Key result
CT planimetry of mitral valve area correlates well with mean gradient and echocardiographic planimetry.
Why the study?
Does computed tomography (CT) planimetry accurately assess mitral valve area compared to echocardiographic parameters in patients with mitral stenosis?
Observational (n=85)
Blinded to clinical information
No
Does computed tomography (CT) planimetry accurately assess mitral valve area compared to echocardiographic parameters in patients with mitral stenosis?
Effect estimate: rho -0.60 (95% CI -0.73;-0.42)
p-value: p=<0.001
CT planimetry is a feasible and reproducible tool that correlates well with echocardiographic mean pressure gradient and planimetry for assessing mitral stenosis, offering a complementary diagnostic method.
CT planimetry may complement echocardiography when images are inconclusive in mitral stenosis; leaves open prospective outcome validation before routine adoption.
Purpose: Mitral stenosis (MS) remains diagnostically challenging, particularly in degenerative disease, where echocardiographic parameters are often unreliable. Computed tomography (CT) planimetry has been validated for other valvular diseases, but is not established for MS. This study evaluated the feasibility and diagnostic performance of CT planimetry in patients with MS compared with echocardiographic parameters. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 85 patients (mean age 79 ± 7.8 years, 63.5% female), who underwent ECG-gated cardiac CT within 90 days of a transthoracic echocardiography with a mean mitral transvalvular pressure gradient (MPG) ≥ 5 mmHg between 2019 and 2024. Patients with severe mitral regurgitation, mechanical valves, valve-in-valve procedures, prior edge-to-edge repair, or inadequate image quality were excluded. Results: CT planimetry of mitral valve area (MVA) was feasible and showed high interobserver agreement (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.983, 95% CI 0.960;0.993). CT-derived MVA correlated inversely with MPG (rho − 0.60, 95% CI -0.73;-0.42) and moderately with echocardiographic planimetry (rho 0.58, 95% CI 0.29;0.78), particularly in degenerative and native valve subgroups. Correlations with pressure half-time (PHT)-derived MVA were weak and inconsistent (rho 0.32, 95% CI -0.01;0.60). Conclusion: Computed tomography planimetry showed significant correlations with MPG and echocardiographic planimetry, but not with the indirect estimation of MVA by PHT. It proved to be a feasible and highly reproducible tool for assessing MVA in MS and therefore may serve as a complementary method in cases with inconclusive or technically limited echocardiographic findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Steinhoff et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Mitral stenosis (n=85). Computed tomography (CT) planimetry vs. Echocardiographic parameters was evaluated on Correlation between CT-derived mitral valve area and mean transvalvular pressure gradient (rho -0.60, 95% CI -0.73;-0.42, p=<0.001). Computed tomography planimetry of the mitral valve area correlated significantly with mean transvalvular pressure gradient (rho -0.60) and echocardiographic planimetry (rho 0.58).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: