Key result
Significant mitral regurgitation shows no association with altered isovolumic relaxation flow propagation velocity.
Why the study?
Mitral regurgitation can affect left ventricular diastolic parameters due to interference with regurgitation flow, but its impact on specific parameters requires comparison.
Does significant mitral regurgitation alter echocardiographic left ventricular diastolic parameters compared to matched controls?
Case-Control (n=114)
Does significant mitral regurgitation alter echocardiographic left ventricular diastolic parameters compared to matched controls?
Isovolumic relaxation flow propagation velocity (IRFPV) appears unaffected by significant mitral regurgitation, suggesting it may be a reliable parameter for assessing diastolic relaxation in this population.
Clinicians should interpret LV diastolic parameters cautiously with significant MR; leaves open need for adjusted reference values.
Mitral regurgitation (MR) can affect left ventricular diastolic parameters because of interference with regurgitation flow. This study compared left ventricular diastolic parameters between patients with and without significant MR. The MR group included 57 consecutive patients with significant MR. Fifty-seven age-, sex- and Tei index-matched patients without significant MR were selected as the reference group. Baseline characteristics and Tei index and its components were comparable between the MR and reference groups. The MR group had higher left atrial volume index, transmitral E wave velocity (E), ratio of E to transmitral A wave velocity, early diastolic mitral annular velocity (Ea), E/Ea, and ratio of E to isovolumic relaxation flow propagation velocity (IRFPV) (p ≤ 0.025), and lower E-wave deceleration time (p = 0.019) and late diastolic mitral annular velocity (p < 0.001). However, the two groups had similar IRFPV (p = 0.844). In conclusion, MR apparently affects E and Ea, but not IRFPV. IRFPV could potentially be a reliable relaxation parameter in patients with significant MR, but further confirmation by invasive studies is needed.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Su et al. (2010) conducted a case-control in Significant mitral regurgitation (n=114). Significant mitral regurgitation vs. No significant mitral regurgitation was evaluated on Isovolumic relaxation flow propagation velocity (IRFPV) (p=0.844). Significant mitral regurgitation altered multiple diastolic parameters including E and Ea, but isovolumic relaxation flow propagation velocity remained similar between groups (p=0.844).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: