51%, p = 0.05) compared to CMR, while CMR demonstrated a higher LVEDV (21.9 ml, I = 66%, p = < 0.001) and LVESV (16.8 ml, I = 0%, p = < 0.001) compared to TTE. Our findings demonstrate substantial disparities in TTE and CMR derived measurements for parameters that play a pivotal role in the clinical stratification guidelines. This discrepancy prompts a critical question regarding the prognostic value of both imaging modalities, which warrants future research.
原发性二尖瓣反流(MR)是一种常见的心脏瓣膜疾病。MR的治疗分层取决于对MR严重程度和左心室(LV)尺寸的准确评估。虽然经胸超声心动图(TTE)一直是标准的/首选评估方法,但心血管磁共振成像(CMR)因其在评估LV尺寸和MR严重程度方面的优势而受到认可。两种成像方式在治疗指导方面都有各自的优点和局限性。然而,两种方式在评估MR严重程度分级和临床影响方面的差异仍不明确。本系统评价旨在评估TTE和CMR在量化MR严重程度和LV尺寸方面的差异,为优化临床管理提供见解。从开始到2023年3月21日进行了文献检索。共检索到2728篇文章。筛选后,22篇文章被认为符合纳入荟萃分析的条件。纳入研究的变量包括二尖瓣反流容积(MR)、反流分数(MR)、左心室舒张末期容积(LVEDV)、左心室收缩末期容积(LVESV)、左心室搏出量(LVSV)和左心室射血分数(LVEF)。与CMR相比,TTE显示出显著更高的MR(10.4 ml,I=88%,p=0.002)和MR(6.3%,I=51%,p=0.05),而与TTE相比,CMR显示出更高的LVEDV(21.9 ml,I=66%,p<0.001)和LVESV(16.8 ml,I=0%,p<0.001)。我们的研究结果表明,TTE和CMR得出的测量值在临床分层指南中起关键作用的参数方面存在很大差异。这种差异引发了一个关于两种成像方式预后价值的关键问题,值得未来研究。