Looking for Perfection in the Evaluation of Mitral Regurgitation

Marta L. Nacke, J. Parras, Francisco G. Fazio, E. M. Assaf
{"title":"Looking for Perfection in the Evaluation of Mitral Regurgitation","authors":"Marta L. Nacke, J. Parras, Francisco G. Fazio, E. M. Assaf","doi":"10.7775/RAC.85.6.12553","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Currently, there is no single echocardiographic parameter for assessing the severity of mitral regurgitation. Two conceptually similar methods have been published. One method is the mitral valve to LVOT velocity time integral ratio (MOTVTI), and the other the mitral E wave peak velocity to LVOT velocity time integral ratio (EVTI). Objectives: Our goals were to compare the ability of both methods to diagnose severe mitral regurgitation and establish the best cutoff points for the diagnosis. Methods: We included patients with and without mitral regurgitation. The area under the ROC curve for MOTVTI and EVTI was analyzed to compare their diagnostic ability of both methods and estimate the best diagnostic cutoff points. Results: A total of 135 patients were included in the study, 51 with various degrees of mitral regurgitation and the rest as controls. Patients with severe mitral regurgitation had an effective regurgitant orifice area of 0.73±0.34 cm2, vena contracta of 8.3±2.2 mm and regurgitant volume of 99±42 ml. The analysis showed an area under ROC curve of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.89) for MOTVTI and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86 to 0.96) for EVTI, without significant differences. The best cutoff point was> 1.84 for MOTVTI (sensitivity 80%, specificity 94%) and >6.25 for EVTI (sensitivity 100%, specificity 79%). Conclusions: Both methods are useful for the diagnosis of severe MR and have similar diagnostic capacity. The best cutoff points differ from those originally published.","PeriodicalId":447734,"journal":{"name":"Argentine Journal of Cardiology","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Argentine Journal of Cardiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7775/RAC.85.6.12553","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Currently, there is no single echocardiographic parameter for assessing the severity of mitral regurgitation. Two conceptually similar methods have been published. One method is the mitral valve to LVOT velocity time integral ratio (MOTVTI), and the other the mitral E wave peak velocity to LVOT velocity time integral ratio (EVTI). Objectives: Our goals were to compare the ability of both methods to diagnose severe mitral regurgitation and establish the best cutoff points for the diagnosis. Methods: We included patients with and without mitral regurgitation. The area under the ROC curve for MOTVTI and EVTI was analyzed to compare their diagnostic ability of both methods and estimate the best diagnostic cutoff points. Results: A total of 135 patients were included in the study, 51 with various degrees of mitral regurgitation and the rest as controls. Patients with severe mitral regurgitation had an effective regurgitant orifice area of 0.73±0.34 cm2, vena contracta of 8.3±2.2 mm and regurgitant volume of 99±42 ml. The analysis showed an area under ROC curve of 0.83 (95% CI: 0.75 to 0.89) for MOTVTI and 0.92 (95% CI: 0.86 to 0.96) for EVTI, without significant differences. The best cutoff point was> 1.84 for MOTVTI (sensitivity 80%, specificity 94%) and >6.25 for EVTI (sensitivity 100%, specificity 79%). Conclusions: Both methods are useful for the diagnosis of severe MR and have similar diagnostic capacity. The best cutoff points differ from those originally published.
寻找二尖瓣返流评价的完善
背景:目前,没有单一的超声心动图参数来评估二尖瓣反流的严重程度。已经发表了两种概念上相似的方法。一种方法是二尖瓣与左心室速度时间积分比(MOTVTI),另一种方法是二尖瓣E波峰值速度与左心室速度时间积分比(EVTI)。目的:我们的目的是比较两种方法诊断严重二尖瓣反流的能力,并建立诊断的最佳分界点。方法:纳入有二尖瓣返流和无二尖瓣返流的患者。对MOTVTI和EVTI的ROC曲线下面积进行分析,比较两种方法的诊断能力,并估计最佳诊断截止点。结果:共纳入135例患者,51例有不同程度二尖瓣反流,其余为对照组。严重二尖瓣返流患者有效返流口面积0.73±0.34 cm2,收缩静脉8.3±2.2 mm,返流容积99±42 ml。分析显示,MOTVTI的ROC曲线下面积为0.83 (95% CI: 0.75 ~ 0.89), EVTI的ROC曲线下面积为0.92 (95% CI: 0.86 ~ 0.96),差异无统计学意义。MOTVTI的最佳截断点> 1.84(敏感性80%,特异性94%),EVTI的最佳截断点>6.25(敏感性100%,特异性79%)。结论:两种方法均可用于诊断重症MR,且诊断能力相近。最佳分界点与最初公布的不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信