Which method should be the reference method to evaluate the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis? Gorlin's method versus 3D-echo.
BACKGROUND
Several studies have shown a wide variability among different methods to determine the valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis. Our aim was to evaluate if 3D-echo planimetry is more accurate than the Gorlin method to measure the valve area.


METHODS
Twenty-six patients with mitral stenosis underwent 2D and 3D-echo echocardiographic examinations and catheterization. Valve area was estimated by different methods. A median value of the mitral valve area, obtained from the measurements of three classical non-invasive methods (2D planimetry, pressure half-time and PISA method), was used as the reference method and it was compared with 3D-echo planimetry and Gorlin's method.


RESULTS
Our results showed that the accuracy of 3D-echo planimetry is superior to the accuracy of the Gorlin method for the assessment of mitral valve area.


CONCLUSIONS
We should keep in mind the fact that 3D-echo planimetry may be a better reference method than the Gorlin method to assess the severity of rheumatic mitral stenosis.
Pérez de Isla
Leopoldo
L
Unidad de Imagen Cardiovascular, Hospital Clínico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain.
Casanova
Carlos
C
Almería
Carlos
C
Rodrigo
José Luis
JL
Cordeiro
Pedro
P
Mataix
Luis
L
Aubele
Ada Lia
AL
Lang
Roberto
R
Zamorano
José Luis
JL
D000328:Adult; D004452:Echocardiography / Q000379:methods*; D019560:Echocardiography, Three-Dimensional; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008946:Mitral Valve Stenosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000209:etiology / Q000503:physiopathology; D012214:Rheumatic Heart Disease / Q000150:complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging* / Q000503:physiopathology; D012720:Severity of Illness Index