Member Comments are provided by individuals and reflect their personal opinions only. Under NO circumstances should you act on any advice or opinion posted in this forum. ALWAYS check with your personal physician before taking any action regarding your health! MedHelp International and our partners, sponsors and affiliates have no obligation to monitor any comments posted on this site, or the content and/or accuracy of such exchanges. MedHelp International does not endorse the views of any user.
Heart Disease (Expert Forum)
Ambiguous MVP/MR diagnosis w PSVT
This forum is for questions and support regarding heart issues such as: Angina, Angioplasty, Arrhythmia, Bypass Surgery, Cardiomyopathy, Coronary Artery Disease, Defibrillator, Heart Attack, Heart Disease, High Blood Pressure, Mitral Valve, Pacemaker, PAD, Stenosis, Stress Tests
Ambiguous MVP/MR diagnosis w PSVT
by dave3422, Nov 07, 2006 12:00AM
32/M with history of PSVT since age 10. Managed well (no meds) with very infrequent episodes. Otherwise healthy and exercise regularly.
1998, I went for a routine follow up w/echo. Echo showed "some prolapse of the anterior mitral leaflet without mitral regurgitation".
Jan-2006 I went for another routine follow up, was given another echo:
LVSd: .95cm
LVPWd: .95 cm
LVIDd: 5.2cm
LVIDs: 3.4 cm
Ao root diam: 2.8 cm
LA dimension: 2.9 cm
LV:
Normal size, wall thickness, wall motion and function.EF approx. 60-65%.
RV:
Normal size, wall thickness, wall motion and function.
Atria:
LA size normal. RA size normal. No thrombus or ASD demonstrated.
Mitral Valve:
Mild annular and leaflet fibrosis. No stenosis or vegitation. Borderline posterior leaflet prolapse.
Mild mitral regurgitation.
Conc: The study shows borderline MVP with mild leaflet thickening and regurgitation. Otherwise normal.
Original study was done by a cardiologist at a regional medical center. Took the echo CD to a cardiologist at a major educational/research institution. He and one of his colleagues reviewed the echo and said I have no prolapse and no regurgitation.
Questions:
1) What are "normal" values for echo results?
2) What accounts for the discrepancy between interpretations?
3) What does "mild leaflet fibrosis mean"?
4) Does no regurgitation then showing (supposedly) regurge indicate a worsening condition?
5) PCP said I need antibiotics before dental work. Cardio who reviewed echo in 2006 says no antibiotics necessary. How do I know?
Thank you
1998, I went for a routine follow up w/echo. Echo showed "some prolapse of the anterior mitral leaflet without mitral regurgitation".
Jan-2006 I went for another routine follow up, was given another echo:
LVSd: .95cm
LVPWd: .95 cm
LVIDd: 5.2cm
LVIDs: 3.4 cm
Ao root diam: 2.8 cm
LA dimension: 2.9 cm
LV:
Normal size, wall thickness, wall motion and function.EF approx. 60-65%.
RV:
Normal size, wall thickness, wall motion and function.
Atria:
LA size normal. RA size normal. No thrombus or ASD demonstrated.
Mitral Valve:
Mild annular and leaflet fibrosis. No stenosis or vegitation. Borderline posterior leaflet prolapse.
Mild mitral regurgitation.
Conc: The study shows borderline MVP with mild leaflet thickening and regurgitation. Otherwise normal.
Original study was done by a cardiologist at a regional medical center. Took the echo CD to a cardiologist at a major educational/research institution. He and one of his colleagues reviewed the echo and said I have no prolapse and no regurgitation.
Questions:
1) What are "normal" values for echo results?
2) What accounts for the discrepancy between interpretations?
3) What does "mild leaflet fibrosis mean"?
4) Does no regurgitation then showing (supposedly) regurge indicate a worsening condition?
5) PCP said I need antibiotics before dental work. Cardio who reviewed echo in 2006 says no antibiotics necessary. How do I know?
Thank you
Doctor's Answer
by CCF-M.D.-MJM, Nov 08, 2006 12:00AM
Hi Dave,
1) What are "normal" values for echo results?
From what you have written above, your echo sounds pretty normal. The "boarderline posterior leaflet prolapse" is probably not of any clinical consequences ( I say probably because I haven't seen the study).
2) What accounts for the discrepancy between interpretations?
The interpretations aren't as different as you might think. Mild or trace mitral regurgitation can be seen on most people that have an echo -- the test is too sensitive. Mild leaking is usually of no significance.
3) What does "mild leaflet fibrosis mean"?
I think they probably meant "restrictive" rather than "fibrosis."
They probably meant that it isn't moving as freely as they thought it should --- but remember that called it boarderline, which means they almost didn't comment on it at all.
4) Does no regurgitation then showing (supposedly) regurge indicate a worsening condition?
No. As I mentioned above, this can be seen on most echos.
5) PCP said I need antibiotics before dental work. Cardio who reviewed echo in 2006 says no antibiotics necessary. How do I know?
I would probably side with the cardiologist, but I would need to see the study. Cardiologist tend to have more experience with these issues. On the written report above there is nothing that would indicate a need for antibiotics.
I hope this answers your questions. Good luck and thanks for posting.
1) What are "normal" values for echo results?
From what you have written above, your echo sounds pretty normal. The "boarderline posterior leaflet prolapse" is probably not of any clinical consequences ( I say probably because I haven't seen the study).
2) What accounts for the discrepancy between interpretations?
The interpretations aren't as different as you might think. Mild or trace mitral regurgitation can be seen on most people that have an echo -- the test is too sensitive. Mild leaking is usually of no significance.
3) What does "mild leaflet fibrosis mean"?
I think they probably meant "restrictive" rather than "fibrosis."
They probably meant that it isn't moving as freely as they thought it should --- but remember that called it boarderline, which means they almost didn't comment on it at all.
4) Does no regurgitation then showing (supposedly) regurge indicate a worsening condition?
No. As I mentioned above, this can be seen on most echos.
5) PCP said I need antibiotics before dental work. Cardio who reviewed echo in 2006 says no antibiotics necessary. How do I know?
I would probably side with the cardiologist, but I would need to see the study. Cardiologist tend to have more experience with these issues. On the written report above there is nothing that would indicate a need for antibiotics.
I hope this answers your questions. Good luck and thanks for posting.
Auscultation yields no clicks or murmers.
Echo in 1998 yielded "some mitral prolapse of anterior mitral valve without mitral regurgitation".
Echo in 2006 yielded "borderline posterior leaflet prolapse" and mild "fibrosis" and mild mitral regurgitation by first cardiologist to review.
Cardiologist at a different (larger) center looked at the echo and found no prolapse and no regurgitation and said I do not need to take antibiotics prior to dental work.
Question: Why the discrepancies and three different interpretations? I am wondering if I have MVP/MR or not.
Thank you again!
Thanks ;)