Mitral Regurgitation: Advanced Imaging Parameters and Changing Treatment Landscape.

Mitral regurgitation is a common valvular heart disease with increasing prevalence due to the aging population. In degenerative (primary) mitral regurgitation, medical therapies are limited and the mainstay of treatment is mitral valve surgery. Patients are referred for mitral valve surgery based on the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, which recommend surgery in patients with severe mitral regurgitation. Echocardiography uses multiple parameters that lack reproducibility and accuracy. Studies comparing cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) and echocardiography have shown that CMR is a better predictor of clinical outcome and postsurgical left ventricular remodeling than echocardiography.

The relationship between mitral regurgitant severity, symptoms, and exercise capacity in primary degenerative mitral regurgitation.

Although it is assumed that more severe MR is associated with a greater burden of symptoms and lower exercise capacity, the relationship between symptoms, exercise capacity, and mitral regurgitant severity has not been well studied. We prospectively studied 67 (63 ± 11 years, 72% male) patients with at least mild degenerative MR and left ventricular ejection fraction ≥ 50% who underwent stress echocardiography, CMR, and evaluation with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy questionnaire (KCCQ). Symptoms and exercise capacity were evaluated in the context of MR severity. Patients reporting dyspnea had lower KCCQ symptom scores (79 ± 23 vs. 96 ± 9, p = 0.01) and achieved lower percentage of age and gender predicted METs (114 ± 37 vs. 152 ± 43%, p < 0.001) compared to those without dyspnea. There was no significant difference in MR volume between those with vs. without dyspnea by CMR (43 ± 26 ml vs. 51 ± 28 ml, p = 0.3) or echocardiography (64 ± 28 vs. 73 ± 41ml, p = 0.4). Those with severe MR by CMR had similar KCCQ symptom scores (96 ± 10 vs. 89 ± 17, p = 0.04) and percentage of age and gender predicted METs (148 ± 42 vs. 133 ± 47%, p = 0.2) to those without severe MR. Those with severe MR by echocardiography had similar KCCQ symptom score (93 ± 15 vs. 89 ± 16, p = 0.3) and percentage of age and gender predicted METs (138 ± 43 vs. 153 ± 46%, p = 0.2) to those without severe MR. Patients with degenerative MR assessed by CMR and stress echocardiography, there was no relationship between MR severity and either symptoms or exercise capacity. These findings highlight the disconnect between symptoms and the severity of MR and challenge the assumption that correcting MR can be counted on to improve symptom status in patients with degenerative MR.

Assessment of lifestyle-related risk factors enhances the effectiveness of cardiac stress testing.

Cardiac stress tests have been widely utilized since the 1960s for the diagnostic and prognostic assessment of patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). Clinical risk is primarily based on assessing the presence and magnitude of inducible myocardial ischemia. However, the primary factors driving mortality risk have changed over recent decades. Factors such as typical angina and inducible ischemia have decreased, whereas the percentage of patients with diabetes, obesity and hypertension have increased. There has also been a marked temporal increase in the percentage of patients who require pharmacologic testing due to inability to perform treadmill exercise at the time of cardiac stress testing and this need has emerged as the most potent predictor of mortality risk in contemporary stress test populations. However, the long-term clinical risk posed by the inability to perform exercise and concomitant CAD risk factors are rarely reflected in the assessment of patients' prognostic risk in cardiac stress test reports. In this review, we suggest that the clinical utility of present-day cardiac stress testing can be improved by developing a more comprehensive assessment that integrates and reports all factors which modulate patients' long-term clinical risk following stress and testing. This should include assessment of patients' CAD risk factors, physical activity habits and mobility risks, and identification of the reasons why patients could not exercise at the time of cardiac stress testing. In addition, the assessment of four core non-aerobic functional parameters should be considered among patients who cannot exercise: assessment of gait speed, handgrip strength, lower extremity strength, and standing balance.

American Society of Echocardiography Algorithm for Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation: Comparison With CMR.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the American Society of Echocardiography (ASE) algorithm for assessing mitral regurgitation (MR) to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and left ventricular (LV) remodeling following mitral intervention. BACKGROUND: The ASE recommends integrating multiple echocardiographic parameters for assessing MR. The ASE guidelines include an algorithm that weighs the parameters and highlights those considered indicative of definitely mild or definitely severe MR. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 152 (age 62 ± 13 years; 59% male) patients with degenerative MR who underwent ASE algorithm-guided echocardiographic and CMR grading of MR severity. Using the ASE algorithm, patients were graded as definitely mild, grade I, grade II, grade III, grade IV, or definitely severe MR. CMR MR volume was graded as mild (<30 mL), grade II moderate (30-44 mL), grade III moderate (45-59 mL), or severe (≥60 mL). A subgroup of 63 patients underwent successful mitral intervention, of whom 48 had postintervention CMR. RESULTS: Only 52% of patients with definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm had severe MR by CMR, and 10% had mild MR by CMR. There was an increase in post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling with worsening MR severity using CMR (P < 0.0001) but not the ASE algorithm (P = 0.07). Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling and definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with degenerative MR, agreement between CMR and the ASE algorithm was suboptimal. Severe MR by CMR was an independent predictor of post mitral intervention LV reverse remodeling, whereas definitely severe MR by the ASE algorithm was not. These findings suggest an important role for CMR in surgical decision making in degenerative MR. (Comparison Study of Echocardiography and Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment of Mitral and Aortic Regurgitation; NCT04038879).

Characterization of Primary Mitral Regurgitation With Flail Leaflet and/or Wall-Impinging Flow.

BACKGROUND: Echocardiography guidelines note that a flail leaflet is a specific criterion for severe mitral regurgitation (MR) and that regurgitant severity is underestimated in wall-impinging jets (Coanda effect). Both findings are often considered to be pathognomonic of severe MR. OBJECTIVES: In this study, the authors sought to determine the association of flail leaflet and Coanda effect with MR severity quantified by means of cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS: The authors enrolled 158 consecutive patients with primary MR according to echocardiography and CMR. The presence of a flail leaflet or Coanda was determined for each patient. CMR regurgitant volume (RV) and regurgitant fraction (RF) were quantified for all patients. RESULTS: There were 55 patients (35%) with a flail leaflet, 52 (33%) with Coanda, and 22 (14%) with a flail leaflet and Coanda. The mean CMR mitral RV and RF progressively increased in patients without a Coanda or flail, a Coanda, a flail, or a Coanda and a flail (RV: 28 ± 21 mL vs 43 ± 23 mL vs 58 ± 29 mL vs 64 ± 25 mL [P < 0.001]; RF: 25% ± 16% vs 34% ± 14% vs 41% ± 12% vs 45% ± 12% [P < 0.001]). With the use of CMR RV, 35%, 46%, and 59% of patients had severe MR with the presence of a Coanda, flail leaflet, or both, respectively. With the use of CMR RF, 25%, 31%, and 40% of patients had severe MR with the presence of a Coanda, flail leaflet, or both, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: While the presence of a flail leaflet and Coanda effect on echocardiography are associated with higher regurgitant volumes and fractions, they are frequently not associated with severe MR as assessed by means of CMR. (Comparison Study of Echocardiography and Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Assessment of Mitral and Aortic Regurgitation; NCT04038879).

Imaging strategies for safety surveillance after renal artery denervation.

Renal denervation has emerged as a safe and effective therapy to lower blood pressure in hypertensive patients. In addition to the main renal arteries, branch vessels are also denervated in more contemporary studies. Accurate and reliable imaging in renal denervation patients is critical for long-term safety surveillance due to the small risk of renal artery stenosis that may occur after the procedure. This review summarizes three common non-invasive imaging modalities: Doppler ultrasound (DUS), computed tomography angiography (CTA), and magnetic resonance angiography (MRA). DUS is the most widely used owing to cost considerations, ease of use, and the fact that it is less invasive, avoids ionizing radiation exposure, and requires no contrast media use. Renal angiography is used to determine if renal artery stenosis is present when non-invasive imaging suggests renal artery stenosis. We compiled data from prior renal denervation studies as well as the more recent SPYRAL-HTN OFF MED Study and show that DUS demonstrates both high sensitivity and specificity for detecting renal stenosis de novo and in longitudinal assessment of renal artery patency after interventions. In the context of clinical trials DUS has been shown, together with the use of the baseline angiogram, to be effective in identifying stenosis in branch and accessory arteries and merits consideration as the main screening imaging modality to detect clinically significant renal artery stenosis after renal denervation and this is consistent with guidelines from the recent European Consensus Statement on Renal Denervation.

Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance in Valvular Heart Disease-Related Heart Failure.

Patients with valvular heart disease-related heart failure are unable to pump enough blood to meet the body's needs. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can play an important role by identifying these patients and distinguishing them from patients whose valvular disease is not the cause of their heart failure. Heart failure is a major public health problem, with a prevalence of 5.8 million people in the United States and more than 223 million people worldwide. This article focuses on the diagnostic and prognostic value of MRI patients with valvular causes of heart failure.

Defining the left ventricular base in mitral valve prolapse: impact on systolic function and regurgitation.

In bileaflet mitral valve prolapse (BMVP) systolic leaflet displacement creates a pocket of blood on the left ventricular (LV) side of the leaflets, but on the atrial side of the annulus. This blood is excluded from the LV end-systolic volume if the mitral valve annulus is used to determine the most basal extent of the LV. The purpose of this study is to describe the quantitative implications of defining the LV base on mitral regurgitant severity and LV systolic function in BMVP. In 30 consecutive patients (53% male, 58 ± 14 years) with BMVP, LV endocardial and epicardial borders were determined from SSFP images. The LV base at end-systole was defined by the "Functional" method (at the mitral valve annulus) or the "Anatomic" method (at the mitral valve leaflets). Regurgitant volume was the difference between the LV stroke volume and mean forward flow. LV myocardial strain measurements were determined from the short axis endocardial and epicardial borders. The "Functional" method resulted in higher regurgitant volumes (mean difference: 22 ml, range 0-40 ml) and higher ejection fractions (mean difference: 9%, range 0-21%). The correlation between LV end-diastolic volume and regurgitant volume was better with the "Functional" method (r = 0.79, p < 0.0001) than the "Anatomic" method (r = 0.67, p < 0.0001). The correlation between global myocardial radial strain and LV EF was better with the "Functional" method (r = 0.86, p < 0.0001) than the "Anatomic" method (r = 0.68, p < 0.0001). In BMVP, the base of the LV should be defined at the level of the mitral valve annulus so that regurgitant volume most accurately reflects the functional significance of the mitral valve disease and LVEF most accurately reflects global systolic LV function. Defining the basal extent of the LV at the mitral valve leaflets leads to substantially lower regurgitant volumes and lower ejection fractions that could have important clinical consequences.

Concordance and Discordance of Echocardiographic Parameters Recommended for Assessing the Severity of Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and American Society of Echocardiography guidelines recommend assessing several echocardiographic parameters when evaluating mitral regurgitation (MR) severity. These parameters can be discordant, making the assessment of MR challenging. The degree to which echocardiographic parameters of MR severity are concordant is not well studied. METHODS: We enrolled 159 patients in a prospective multicenter study. Eight parameters were included in this analysis: proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA)-derived regurgitant volume, PISA-derived effective regurgitant orifice area, vena contracta, color Doppler jet/left atrial area, left atrial volume index, left ventricular end-diastolic volume index, peak E wave, and the presence of pulmonary vein systolic reversal. Each echocardiographic parameter was determined to represent severe or nonsevere MR according to the American Society of Echocardiography guidelines. A concordance score was calculated as [Formula: see text] so that a higher score reflects greater concordance. There was no discordance when all the echocardiographic parameters agreed and high discordance when 3 or 4 parameters were discordant. RESULTS: The mean concordance score was 75±14% for the entire cohort. There were 9 (6%) patients with complete agreement of all parameters and 61 (38%) with high discordance. There was greater discordance in patients with severe MR but no difference between primary versus secondary or central versus eccentric jets. There was an improvement in concordance when only considering PISA-based regurgitant volume, PISA-based effective regurgitant orifice area, and vena contracta with agreement in 68% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: There was limited concordance between the echocardiographic parameters of MR severity, and the discordance was worse with more severe MR. Concordance improved when considering only 3 quantitative measures of vena contracta and PISA-based effective regurgitant orifice area and regurgitant volume. These findings highlight the challenges facing echocardiographers when assessing the severity of MR and emphasize the difficulty of using an integrated approach that incorporates multiple components. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04038879.