Reproducibility of reading echocardiographic parameters to assess severity of mitral regurgitation. Insights from a French multicentre study.

BACKGROUND

Poor reproducibility in assessment of mitral regurgitation (MR) has been reported.

AIM: To investigate the robustness of echocardiographic MR assessment in 2019, based on improvements in technology and the skill of echocardiographists regarding MR quantification.

METHODS

Reproducibility in parameters of MR severity and global rating were tested using transthoracic echocardiography in 25 consecutive patients independently analysed by 16 junior and senior cardiologists specialized in echocardiography (400 analyses per parameter).

RESULTS

Overall interobserver agreement for mechanism definition, effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA) and regurgitant volume (RVol) was moderate, and was lower in secondary MR. Interobserver agreement was substantial for EROA [0.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.75] and moderate for RVol with the PISA method (0.50, 95% CI 0.33-0.56) in senior physicians and was fair in junior physicians (0.33, 95% CI 0.19-0.51 and 0.36, 95% CI 0.36-0.43, respectively). Using a multiparametric approach, overall interobserver agreement for grading MR severity was fair (0.30), was slightly better in senior than in junior physicians (0.31 vs. 0.28, respectively) with substantial or almost perfect agreement more frequently observed in senior versus junior physicians (52% vs. 36%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Reproducible transthoracic echocardiography MR quantification remains challenging in 2019, despite the expected high skills of echocardiographers regarding MR at the time of dedicated percutaneous intervention. The multiparametric approach does not entirely alleviate the substantial dispersion in measurement of MR severity parameters, whereas reader experience seems to partially address the issue. Our study emphasizes the continuing need for multimodality imaging and education in the evaluation of MR among cardiologists.