Still confused about ambiguous MVP diagnosis

[dave3422]

Hello and thank you very much for taking my questions. This is a very educational forum and I am glad to see the upgrades!
I am 33/M in good overall health - normal BP, exercise regularly, good diet, etc, history of modest PSVT, managed without meds.

In January 2006, I had an echo and the written impression was "borderline MVP with leaflet thickening and mild mitral regurgitation."

Desiring a second opinion, I obtained a copy of the echo on CD and provided it to a cardiologist at another major center. He and one of his staff reviewed the echo and found "no leaflet thickening, no MR, and there is posterior leaflet prolapse" resulting in an impression of "question mitral valve prolapse".

Questions:

1) Please explain the discrepancy where one specialist reading the echo sees "leaflet thickening and regurgitation" and the other sees "no thickening and no MR". And one says "borderline posterior leaflet prolapse" and the other says "posterior leaflet prolapse".

2) How do I know if I have MVP or not? I desire some closure. In either case, there was no mention of any follow up or concern.

3) Should I be concerned and/or seek follow up?

4) Also - a recent ECG indicated "high voltage" (no specificity) and "mild intra-atrial conduction defect". What do these readings mean? The cardiologist did not even mention them to me, I just read these on the written report.

Thank you very much for your time,
Respectfully,

[EchoTech]

mild MVP and borderline MVP = go on with your life with no restrictions what so ever.  

[Forum-M.D.-bkj]

dave,

Thanks for the post.

1) Please explain the discrepancy where one specialist reading the echo sees 'leaflet thickening and regurgitation' and the other sees 'no thickening and no MR'. And one says 'borderline posterior leaflet prolapse' and the other says 'posterior leaflet prolapse'.

A lot of reading an echo is subjective. Because of this there are subtle differences between readers interpretations of the same echos.  If there was a marked difference between readings. I would be more concerned if there were dramatic differences in interpretations.

2) How do I know if I have MVP or not? I desire some closure. In either case, there was no mention of any follow up or concern.

Either way, from the sound of it, you may have mild prolapse. Without any other major issues like significant regurgitation, there really is no significance and no need for followup. It's easy to get focused on things listed on an echo, but mild prolapse is just an anatomic term.  

3) Should I be concerned and/or seek follow up?

see above.

4) Also - a recent ECG indicated 'high voltage' (no specificity) and 'mild intra-atrial conduction defect'. What do these readings mean?

Hard to tell without seeing the ecg. If you are a thin person, it probably is realted to your body habitus.

good luck