Document Type : Original Article(s)


1 Assistant Professor, Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Rajaie Cardiovascular Medical and Research Center, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran


BACKGROUND: Mitral valve prolapse (MVP) is the most common cause of isolated mitral regurgitation (MR) requiring surgical repair. Therapeutic interventions should be considered before irreversible left ventricular (LV) dysfunction in asymptomatic patients. Measurement of LV volume and function is very important. Because of two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography limitations, three-dimensional (3D) measurement is preferred on the strength of its speed, accuracy, and reproducibility, which are comparable with those of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).METHODS: This study was conducted between April 2018 and February 2019 on 50 patients with different MVP types and severe MR scheduled for valve surgery at Rajaie Cardiovascular Research Center, Tehran, Iran, with the aid of the HeartModelAnatomical intelligence (A.I.) (EPIQ 7: new 3D software) for measurement of LV volume indices and function.RESULTS: Patients with the Barlow syndrome had a greater drop in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) than those with fibroelastic deficiency (FED) (57.05% ± 6.00% vs. 65.00% ± 4.08%; P = 0.001). LV volume was larger in patients with flail mitral valve (MV) than in those with non-flail MV (165 cc vs. 118 cc; P = 0.001). LVEF declined more in patients with the involvement of both leaflets than in those with the involvement of the anterior leaflet alone (56.00% ± 7.10% vs. 57.70% ± 4.30%; P = 0.021).CONCLUSION: The LVEF drop was more remarkable in patients with the Barlow syndrome (both flail and non-flail MV) than in those with FED. It is, therefore, advisable that such patients be monitored more meticulously via the 3D HeartModelA.I. method in terms of LVEF and LV size to prevent irreversible effects on LV function and to reduce mortality.


  1. Dal-Bianco JP, Levine RA. Anatomy of the mitral valve apparatus: Role of 2D and 3D echocardiography. Cardiol Clin 2013; 31(2): 151-64.
  2. Shah PM. Current concepts in mitral valve prolapse-diagnosis and management. J Cardiol 2010; 56(2): 125-33.
  3. Zoghbi WA, Adams D, Bonow RO, Enriquez-Sarano M, Foster E, Grayburn PA, et al. Recommendations for noninvasive evaluation of native valvular regurgitation: A report from the american society of echocardiography developed in collaboration with the society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2017; 30(4): 303-71.
  4. Apostolidou E, Maslow AD, Poppas A. Primary mitral valve regurgitation: Update and review. Glob Cardiol Sci Pract 2017; 2017(1): e201703.
  5. Delling FN, Vasan RS. Epidemiology and pathophysiology of mitral valve prolapse: New insights into disease progression, genetics, and molecular basis. Circulation 2014; 129(21): 2158-70.
  6. Barlow JB, Pocock WA. Mitral valve prolapse, the specific billowing mitral leaflet syndrome, or an insignificant non-ejection systolic click. Am Heart J 1979; 97(3): 277-85.
  7. Tribouilloy C, Grigioni F, Avierinos JF, Barbieri A, Rusinaru D, Szymanski C, et al. Survival implication of left ventricular end-systolic diameter in mitral regurgitation due to flail leaflets a
  8. long-term follow-up multicenter study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54(21): 1961-8.
  9. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP 3rd, Fleisher LA, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: A report of the American college of cardiology/American heart association task force on clinical practice guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 70(2): 252-89.
  10. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J 2017; 38(36): 2739-91.
  11. Lang RM, Badano LP, Tsang W, Adams DH, Agricola E, Buck T, et al. EAE/ASE recommendations for image acquisition and display using three-dimensional echocardiography. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2012; 13(1): 1-46.
  12. Mor-Avi V, Jenkins C, Kuhl HP, Nesser HJ, Marwick T, Franke A, et al. Real-time
  13. -dimensional echocardiographic quantification of left ventricular volumes: Multicenter study for validation with magnetic resonance imaging and investigation of sources of error. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2008; 1(4): 413-23.
  14. Tsang W, Salgo IS, Medvedofsky D, Takeuchi M, Prater D, Weinert L, et al. Transthoracic 3D echocardiographic left heart chamber quantification using an automated adaptive analytics algorithm. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging 2016; 9(7): 769-82.
  15. Greupner J, Zimmermann E, Grohmann A, Dubel HP, Althoff TF, Borges AC, et al. Head-to-head comparison of left ventricular function assessment with 64-row computed tomography, biplane left cineventriculography, and both 2- and 3-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography: Comparison with magnetic resonance imaging as the reference standard. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 59(21): 1897-907.
  16. Malev E, Kim G, Mitrofanova L, Zemtsovsky E.
  17. Preoperative left ventricular function in degenerative mitral valve disease. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown) 2014; 15(3): 222-9.
  18. Garbi M, Lancellotti P, Sheppard MN. Mitral valve and left ventricular features in malignant mitral valve prolapse. Open Heart 2018; 5(2): e000925.
  19. Bui AH, Roujol S, Foppa M, Kissinger KV, Goddu B, Hauser TH, et al. Diffuse myocardial fibrosis in patients with mitral valve prolapse and ventricular arrhythmia. Heart 2017; 103(3): 204-9.
  20. Suzuki K, Murata M, Yasuda R, Tsuruta H, Tomotsugu N, Abe T, et al. Effect of lesional differences in prolapsed leaflets on clinical outcomes in patients with mitral valve prolapse. Am J Cardiovasc Dis 2012; 2(3): 152-9.