Why the study?
Does qualitative assessment by SSFP cine cardiac MRI accurately detect valvular regurgitation compared to Doppler echocardiography in a mixed prospective cohort?
Does qualitative assessment by SSFP cine cardiac MRI accurately detect valvular regurgitation compared to Doppler echocardiography in a mixed prospective cohort?
Routine SSFP cine MRI is reliable for detecting the absence or presence of significant (≥ 1.5+) valvular regurgitation but is limited in detecting mild or trivial disease compared to echocardiography.
SSFP cine MRI may miss mild regurgitation; leaves open need for quantitative CMR validation before routine clinical grading.
Background : The accuracy of valvular regurgitation assessment is uncertain by SSFP cine MR imaging. In this study we compared performance of cine images with Doppler echocardiography (echo) in a large prospective cohort. Methods : We prospectively recruited 205 subjects who underwent MRI within 2 hours of echo. Regurgitation was assessed qualitatively and graded as none (0), trace (0.5), mild (1), mild to moderate (1.5), moderate (2.0), moderate to severe (2.5) and severe (3.0) by echo and by cine MRI. Grading from echo was used as reference. Results : Prevalence of the mitral (MR), tricuspid (TR), aortic (AR) and pulmonic (PR) regurgitation was 79%, 87%, 29% and 58% by echo, respectively. When regurgitation was absent the agreement between MRI and echo was good: 86%, 79%, 99% and 96% for MR, TR, AR and PR, respectively. However, few cases were detected by MRI for lesions 1+ or less: 16%, 29%, 10% and 2%, respectively. Detection of significant regurgitation (≥ 1.5+) by MRI was reliable, 97%, 93%, 90% and 100%, with 25%, 14%, 30% and 33% underestimation of severity present, respectively while overestimation was rare. Conclusion : SSFP cine MRI is reliable in detecting the absence or significant (≥ 1.5+) regurgitant lesions but limited for mild or trivial diseases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sawhney et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: