Os critérios para classificação da insuficiência mitral não foram adequados na cardiomiopatia dilatada

BACKGROUND: Mitral regurgitation (MR) is common in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). It is unknown whether the criteria for MR classification are inadequate for patients with DCM. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the agreement among the four most common echocardiographic methods for MR clas...

ver descrição completa

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autores: Mancuso, Frederico José Neves [UNIFESP], Moisés, Valdir Ambrósio [UNIFESP], Almeida, Dirceu Rodrigues de [UNIFESP], Oliveira, Wercules Antonio [UNIFESP], Poyares, Dalva [UNIFESP], Brito, Flavio Souza [UNIFESP], De Paola, Angelo Amato Vincenzo [UNIFESP], Carvalho, Antonio Carlos [UNIFESP], Campos Filho, Orlando [UNIFESP]
Formato: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2013
País:Brasil
Recursos:Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
Repositorio:Repositório Institucional da UNIFESP
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.unifesp.br:11600/8000
Acesso em linha:http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/abc.20130200
http://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/8000
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palavra-chave:Mitral Valve Insufficiency
Cardiomyopathy, Dilated
Echocardiography
Insuficiência da Valva Mitral
Cardiomiopatia Dilatada
Ecocardiografia
Descrição
Resumo:BACKGROUND: Mitral regurgitation (MR) is common in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). It is unknown whether the criteria for MR classification are inadequate for patients with DCM. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate the agreement among the four most common echocardiographic methods for MR classification. METHODS: Ninety patients with DCM were included. Functional MR was classified using four echocardiographic methods: color flow jet area (JA), vena contracta (VC), effective regurgitant orifice area (ERO) and regurgitant volume (RV). MR was classified as mild, moderate or important according to the American Society of Echocardiography criteria and by dividing the values into terciles. The Kappa test was used to evaluate whether the methods agreed, and the Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the correlation between the absolute values of each method. RESULTS: MR classification according to each method was as follows: JA: 26 mild, 44 moderate, 20 important; VC: 12 mild, 72 moderate, 6 important; ERO: 70 mild, 15 moderate, 5 important; RV: 70 mild, 16 moderate, 4 important. The agreement was poor among methods (kappa=0.11; p<0.001). It was observed a strong correlation between the absolute values of each method, ranging from 0.70 to 0.95 (p<0.01) and the agreement was higher when values were divided into terciles (kappa = 0.44; p < 0.01) CONCLUSION: The use of conventional echocardiographic criteria for MR classification seems inadequate in patients with DCM. It is necessary to establish new cutoff values for MR classification in these patients.