Why the study?
Does two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry accurately estimate mitral valve area compared to Doppler pressure half-time and the Gorlin formula before and after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty?
Does two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry accurately estimate mitral valve area compared to Doppler pressure half-time and the Gorlin formula before and after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty?
Two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry is as accurate for estimating mitral valve area after balloon valvuloplasty as it is before, though its correlation with the invasive Gorlin formula is only moderate.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Supports planimetry for mitral valve area post-PBMV; leaves open stronger validation against invasive Gorlin in prospective cohorts.
The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of planimetry after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty (PBMV). The mitral valve area (MVA) was estimated in 34 patients before and after PBMV, using two-dimensional echocardiographic planimetry, Doppler pressure half-time (PHT), and the Gorlin formula. There was no significant difference in the correlation of planimetry and PHT before (r = 0.53, p = 0.001) and after PBMV (r = 0.56, p < 0.001). A similar correlation was found between planimetry and the Gorlin formula (r = 0.44, p = 0.01 before PBMV, r = 0.37, p = 0.03 after PBMV). The concordance between planimetry, PHT, and the Gorlin formula in classifying patients into mild, moderate, or severe mitral stenosis was not worse after PBMV. Planimetry-derived MVA was not less accurate after PBMV than before PBMV. However, the correlation between the two echocardiographic measurements and the Gorlin formula was only moderate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shiran et al. (1998) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: