Identifying the subgroup of patients with mitral valve prolapse (MVP) and high incidence of ventricular arrhythmias (VA) represents a challenge. The arrhythmic MVP (AMVP) has been defined as the presence of MVP, combined with frequent and/or complex VA in the absence of any other arrhythmic substrate, regardless of the presence of mitral regurgitation (MR).1–4 There have been efforts to identify echocardiographic characteristics of AMVP, being bileaflet prolapse and mitral annular disjunction (MAD) the most studied ones.5,6 It has been previously postulated that leaflet displacement exerts increased tension on papillary muscles (PMs) causing excessive traction,7 which may be linked to the reduced regional strain and myocardial fibrosis at the PMs and basal inferior-lateral left ventricular (LV) wall, that is seen in this population.8–10

We hypothesize that mitral valve apparatus geometry and subsequent excessive traction forces on the PMs constitute the underlying pathophysiological pathway for the development of VA. We believe we are able to identify and quantify this mechanism by transthoracic echocardiography (TTE). Therefore, by identifying patients with disruptive traction forces, we could define echocardiographic patterns associated with VA.

This is a retrospective cohort study. Forty-two patients (n = 42) were selected for a proof-of-concept analysis. Mitral valve prolapse was defined as systolic displacement of one or both mitral leaflets ≥ 2 mm above the plane of the mitral annulus (MA) in the parasternal long-axis view and AMVP as MVP combined with frequent or complex VA [≥5% total premature ventricular contraction (PVC) burden, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (NSVT), ventricular tachycardia, or ventricular fibrillation].1 Valve geometry and traction parameters were measured using 2D TTE. Traction forces were quantified as the change in distance between PM and MA from early to peak systole (Figure 1).7

Left panel: traction was measured in a three-chamber apical view as the distance from the tip of the PM to a line at the level of the mitral annular hinge points at 2 moments: (i) at full closure of the mitral valve (early systole) and (ii) in mid-late systole at the time of maximal superior leaflet displacement (peak systole). The change in this distance between the two moments was calculated and represents traction. Right panel: PM-MA distance change (traction) in the four groups. AMVP, arrhythmic MVP; BMVP, benign MVP; MA, mitral annulus; MR-MVP, MVP with severe mitral regurgitation; MVP, mitral valve prolapse; PM, papillary muscle.
Figure 1

Left panel: traction was measured in a three-chamber apical view as the distance from the tip of the PM to a line at the level of the mitral annular hinge points at 2 moments: (i) at full closure of the mitral valve (early systole) and (ii) in mid-late systole at the time of maximal superior leaflet displacement (peak systole). The change in this distance between the two moments was calculated and represents traction. Right panel: PM-MA distance change (traction) in the four groups. AMVP, arrhythmic MVP; BMVP, benign MVP; MA, mitral annulus; MR-MVP, MVP with severe mitral regurgitation; MVP, mitral valve prolapse; PM, papillary muscle.

The patients were divided into four groups: a control group (controls, n = 10), a group with benign MVP with no significant MR (BMVP, n = 14), an AMVP group with no significant MR (AMVP, n = 8), and a group with MVP and severe MR (MR-MVP, n = 10).

Clinical characteristics and echo measurements are presented in Table 1. The groups were comparable in terms of age, gender and LV dimension, function, and global longitudinal strain. Palpitations were more common in AMVP, while dyspnoea was the predominant symptom in MR-MVP. The AMVP group also had a higher likelihood of pathological electrocardiogram (ECG), with PVCs and negative T waves being the most common findings. The AMVP patients exhibited the highest burden of VA on 24 h Holter monitoring, predominantly NSVT. As expected, MR-MVP patients had the largest left atrium volume. In terms of mitral valve geometry, the AMVP group had the largest prolapsing area and height, with primarily bileaflet involvement, and MAD was significantly more frequent in this group as well (six out of the eight patients had MAD).

Table 1

Basal patients’ characteristics and echocardiographic measurements

TotalControlsBMVPaAMVPbMR-MVPP valueControls vs. BMVPControls vs. AMVPControls vs. MR-MVPBMVP vs. AMVPBMVP vs. MR-MVPAMVP vs. MR-MVP
Basal characteristics
 Patients, n42 (100%)10 (23.8%)14 (33.3%)8 (19.1%)10 (23.8%)
 Age, years47.7 (16.9)42.3 (13.1)48.1 (17.8)45.5 (14.4)54.4 (20.6)0.450.390.590.200.760.380.31
 Gender (men), n16 (38.1%)4 (40%)5 (35.7%)3 (37.5%)4 (40%)1.000.830.911.000.930.830.91
 BMI, kg/m223.7 (3.8)25.1 (1.9)21.9 (3.6)22.2 (3.2)26.3 (4.3)0.0100.0260.0620.880.730.0190.051
 Symptoms, n0.110.750.170.380.080.240.24
  Palpitations2 (4.8%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
  Syncope3 (7.1%)1 (10%)2 (14.3%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
  Dizziness1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Dyspnoea1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
  Dyspnoea + palpitations1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
 ECG findings, n0.0040.490.0040.170.0030.330.030
  Long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Fragmented QRS2 (5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  PVCs4 (10%)0 (0%)0 (0%)3 (37.5%)1 (11.1%)
  RBBB3 (7.5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)2 (22.2%)
  Negative T waves + long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Negative T waves + PVCs2 (5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
 24 h Holter monitoring findings, n0.0740.150.730.0190.420.097
  PVCs > 5%2 (8.33%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)1 (12.50%)1 (12.50%)
  NSVT6 (25.00%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)5 (62.50%)1 (12.50%)
  VT0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
 SCD, n1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)0.230.250.180.25
 Family history of SCD or VA, n3 (7.5%)2 (20%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0.310.350.210.160.470.41
Echocardiography
 LA volume (BP) index, mL/m232.1 (12.36)26.1 (9.07)29.3 (11)28.7 (8.95)46.3 (10.4)<0.0010.560.480.0020.950.0030.003
 LV EDV (BP) index, mL/m253.7 (16.6)50.2 (11.3)48.3 (12)57.7 (23)61.4 (19)0.240.990.850.510.670.280.98
 LV ESV (BP) index, mL/m221.9 (9.7)19.8 (8.3)19.7 (6.7)27.9 (15.9)22.35 (7.1)0.240.990.290.940.230.910.63
 LV EF, %62.4 (5.5)64.5 (3.8)61.9 (6.1)60.5 (5.9)62.4 (5.8)0.490.290.110.330.580.860.48
 Global longitudinal strain, %20.6 (2.9)21.9 (2.7)19.8 (2.9)19.3 (3.9)20.9 (2.3)0.290.0770.460.920.920.220.25
Geometry parameters
 Annulus diameter, cm3.47 (0.51)3.05 (0.47)3.46 (0.38)3.86 (0.43)3.59 (0.52)0.0040.0360.0040.0150.0600.410.26
 Prolapsing leaflets, n<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0580.940.047
  Anterior5 (11.90%)0 (0%)3 (21.43%)0 (0%)2 (20.00%)
  Posterior12 (28.57%)0 (0%)6 (42.86%)1 (12.50%)5 (50.00%)
  Bileaflet15 (35.71%)0 (0%)5 (35.71%)7 (87.50%)3 (30.00%)
 Prolapse area (3Ch), cm20.47 (0.16–0.92)0 (0)0.49 (0.34–0.68)1.29 (1.04–1.41)0.49 (0.31–0.71)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.980.003
 Prolapse height (3Ch), cm0.44 (0.16–0.70)0 (0)0.47 (0.43–0.62)0.84 (0.60–0.94)0.42 (0.35–0.55)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0140.120.006
 MADc, n8 (19.05%)0 (0%)1 (7.14%)6 (75.00%)1 (10.00%)<0.0010.39<0.0010.300.0010.800.005
 Anterior leaflet length, cm2.51 (0.51)2.13 (0.23)2.51 (0.53)2.93 (0.55)2.55 (0.41)0.0080.10<0.0010.0060.140.790.25
 Posterior leaflet length, cm1.65 (0.56)1.12 (0.23)1.51 (0.50)2.16 (0.38)1.95 (0.49)<0.0010.043<0.001<0.0010.0030.0840.31
 Anterior leaflet thickness, cm0.52 (0.43–0.65)0.40 (0.37–0.5)0.55 (0.47–0.65)0.79 (0.65–0.85)0.51 (0.47–0.61)0.0020.0080.0010.0490.120.450.010
 Posterior leaflet thickness, cm0.50 (0.36–0.62)0.33 (0.3–0.37)0.45 (0.37–0.6)0.72 (0.59–0.81)0.59 (0.5–0.74)<0.0010.006<0.001<0.0010.0030.0790.35
Traction parameters
 PM-MA distance ES, cm2.93 (0.56)2.66 (0.31)2.72 (0.58)3.46 (0.37)3.03 (0.58)0.0050.64<0.0010.120.0050.140.082
 PM-MA distance PS, cm2.46 (0.45)2.51 (0.28)2.46 (0.54)2.22 (0.39)2.61 (0.47)0.320.260.120.820.450.370.099
 PM-MA distance change, cm−0.46 (0.45)−0.15 (0.11)−0.26 (0.13)−1.25 (0.4)−0.42 (0.18)<0.0010.63<0.0010.04<0.0010.31<0.001
 PM-MA distance change, %14.73 (12.4)5.6 (3.59)9.46 (4.86)36 (10.34)13.7 (4.35)<0.0010.042<0.0010.02<0.0010.34<0.001
TotalControlsBMVPaAMVPbMR-MVPP valueControls vs. BMVPControls vs. AMVPControls vs. MR-MVPBMVP vs. AMVPBMVP vs. MR-MVPAMVP vs. MR-MVP
Basal characteristics
 Patients, n42 (100%)10 (23.8%)14 (33.3%)8 (19.1%)10 (23.8%)
 Age, years47.7 (16.9)42.3 (13.1)48.1 (17.8)45.5 (14.4)54.4 (20.6)0.450.390.590.200.760.380.31
 Gender (men), n16 (38.1%)4 (40%)5 (35.7%)3 (37.5%)4 (40%)1.000.830.911.000.930.830.91
 BMI, kg/m223.7 (3.8)25.1 (1.9)21.9 (3.6)22.2 (3.2)26.3 (4.3)0.0100.0260.0620.880.730.0190.051
 Symptoms, n0.110.750.170.380.080.240.24
  Palpitations2 (4.8%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
  Syncope3 (7.1%)1 (10%)2 (14.3%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
  Dizziness1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Dyspnoea1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
  Dyspnoea + palpitations1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
 ECG findings, n0.0040.490.0040.170.0030.330.030
  Long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Fragmented QRS2 (5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  PVCs4 (10%)0 (0%)0 (0%)3 (37.5%)1 (11.1%)
  RBBB3 (7.5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)2 (22.2%)
  Negative T waves + long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Negative T waves + PVCs2 (5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
 24 h Holter monitoring findings, n0.0740.150.730.0190.420.097
  PVCs > 5%2 (8.33%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)1 (12.50%)1 (12.50%)
  NSVT6 (25.00%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)5 (62.50%)1 (12.50%)
  VT0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
 SCD, n1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)0.230.250.180.25
 Family history of SCD or VA, n3 (7.5%)2 (20%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0.310.350.210.160.470.41
Echocardiography
 LA volume (BP) index, mL/m232.1 (12.36)26.1 (9.07)29.3 (11)28.7 (8.95)46.3 (10.4)<0.0010.560.480.0020.950.0030.003
 LV EDV (BP) index, mL/m253.7 (16.6)50.2 (11.3)48.3 (12)57.7 (23)61.4 (19)0.240.990.850.510.670.280.98
 LV ESV (BP) index, mL/m221.9 (9.7)19.8 (8.3)19.7 (6.7)27.9 (15.9)22.35 (7.1)0.240.990.290.940.230.910.63
 LV EF, %62.4 (5.5)64.5 (3.8)61.9 (6.1)60.5 (5.9)62.4 (5.8)0.490.290.110.330.580.860.48
 Global longitudinal strain, %20.6 (2.9)21.9 (2.7)19.8 (2.9)19.3 (3.9)20.9 (2.3)0.290.0770.460.920.920.220.25
Geometry parameters
 Annulus diameter, cm3.47 (0.51)3.05 (0.47)3.46 (0.38)3.86 (0.43)3.59 (0.52)0.0040.0360.0040.0150.0600.410.26
 Prolapsing leaflets, n<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0580.940.047
  Anterior5 (11.90%)0 (0%)3 (21.43%)0 (0%)2 (20.00%)
  Posterior12 (28.57%)0 (0%)6 (42.86%)1 (12.50%)5 (50.00%)
  Bileaflet15 (35.71%)0 (0%)5 (35.71%)7 (87.50%)3 (30.00%)
 Prolapse area (3Ch), cm20.47 (0.16–0.92)0 (0)0.49 (0.34–0.68)1.29 (1.04–1.41)0.49 (0.31–0.71)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.980.003
 Prolapse height (3Ch), cm0.44 (0.16–0.70)0 (0)0.47 (0.43–0.62)0.84 (0.60–0.94)0.42 (0.35–0.55)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0140.120.006
 MADc, n8 (19.05%)0 (0%)1 (7.14%)6 (75.00%)1 (10.00%)<0.0010.39<0.0010.300.0010.800.005
 Anterior leaflet length, cm2.51 (0.51)2.13 (0.23)2.51 (0.53)2.93 (0.55)2.55 (0.41)0.0080.10<0.0010.0060.140.790.25
 Posterior leaflet length, cm1.65 (0.56)1.12 (0.23)1.51 (0.50)2.16 (0.38)1.95 (0.49)<0.0010.043<0.001<0.0010.0030.0840.31
 Anterior leaflet thickness, cm0.52 (0.43–0.65)0.40 (0.37–0.5)0.55 (0.47–0.65)0.79 (0.65–0.85)0.51 (0.47–0.61)0.0020.0080.0010.0490.120.450.010
 Posterior leaflet thickness, cm0.50 (0.36–0.62)0.33 (0.3–0.37)0.45 (0.37–0.6)0.72 (0.59–0.81)0.59 (0.5–0.74)<0.0010.006<0.001<0.0010.0030.0790.35
Traction parameters
 PM-MA distance ES, cm2.93 (0.56)2.66 (0.31)2.72 (0.58)3.46 (0.37)3.03 (0.58)0.0050.64<0.0010.120.0050.140.082
 PM-MA distance PS, cm2.46 (0.45)2.51 (0.28)2.46 (0.54)2.22 (0.39)2.61 (0.47)0.320.260.120.820.450.370.099
 PM-MA distance change, cm−0.46 (0.45)−0.15 (0.11)−0.26 (0.13)−1.25 (0.4)−0.42 (0.18)<0.0010.63<0.0010.04<0.0010.31<0.001
 PM-MA distance change, %14.73 (12.4)5.6 (3.59)9.46 (4.86)36 (10.34)13.7 (4.35)<0.0010.042<0.0010.02<0.0010.34<0.001

Described as n (%), mean (SD), or median (IQR). Statistically significant P values were identified in italics. Statistically significant P values between the Benign MVP group and the Arrhythmogenic MVP group were identified in bold italicized values, which are the most remarkable findings of the study, mentioned in the text.

3Ch, three-chamber view; AMVP, arrhythmic MVP; BMI, body mass index; BMVP, benign MVP; EDV, end-diastolic volume; EF, ejection fraction; ECG, electrocardiogram; ES, early systole; ESV, end-systolic volume; LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricle; MA, mitral annulus; MAD, mitral annular disjunction; MR-MVP, MVP with severe mitral regurgitation; MVP, mitral valve prolapse; NSVT, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia; PM, papillary muscle; PS, peak systole; RBBB, right bundle branch block; SCD, sudden cardiac death; VA, ventricular arrhythmia; VT, ventricular tachycardia.

aMVP was defined as systolic displacement of one or both mitral leaflets ≥ 2 mm above the plane of the MA in the parasternal long-axis view.

bAMVP was defined as MVP combined with frequent or complex VA(≥5% total PVC burden, NSVT, VT, or VF) in the absence of any other well-defined arrhythmic substrate.

cMAD was defined as an abnormal longitudinal atrial displacement ≥ 2 mm of the hinge point of the mitral valve away from the ventricular myocardium during systole.

Table 1

Basal patients’ characteristics and echocardiographic measurements

TotalControlsBMVPaAMVPbMR-MVPP valueControls vs. BMVPControls vs. AMVPControls vs. MR-MVPBMVP vs. AMVPBMVP vs. MR-MVPAMVP vs. MR-MVP
Basal characteristics
 Patients, n42 (100%)10 (23.8%)14 (33.3%)8 (19.1%)10 (23.8%)
 Age, years47.7 (16.9)42.3 (13.1)48.1 (17.8)45.5 (14.4)54.4 (20.6)0.450.390.590.200.760.380.31
 Gender (men), n16 (38.1%)4 (40%)5 (35.7%)3 (37.5%)4 (40%)1.000.830.911.000.930.830.91
 BMI, kg/m223.7 (3.8)25.1 (1.9)21.9 (3.6)22.2 (3.2)26.3 (4.3)0.0100.0260.0620.880.730.0190.051
 Symptoms, n0.110.750.170.380.080.240.24
  Palpitations2 (4.8%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
  Syncope3 (7.1%)1 (10%)2 (14.3%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
  Dizziness1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Dyspnoea1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
  Dyspnoea + palpitations1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
 ECG findings, n0.0040.490.0040.170.0030.330.030
  Long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Fragmented QRS2 (5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  PVCs4 (10%)0 (0%)0 (0%)3 (37.5%)1 (11.1%)
  RBBB3 (7.5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)2 (22.2%)
  Negative T waves + long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Negative T waves + PVCs2 (5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
 24 h Holter monitoring findings, n0.0740.150.730.0190.420.097
  PVCs > 5%2 (8.33%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)1 (12.50%)1 (12.50%)
  NSVT6 (25.00%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)5 (62.50%)1 (12.50%)
  VT0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
 SCD, n1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)0.230.250.180.25
 Family history of SCD or VA, n3 (7.5%)2 (20%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0.310.350.210.160.470.41
Echocardiography
 LA volume (BP) index, mL/m232.1 (12.36)26.1 (9.07)29.3 (11)28.7 (8.95)46.3 (10.4)<0.0010.560.480.0020.950.0030.003
 LV EDV (BP) index, mL/m253.7 (16.6)50.2 (11.3)48.3 (12)57.7 (23)61.4 (19)0.240.990.850.510.670.280.98
 LV ESV (BP) index, mL/m221.9 (9.7)19.8 (8.3)19.7 (6.7)27.9 (15.9)22.35 (7.1)0.240.990.290.940.230.910.63
 LV EF, %62.4 (5.5)64.5 (3.8)61.9 (6.1)60.5 (5.9)62.4 (5.8)0.490.290.110.330.580.860.48
 Global longitudinal strain, %20.6 (2.9)21.9 (2.7)19.8 (2.9)19.3 (3.9)20.9 (2.3)0.290.0770.460.920.920.220.25
Geometry parameters
 Annulus diameter, cm3.47 (0.51)3.05 (0.47)3.46 (0.38)3.86 (0.43)3.59 (0.52)0.0040.0360.0040.0150.0600.410.26
 Prolapsing leaflets, n<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0580.940.047
  Anterior5 (11.90%)0 (0%)3 (21.43%)0 (0%)2 (20.00%)
  Posterior12 (28.57%)0 (0%)6 (42.86%)1 (12.50%)5 (50.00%)
  Bileaflet15 (35.71%)0 (0%)5 (35.71%)7 (87.50%)3 (30.00%)
 Prolapse area (3Ch), cm20.47 (0.16–0.92)0 (0)0.49 (0.34–0.68)1.29 (1.04–1.41)0.49 (0.31–0.71)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.980.003
 Prolapse height (3Ch), cm0.44 (0.16–0.70)0 (0)0.47 (0.43–0.62)0.84 (0.60–0.94)0.42 (0.35–0.55)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0140.120.006
 MADc, n8 (19.05%)0 (0%)1 (7.14%)6 (75.00%)1 (10.00%)<0.0010.39<0.0010.300.0010.800.005
 Anterior leaflet length, cm2.51 (0.51)2.13 (0.23)2.51 (0.53)2.93 (0.55)2.55 (0.41)0.0080.10<0.0010.0060.140.790.25
 Posterior leaflet length, cm1.65 (0.56)1.12 (0.23)1.51 (0.50)2.16 (0.38)1.95 (0.49)<0.0010.043<0.001<0.0010.0030.0840.31
 Anterior leaflet thickness, cm0.52 (0.43–0.65)0.40 (0.37–0.5)0.55 (0.47–0.65)0.79 (0.65–0.85)0.51 (0.47–0.61)0.0020.0080.0010.0490.120.450.010
 Posterior leaflet thickness, cm0.50 (0.36–0.62)0.33 (0.3–0.37)0.45 (0.37–0.6)0.72 (0.59–0.81)0.59 (0.5–0.74)<0.0010.006<0.001<0.0010.0030.0790.35
Traction parameters
 PM-MA distance ES, cm2.93 (0.56)2.66 (0.31)2.72 (0.58)3.46 (0.37)3.03 (0.58)0.0050.64<0.0010.120.0050.140.082
 PM-MA distance PS, cm2.46 (0.45)2.51 (0.28)2.46 (0.54)2.22 (0.39)2.61 (0.47)0.320.260.120.820.450.370.099
 PM-MA distance change, cm−0.46 (0.45)−0.15 (0.11)−0.26 (0.13)−1.25 (0.4)−0.42 (0.18)<0.0010.63<0.0010.04<0.0010.31<0.001
 PM-MA distance change, %14.73 (12.4)5.6 (3.59)9.46 (4.86)36 (10.34)13.7 (4.35)<0.0010.042<0.0010.02<0.0010.34<0.001
TotalControlsBMVPaAMVPbMR-MVPP valueControls vs. BMVPControls vs. AMVPControls vs. MR-MVPBMVP vs. AMVPBMVP vs. MR-MVPAMVP vs. MR-MVP
Basal characteristics
 Patients, n42 (100%)10 (23.8%)14 (33.3%)8 (19.1%)10 (23.8%)
 Age, years47.7 (16.9)42.3 (13.1)48.1 (17.8)45.5 (14.4)54.4 (20.6)0.450.390.590.200.760.380.31
 Gender (men), n16 (38.1%)4 (40%)5 (35.7%)3 (37.5%)4 (40%)1.000.830.911.000.930.830.91
 BMI, kg/m223.7 (3.8)25.1 (1.9)21.9 (3.6)22.2 (3.2)26.3 (4.3)0.0100.0260.0620.880.730.0190.051
 Symptoms, n0.110.750.170.380.080.240.24
  Palpitations2 (4.8%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
  Syncope3 (7.1%)1 (10%)2 (14.3%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
  Dizziness1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Dyspnoea1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
  Dyspnoea + palpitations1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (10%)
 ECG findings, n0.0040.490.0040.170.0030.330.030
  Long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Fragmented QRS2 (5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  PVCs4 (10%)0 (0%)0 (0%)3 (37.5%)1 (11.1%)
  RBBB3 (7.5%)0 (0%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)2 (22.2%)
  Negative T waves + long QTc1 (2.5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)
  Negative T waves + PVCs2 (5%)0 (0%)0 (0%)2 (25%)0 (0%)
 24 h Holter monitoring findings, n0.0740.150.730.0190.420.097
  PVCs > 5%2 (8.33%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)1 (12.50%)1 (12.50%)
  NSVT6 (25.00%)0 (0.00%)0 (0.00%)5 (62.50%)1 (12.50%)
  VT0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0 (0%)
 SCD, n1 (2.4%)0 (0%)0 (0%)1 (12.5%)0 (0%)0.230.250.180.25
 Family history of SCD or VA, n3 (7.5%)2 (20%)1 (7.1%)0 (0%)0 (0%)0.310.350.210.160.470.41
Echocardiography
 LA volume (BP) index, mL/m232.1 (12.36)26.1 (9.07)29.3 (11)28.7 (8.95)46.3 (10.4)<0.0010.560.480.0020.950.0030.003
 LV EDV (BP) index, mL/m253.7 (16.6)50.2 (11.3)48.3 (12)57.7 (23)61.4 (19)0.240.990.850.510.670.280.98
 LV ESV (BP) index, mL/m221.9 (9.7)19.8 (8.3)19.7 (6.7)27.9 (15.9)22.35 (7.1)0.240.990.290.940.230.910.63
 LV EF, %62.4 (5.5)64.5 (3.8)61.9 (6.1)60.5 (5.9)62.4 (5.8)0.490.290.110.330.580.860.48
 Global longitudinal strain, %20.6 (2.9)21.9 (2.7)19.8 (2.9)19.3 (3.9)20.9 (2.3)0.290.0770.460.920.920.220.25
Geometry parameters
 Annulus diameter, cm3.47 (0.51)3.05 (0.47)3.46 (0.38)3.86 (0.43)3.59 (0.52)0.0040.0360.0040.0150.0600.410.26
 Prolapsing leaflets, n<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0580.940.047
  Anterior5 (11.90%)0 (0%)3 (21.43%)0 (0%)2 (20.00%)
  Posterior12 (28.57%)0 (0%)6 (42.86%)1 (12.50%)5 (50.00%)
  Bileaflet15 (35.71%)0 (0%)5 (35.71%)7 (87.50%)3 (30.00%)
 Prolapse area (3Ch), cm20.47 (0.16–0.92)0 (0)0.49 (0.34–0.68)1.29 (1.04–1.41)0.49 (0.31–0.71)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.980.003
 Prolapse height (3Ch), cm0.44 (0.16–0.70)0 (0)0.47 (0.43–0.62)0.84 (0.60–0.94)0.42 (0.35–0.55)<0.001<0.001<0.001<0.0010.0140.120.006
 MADc, n8 (19.05%)0 (0%)1 (7.14%)6 (75.00%)1 (10.00%)<0.0010.39<0.0010.300.0010.800.005
 Anterior leaflet length, cm2.51 (0.51)2.13 (0.23)2.51 (0.53)2.93 (0.55)2.55 (0.41)0.0080.10<0.0010.0060.140.790.25
 Posterior leaflet length, cm1.65 (0.56)1.12 (0.23)1.51 (0.50)2.16 (0.38)1.95 (0.49)<0.0010.043<0.001<0.0010.0030.0840.31
 Anterior leaflet thickness, cm0.52 (0.43–0.65)0.40 (0.37–0.5)0.55 (0.47–0.65)0.79 (0.65–0.85)0.51 (0.47–0.61)0.0020.0080.0010.0490.120.450.010
 Posterior leaflet thickness, cm0.50 (0.36–0.62)0.33 (0.3–0.37)0.45 (0.37–0.6)0.72 (0.59–0.81)0.59 (0.5–0.74)<0.0010.006<0.001<0.0010.0030.0790.35
Traction parameters
 PM-MA distance ES, cm2.93 (0.56)2.66 (0.31)2.72 (0.58)3.46 (0.37)3.03 (0.58)0.0050.64<0.0010.120.0050.140.082
 PM-MA distance PS, cm2.46 (0.45)2.51 (0.28)2.46 (0.54)2.22 (0.39)2.61 (0.47)0.320.260.120.820.450.370.099
 PM-MA distance change, cm−0.46 (0.45)−0.15 (0.11)−0.26 (0.13)−1.25 (0.4)−0.42 (0.18)<0.0010.63<0.0010.04<0.0010.31<0.001
 PM-MA distance change, %14.73 (12.4)5.6 (3.59)9.46 (4.86)36 (10.34)13.7 (4.35)<0.0010.042<0.0010.02<0.0010.34<0.001

Described as n (%), mean (SD), or median (IQR). Statistically significant P values were identified in italics. Statistically significant P values between the Benign MVP group and the Arrhythmogenic MVP group were identified in bold italicized values, which are the most remarkable findings of the study, mentioned in the text.

3Ch, three-chamber view; AMVP, arrhythmic MVP; BMI, body mass index; BMVP, benign MVP; EDV, end-diastolic volume; EF, ejection fraction; ECG, electrocardiogram; ES, early systole; ESV, end-systolic volume; LA, left atrium; LV, left ventricle; MA, mitral annulus; MAD, mitral annular disjunction; MR-MVP, MVP with severe mitral regurgitation; MVP, mitral valve prolapse; NSVT, non-sustained ventricular tachycardia; PM, papillary muscle; PS, peak systole; RBBB, right bundle branch block; SCD, sudden cardiac death; VA, ventricular arrhythmia; VT, ventricular tachycardia.

aMVP was defined as systolic displacement of one or both mitral leaflets ≥ 2 mm above the plane of the MA in the parasternal long-axis view.

bAMVP was defined as MVP combined with frequent or complex VA(≥5% total PVC burden, NSVT, VT, or VF) in the absence of any other well-defined arrhythmic substrate.

cMAD was defined as an abnormal longitudinal atrial displacement ≥ 2 mm of the hinge point of the mitral valve away from the ventricular myocardium during systole.

Regarding traction parameters, the AMVP group had the greatest PM-MA distance in early systole and the highest change in this distance between early and peak systole, compared to all the other groups.

These results support previously proposed AMVP characteristics, such as bileaflet involvement, large prolapse area and height, the presence of MAD, and pathological ECG and 24 h ECG Holter monitoring findings.2,5 Additionally, the findings in the MR-MVP group reinforce that significant MR is associated with symptoms, some degree of arrhythmic burden, and valve distortion.11

However, the most remarkable findings are those that differed between AMVP and BMVP. Specifically, the most interesting observation is that AMVP patients exhibited an increased PM-MA distance in early systole and a greater change of this distance between early and peak systole compared to BMVP (3.46 cm ± 0.37 vs. 2.72 cm ± 0.58, P < 0.01, and 36% ± 10.34 vs. 9.46% ± 4.86, P < 0.01, respectively). These findings were consistently maintained when comparing AMVP to controls and MR-MVP as well. In other words, patients with AMVP showed increased traction forces in the subvalvular apparatus compared to those with BMVP.

These results support the hypothesis that AMVP patients exhibit recognizable higher traction forces during systole, as reflected by the change in the PM-MA distance (Figure 1), and propose a possible novel intrinsic characteristic of this group. Although this mechanism was previously explored by Han et al.12 in a smaller cohort by magnetic resonance imaging, our results highlight the existence of excessive traction forces that can be quantified using an accessible and safe imaging method, such as TTE, and show parameters that could simply help in the distinction between BMVP and AMVP.

This study has certainly several limitations, mainly related to the number of patients and its retrospective nature. However, it prompts consideration of whether patients with increased traction forces should be the focus when assessing the risk of VA, although it remains uncertain if this represents a risk of potentially fatal malignant arrhythmias. While larger clinical trials are necessary to reach definitive conclusions, this preliminary proof-of-concept study demonstrates a significant correlation between augmented traction forces and VAs, aiding in the understanding of an infrequent and challenging condition.

