open access

Online first
Original article
Published online: 2021-06-26
Get Citation

Aortic regurgitation and left ventricle remodeling on cardiac magnetic resonance and transthoracic echocardiography

Maciej Haberka, Mariusz Bałys, Zbigniew Gąsior, Bartłomiej Stasiów
DOI: 10.33963/KP.a2021.0047
·
Pubmed: 34176113

open access

Online first
Original article
Published online: 2021-06-26

Abstract

Background: Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the first imaging modality used to assess aortic regurgitation (AR). However, it is not possible to provide a precise quantification in all patients. Aim: Our aim was to compare TTE and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) measurements in grading AR and left ventricle (LV) remodeling. Methods: A total of 51 consecutive patients with AR in TTE (NYHA I/II, 55%/38%) were enrolled into the study and 49 individuals (age, 57.1 [14]; 61% males) underwent a non-contrast CMR (2 pts excluded) obtained on 1.5T system (GE Optima MR450w). Results: The comprehensive quantitative grading with AR volume (AR vol) and regurgitant fraction (RF) were measurable in TTE in 24 cases and showed an association with CMR parameters (AR vol: r = 0.75; P < 0.001 and RF: r = 0.55, P < 0.01). CMR revealed larger LV end-diastolic volumes (EDV) (185,5 [61] vs 158,4 [61] ml; P = 0.03) and a trend towards higher left ventricle ejection fraction (59% [8] vs 56% (8); P = 0.08). The association of AR vol and LV EDV was stronger in CMR (r = 0.85; P < 0.0001) compared to TTE (r = 0.6; P = 0.001). The inter-modality agreement (TTE-CMR) in AR grading was low (κ = 0.15), with highly concordant grading in mild AR (91%). Conclusions: CMR provides a comprehensive assessment of AR severity and LV remodeling with a weak or a moderate agreement with TTE.

Abstract

Background: Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the first imaging modality used to assess aortic regurgitation (AR). However, it is not possible to provide a precise quantification in all patients. Aim: Our aim was to compare TTE and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) measurements in grading AR and left ventricle (LV) remodeling. Methods: A total of 51 consecutive patients with AR in TTE (NYHA I/II, 55%/38%) were enrolled into the study and 49 individuals (age, 57.1 [14]; 61% males) underwent a non-contrast CMR (2 pts excluded) obtained on 1.5T system (GE Optima MR450w). Results: The comprehensive quantitative grading with AR volume (AR vol) and regurgitant fraction (RF) were measurable in TTE in 24 cases and showed an association with CMR parameters (AR vol: r = 0.75; P < 0.001 and RF: r = 0.55, P < 0.01). CMR revealed larger LV end-diastolic volumes (EDV) (185,5 [61] vs 158,4 [61] ml; P = 0.03) and a trend towards higher left ventricle ejection fraction (59% [8] vs 56% (8); P = 0.08). The association of AR vol and LV EDV was stronger in CMR (r = 0.85; P < 0.0001) compared to TTE (r = 0.6; P = 0.001). The inter-modality agreement (TTE-CMR) in AR grading was low (κ = 0.15), with highly concordant grading in mild AR (91%). Conclusions: CMR provides a comprehensive assessment of AR severity and LV remodeling with a weak or a moderate agreement with TTE.

Get Citation

Keywords

aortic regurgitation, cardiovascular magnetic resonance, echocardiography

About this article
Title

Aortic regurgitation and left ventricle remodeling on cardiac magnetic resonance and transthoracic echocardiography

Journal

Kardiologia Polska (Polish Heart Journal)

Issue

Online first

Article type

Original article

Published online

2021-06-26

DOI

10.33963/KP.a2021.0047

Pubmed

34176113

Keywords

aortic regurgitation
cardiovascular magnetic resonance
echocardiography

Authors

Maciej Haberka
Mariusz Bałys
Zbigniew Gąsior
Bartłomiej Stasiów

References (22)
  1. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017; 38(36): 2739–2791.
  2. Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015; 28(1): 1–39.e14.
  3. Zoghbi WA, Adams D, Bonow RO, et al. Recommendations for noninvasive evaluation of native valvular regurgitation – a report from the American Society of Echocardiography developed in collaboration with the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2017; 30(4): 303–371.
  4. Myerson SG, d'Arcy J, Mohiaddin R, et al. Aortic regurgitation quantification using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: association with clinical outcome. Circulation. 2012; 126(12): 1452–1460.
  5. Medvedofsky D, León Jiménez J, Addetia K, et al. Multi-parametric quantification of tricuspid regurgitation using cardiovascular magnetic resonance: A comparison to echocardiography. Eur J Radiol. 2017; 86: 213–220.
  6. Sköldborg V, Madsen PL, Dalsgaard M, et al. Quantification of mitral valve regurgitation by 2D and 3D echocardiography compared with cardiac magnetic resonance a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020; 36(2): 279–289.
  7. Pirat B, Little SH, Igo SR, et al. Direct measurement of proximal isovelocity surface area by real-time three-dimensional color Doppler for quantitation of aortic regurgitant volume: an in vitro validation. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009; 22(3): 306–313.
  8. Cawley PJ, Hamilton-Craig C, Owens DS, et al. Prospective comparison of valve regurgitation quantitation by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013; 6(1): 48–57.
  9. Gelfand EV, Hughes S, Hauser TH, et al. Severity of mitral and aortic regurgitation as assessed by cardiovascular magnetic resonance: optimizing correlation with Doppler echocardiography. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2006; 8(3): 503–507.
  10. Lee JC, Branch KR, Hamilton-Craig C, et al. Evaluation of aortic regurgitation with cardiac magnetic resonance imaging: a systematic review. Heart. 2018; 104(2): 103–110.
  11. Neisius U, Tsao CW, Hauser TH, et al. Aortic regurgitation assessment by cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging and transthoracic echocardiography: intermodality disagreement impacting on prediction of post-surgical left ventricular remodeling. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020; 36(1): 91–100.
  12. Harris AW, Krieger EV, Kim M, et al. Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging Versus Transthoracic Echocardiography for Prediction of Outcomes in Chronic Aortic or Mitral Regurgitation. Am J Cardiol. 2017; 119(7): 1074–1081.
  13. Gabriel RS, Renapurkar R, Bolen MA, et al. Comparison of severity of aortic regurgitation by cardiovascular magnetic resonance versus transthoracic echocardiography. Am J Cardiol. 2011; 108(7): 1014–1020.
  14. Kutty S, Whitehead KK, Natarajan S, et al. Qualitative echocardiographic assessment of aortic valve regurgitation with quantitative cardiac magnetic resonance: a comparative study. Pediatr Cardiol. 2009; 30(7): 971–977.
  15. Dulce MC, Mostbeck GH, O'Sullivan M, et al. Severity of aortic regurgitation: interstudy reproducibility of measurements with velocity-encoded cine MR imaging. Radiology. 1992; 185(1): 235–240.
  16. Honda N, Machida K, Hashimoto M, et al. Aortic regurgitation: quantitation with MR imaging velocity mapping. Radiology. 1993; 186(1): 189–194.
  17. Søndergaard L, Hildebrandt P, Lindvig K, et al. Quantification of aortic regurgitation by magnetic resonance velocity mapping. Am Heart J. 1993; 125(4): 1081–1090.
  18. Bellenger NG, Burgess MI, Ray SG, et al. Comparison of left ventricular ejection fraction and volumes in heart failure by echocardiography, radionuclide ventriculography and cardiovascular magnetic resonance; are they interchangeable? Eur Heart J. 2000; 21(16): 1387–1396.
  19. Hudsmith LE, Petersen SE, Francis JM, et al. Normal human left and right ventricular and left atrial dimensions using steady state free precession magnetic resonance imaging. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2005; 7(5): 775–782.
  20. Uretsky S, Supariwala A, Nidadovolu P, et al. Quantification of left ventricular remodeling in response to isolated aortic or mitral regurgitation. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2010; 12: 32.
  21. Gocoł R, Malinowski M, Bis J, et al. Long-term outcomes of aortic valve repair in over 500 consecutive patients: a single-center experience. Kardiol Pol. 2020; 78(9): 861–868.
  22. Łukaszewski M, Bielicki G, Berezowski M, et al. Aortic valve-sparing procedures in patients with aortic valve insufficiency: a single‑center experience. Kardiol Pol. 2020; 78(2): 158–160.

Important: This website uses cookies. More >>

The cookies allow us to identify your computer and find out details about your last visit. They remembering whether you've visited the site before, so that you remain logged in - or to help us work out how many new website visitors we get each month. Most internet browsers accept cookies automatically, but you can change the settings of your browser to erase cookies or prevent automatic acceptance if you prefer.

By VM Media Sp. z o.o. VM Group Sp.k., ul. Świętokrzyska 73 , 80–180 Gdańsk, Poland

phone:+48 58 320 94 94, fax:+48 58 320 94 60, e-mail: viamedica@viamedica.pl