4.4 Article

Usefulness of 3-Tesla Cardiac Magnetic Resonance to Detect Mitral Annular Disjunction in Patients With Mitral Valve Prolapse

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 124, 期 11, 页码 1725-1730

出版社

EXCERPTA MEDICA INC-ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2019.08.047

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mitral annulus disjunction (MAD) is characterized by a separation between the atrial wall mitral junction and the left ventricular (LV) free wall. Little is known regarding cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) performance to detect MAD and its prevalence in mitral valve prolapse (MVP). Based on 89 MVP patients (63 women; mean age 64 +/- 13) referred for CMR assessment of MR, either from myxomatous mitral valve disease (MMVP) (n = 40; 45%) or fibroelastic disease (n = 49; 55%), we sought to assess the frequency of MAD and its consequences on LV morphology. Patients were classified in 2 groups according to MAD presence (MAD+) or absence (MAD-). MAD (measuring 8 +/- 4 mm) was diagnosed in 35% (31 of 89) of MVP patients, more frequently in MMVP than fibroelastic disease (60% vs 14%). MAD+ was associated with MMVP; bileafiet MVP and nonsustain ventricular tachycardia but not with the severity of MR. Diagnostic accuracy of transthoracic echocardiography for the detection of MAD was fair (65% sensitivity, 96% specificity) with CMR as reference. MAD+ showed significantly enlarged basal and mid LV diameters and enlarged mitral-annulus diameter. In patients with late gadolinium enhancement, presence of LV fibrosis at level of papillary muscle was more frequent in MAD+. After adjustment on age and MR severity, MMVP, and enlarged end-systolic mitral annulus diameter were independently associated with MAD+. In conclusion, MAD was present in about 1/3 of MVP patients, mostly in MMVP and independent of MR severity. Enlarged mitral-annulus and basal LV diameters, nonsustain ventricular tachycardia and papillary muscle fibrosis were associated with MAD presence. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据