Funding

None declared.

Data availability

The data underlying this article will be shared on reasonable request to the corresponding author.

References

1

Sabbag
 
A
,
Essayagh
 
B
,
Barrera
 
JDR
,
Basso
 
C
,
Berni
 
A
,
Cosyns
 
B
, et al.  
EHRA expert consensus statement on arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse and mitral annular disjunction complex in collaboration with the ESC Council on valvular heart disease and the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society, by the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, and by the Latin American Heart Rhythm Society
.
Europace
 
2022
;
24
:
1981
2003
.

2

Sriram
 
CS
,
Syed
 
FF
,
Ferguson
 
ME
,
Johnson
 
JN
,
Enriquez-Sarano
 
M
,
Cetta
 
F
 et al.  
Malignant bileaflet mitral valve prolapse syndrome in patients with otherwise idiopathic out-of-hospital cardiac arrest
.
J Am Coll Cardiol
 
2013
;
62
:
222
30
.

3

Five
 
CK
,
Hasselberg
 
NE
,
Aaserud
 
LT
,
Castrini
 
AI
,
Vlaisavljevic
 
K
,
Lie
 
Ø
 et al.  
Lifetime exercise dose and ventricular arrhythmias in patients with mitral valve prolapse
.
Europace
 
2023
;
25
:
euad309
.

4

Aabel
 
EW
,
Chivulescu
 
M
,
Lie
 
ØH
,
Hopp
 
E
,
Gjertsen
 
E
,
Ribe
 
M
 et al.  
Ventricular arrhythmias in arrhythmic mitral valve syndrome-a prospective continuous long-term cardiac monitoring study
.
Europace
 
2023
;
25
:
506
16
.

5

Essayagh
 
B
,
Sabbag
 
A
,
El-Am
 
E
,
Cavalcante
 
JL
,
Michelena
 
HI
,
Enriquez-Sarano
 
M
.
Arrhythmic mitral valve prolapse and mitral annular disjunction: pathophysiology, risk stratification, and management
.
Eur Heart J
 
2023
;
44
:
3121
35
.

6

Verheul
 
LM
,
Guglielmo
 
M
,
Groeneveld
 
SA
,
Kirkels
 
FP
,
Scrocco
 
C
,
Cramer
 
MJ
 et al.  
Mitral annular disjunction in idiopathic ventricular fibrillation patients: just a bystander or a potential cause?
 
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging
 
2024
;
25
:
764
70
.

7

Sanfilippo
 
AJ
,
Harrigan
 
P
,
Popovic
 
AD
,
Weyman
 
AE
,
Levine
 
RA
.
Papillary muscle traction in mitral valve prolapse: quantitation by two-dimensional echocardiography
.
J Am Coll Cardiol
 
1992
;
19
:
564
71
.

8

Hei
 
S
,
Iwataki
 
M
,
Jang
 
J-Y
,
Kuwaki
 
H
,
Fukuda
 
S
,
Kim
 
YJ
 et al.  
Relations of augmented systolic annular expansion and leaflet/papillary muscle dynamics in late-systolic mitral valve prolapse evaluated by echocardiography with a speckle tracking analysis
.
Int Heart J
 
2020
;
61
:
970
8
.

9

Nagata
 
Y
,
Bertrand
 
PB
,
Baliyan
 
V
,
Kochav
 
J
,
Kagan
 
RD
,
Ujka
 
K
 et al.  
Abnormal mechanics relate to myocardial fibrosis and ventricular arrhythmias in patients with mitral valve prolapse
.
Circ Cardiovasc Imaging
 
2023
;
16
:
e014963
.

10

Lim
 
SJ
,
Koo
 
HJ
,
Cho
 
MS
,
Nam
 
GB
,
Kang
 
JW
,
Yang
 
DH
.
Late gadolinium enhancement of left ventricular papillary muscles in patients with mitral regurgitation
.
Korean J Radiol
 
2021
;
22
:
1609
18
.

11

Enriquez-Sarano
 
M
,
Akins
 
CW
,
Vahanian
 
A
.
Mitral regurgitation
.
Lancet
 
2009
;
373
:
1382
94
.

12

Han
 
Y
,
Peters
 
DC
,
Kissinger
 
KV
,
Goddu
 
B
,
Yeon
 
SB
,
Manning
 
WJ
 et al.  
Evaluation of papillary muscle function using cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in mitral valve prolapse
.
Am J Cardiol
 
2010
;
106
:
243
8
.

Author notes

Conflict of interest: none declared.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.