Author + information
- Received April 14, 2010
- Revision received July 22, 2010
- Accepted August 9, 2010
- Published online November 1, 2010.
- Robert D. Rifkin, MD⁎ ( and )
- Shivak Sharma, MD
- ↵⁎Reprint requests and correspondence:
Dr. Robert D. Rifkin, Division of Cardiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Campus Box 8086, 660 South Euclid Avenue, St. Louis, Missouri 63110
Objectives The purpose of this study was to develop and test a simple, clinically practical alternative isovelocity surface (ISVS) model for calculating effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) in mitral regurgitation (MR) when the regurgitant orifice is elongated, such as in functional MR.
Background Clinical experience and 3-dimensional imaging suggest that the traditional hemispheric ISVS model used in the conventional proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) calculation is invalid in certain MR cases and can cause erroneous EROA values.
Methods Our ISVS model consisted of 3 sections of equal radius (R): a cylindrical midsection of length (L) positioned between 2 hemispheroidal end sections. Total ISVS area (TS) is equal to 2πR2 + πLR and EROA is equal to (VN/VCW)TS, where VN is the flow velocity crossing perpendicular to the ISVS, and VCW is the peak MR jet velocity by continuous-wave Doppler. This EROA was corrected for any obtuse angle, θ formed by tented leaflets, by multiplying TS by a planar factor, (θ/180) or a combination of this planar factor for the cylindrical midsection and the solid-angle factor, 1−cos(θ/2), for the 2 spheroidal end sections. In 24 cases of severe or 3+ functional MR, we calculated EROA using 3 traditional hemispheric surfaces and 3 alternative ISVS models that differed in the leaflet angle correction applied. Results were compared with continuity-based EROA using the standard mitral valve − aortic valve stroke volume method and with predictions based upon theoretical geometric considerations.
Results The mean differences between continuity EROA and ISVS area–based EROA for no angle correction, planar correction, or combined angle correction were, respectively, 0.38, 0.32, and 0.28 cm2 for the 3 spherical surface models and 0.17, 0.018, and −0.012 cm2 for the 3 alternative 3-section ISVS models. The empiric EROA results with both the traditional spherical and alternative ISVS models agreed well with theoretical geometric predictions.
Conclusions The traditional spherical PISA model underestimates EROA in functional MR. For elongated MR orifices, an ISVS model that mirrors orifice shape yields more accurate EROA values. Correction to the ISVS area for obtuse leaflet angulation improves accuracy of EROA estimation.
The authors have reported that they have no relationships to disclose.
- Received April 14, 2010.
- Revision received July 22, 2010.
- Accepted August 9, 2010.
- American College of Cardiology Foundation