In Vitro Quantification of Mitral Regurgitation of Complex Geometry by the Modified Proximal Isovelocity Surface Area Method

Quantification of primary mitral regurgitation by echocardiography: A practical appraisal

The accurate quantification of primary mitral regurgitation (MR) and its consequences on cardiac remodeling is of paramount importance to determine the best timing for surgery in these patients. The recommended echocardiographic grading of primary MR severity relies on an integrated multiparametric approach. It is expected that the large number of echocardiographic parameters collected would offer the possibility to check the measured values regarding their congruence in order to conclude reliably on MR severity. However, the use of multiple parameters to grade MR can result in potential discrepancies between one or more of them. Importantly, many factors beyond MR severity impact the values obtained for these parameters including technical settings, anatomic and hemodynamic considerations, patient's characteristics and echocardiographer' skills. Hence, clinicians involved in valvular diseases should be well aware of the respective strengths and pitfalls of each of MR grading methods by echocardiography. Recent literature highlighted the need for a reappraisal of the severity of primary MR from a hemodynamic perspective. The estimation of MR regurgitation fraction by indirect quantitative methods, whenever possible, should be central when grading the severity of these patients. The assessment of the MR effective regurgitant orifice area by the proximal flow convergence method should be used in a semi-quantitative manner. Furthermore, it is crucial to acknowledge specific clinical situations in MR at risk of misevaluation when grading severity such as late-systolic MR, bi-leaflet prolapse with multiple jets or extensive leak, wall-constrained eccentric jet or in older patients with complex MR mechanism. Finally, it is debatable whether the 4-grades classification of MR severity would be still relevant nowadays, since the indication for mitral valve (MV) surgery is discussed in clinical practice for patients with 3+ and 4+ primary MR based on symptoms, specific markers of adverse outcome and MV repair probability. Primary MR grading should be seen as a continuum integrating both quantification of MR and its consequences, even for patients with presumed "moderate" MR.

Impact of assuming a circular orifice on flow error through elliptical regurgitant orifices: computational fluid dynamics and in vitro analysis of proximal flow convergence

Grounded in hydrodynamic theory, proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) is a simplistic and practical technique widely used to quantify valvular regurgitation flow. PISA provides a relatively reasonable, though slightly underestimated flow rate for circular orifices. However, for elliptical orifices frequently seen in functional mitral regurgitation, PISA underestimates the flow rate. Based on data obtained with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and in vitro experiments using systematically varied orifice parameters, we hypothesized that flow rate underestimation for elliptical orifices by PISA is predictable and within a clinically acceptable range. We performed 45 CFD simulations with varying orifice areas 0.1, 0.3 and 0.5 cm², orifice aspect ratios 1:1, 2:1, 3:1, 5:1, and 10:1, and peak velocities (V_max) 400, 500 and 600 cm/s. The ratio of computed effective regurgitant orifice area to true effective area (EROA_C/EROA) against the ratio of aliasing velocity to peak velocity (V_A/V_max) was analyzed for orifice shape impact. Validation was conducted with in vitro imaging in round and 3:1 elliptical orifices. Plotting EROA_C/EROA against V_A/V_max revealed marginal flow underestimation with 2:1 and 3:1 elliptical axis ratios against a circular orifice (< 10% for 8% V_A/V_max), rising to ≤ 35% for 10:1 ratio. In vitro modeling confirmed CFD findings; there was a 8.3% elliptical EROA underestimation compared to the circular orifice estimate. PISA quantification for regurgitant flow through elliptical orifices produces predictable, but generally small, underestimation deemed clinically acceptable for most regurgitant orifices.

Computational Analysis of Virtual Echocardiographic Assessment of Functional Mitral Regurgitation for Validation of Proximal Isovelocity Surface Area Methods

BACKGROUND

Mitral regurgitation (MR) quantification by the proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) method remains challenging. Using computer models, the authors evaluated the accuracy of different PISA methods and quantified their errors.

METHODS

Five functional MR computer models of different geometric and tethering abnormalities were created, validated, and treated as phantom models, from which the reference values were directly obtained. Virtual two-dimensional (2D) PISA and three-dimensional (3D) PISA (both peak and integrated values) were performed on these phantom models. By comparing virtual PISA results with reference values, the accuracy of different PISA methods was evaluated, and their sources of errors were quantified.

RESULTS

Compared with reference values of regurgitant flow rate, excellent correlations were found for true PISA (r = 0.99, bias = 32.3 ± 35.3 mL/sec), 3D PISA (r = 0.97, bias = -24.4 ± 55.5 mL/sec), followed by multiplane 2D hemicylindrical PISA (r = 0.88, bias = -24.1 ± 85.4 mL/sec) and hemiellipsoidal PISA (r = 0.91, bias = -55.7 ± 96.6 mL/sec). Weaker correlations were found for single-plane 2D hemispherical PISA (parasternal long-axis: r = 0.71, bias = -77.6 ± 124.5 mL/sec; apical two-chamber: r = 0.69, bias = -52.0 ± 122.0 mL/sec; apical four-chamber: r = 0.82, bias = -65.5 ± 107.3 mL/sec). For regurgitant volume quantification, integrated PISA was more accurate than peak PISA. The bias of 3D PISA improved from -12.7 ± 7.8 mL (peak PISA) to -2.1 ± 5.3 mL (integrated PISA).

CONCLUSIONS

For functional MR quantification, 2D hemispherical PISA had significant underestimation, multiplane 2D hemiellipsoidal and hemicylindrical PISA showed improved accuracy, and 3D PISA was the most accurate. The PISA method is subject to both systematic underestimation due to the Doppler angle effect and systematic overestimation when regurgitant flow is not perpendicular to PISA contour. Integrated PISA is able to capture dynamic MR and is therefore more accurate than peak PISA. The sum of regurgitant flow rates is the most feasible way to perform integrated PISA.

Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, and New Therapeutic Approaches for Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation

Ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) is a valvular complication frequently seen in patients with coronary artery disease and is associated with increased mortality and morbidity. Ischemic mitral regurgitation has a complex, heterogeneous, and still incompletely understood pathophysiology involving both the mitral valve and the left ventricle. The occurrence of valve regurgitation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy in return accelerates left ventricular remodelling and dysfunction, ultimately leading to irreversible heart failure. Diagnostic evaluation of ischemic MR is unique and different from the other causes of MR. The severity thresholds associated with outcomes are different from primary MR, and specific imaging characteristics are potentially useful to guide therapy. The use of imaging modalities such as 3-dimensional echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging can refine the diagnostic evaluation and help in choosing the correct management. Although multiple treatments are available to improve ischemic MR, each therapeutic option is associated with limitations and incomplete success. Therapy has therefore to be individualised for each patient. Current options include optimal medical therapy, cardiac resynchronisation therapy, percutaneous or surgical revascularisation, surgical mitral repair or replacement, and new percutaneous interventions. This review aims to discuss the latest insights regarding the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and treatment of ischemic MR.