Arrhythmic risk profile in mitral valve prolapse: A systematic review and metanalysis of 1715 patients

Abstract

AbstractIntroductionMitral valve prolapse (MVP) is a common clinical condition in the general population. A subgroup of patients with MVP may experience ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (“arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse” [AMVP]) but how to stratify arrhythmic risk is still unclear. Our meta‐analysis aims to identify predictive factors for arrhythmic risk in patients with MVP.MethodsWe systematically searched Medline, Cochrane, Journals@Ovid, Scopus electronic databases for studies published up to December 28, 2022 and comparing AMVP and nonarrhythmic mitral valve prolapse (NAMVP) for what concerns history, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic and cardiac magnetic resonance features. The effect size was estimated using a random‐effect model as odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD).ResultsA total of 10 studies enrolling 1715 patients were included. Late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) (OR: 16.67; p = .005), T‐wave inversion (TWI) (OR: 2.63; p < .0001), bileaflet MVP (OR: 1.92; p < .0001) and mitral anulus disjunction (MAD) (OR: 2.60; p < .0001) were more represented among patients with AMVP than in NAMVP. Patients with AMVP were shown to have longer anterior mitral leaflet (AML) (MD: 2.63 mm; p < .0001), posterior mitral leaflet (MD: 2.96 mm; p < .0001), thicker AML (MD: 0.49 mm; p < .0001), longer MAD length (MD: 1.24 mm; p < .0001) and higher amount of LGE (MD: 1.41%; p < .0001) than NAMVP. AMVP showed increased mechanical dispersion (MD: 8.04 ms; 95% confidence interval: 5.13–10.96; p < .0001) compared with NAMVP.ConclusionsOur meta‐analysis proved that LGE, TWI, bileaflet MVP, and MAD are predictive factors for arrhythmic risk in MVP patients.