CLINICAL STATEMENTS AND GUIDELINES 14. Agrawal V, Kumar N, Lohiya B, et al. Metoprolol vs ivabradine in patients with mitral stenosis in sinus rhythm. Int J Cardiol. 2016;221:562 6. 15. Rajesh GN, Sajeer K, Sajeev CG, et al. A comparative study of ivabradine and atenolol in patients with moderate mitral stenosis in sinus rhythm. Indian Heart J. 2016;68:311 5. 16. Iung B, Leenhardt A, Extramiana F. Management of atrial fibrillation in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis. Heart. 2018;104:1062 8. 17. Krishnamoorthy KM. Incidence and predictors of left atrial thrombus in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis and sinus rhythm: a transesopha- geal echocardiographic study. Echocardiography. 2012;29:876 7. 18. Manjunath CN, Srinivasa KH, Panneerselvam A, et al. Incidence and pre- dictors of left atrial thrombus in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis and sinus rhythm: a transesophageal echocardiographic study. Echocar- diography. 2011;28:457 60. 19. Keenan NG, Cueff C, Cimadevilla C, et al. Usefulness of left atrial volume versus diameter to assess thromboembolic risk in mitral stenosis. Am J Cardiol. 2010;106:1152 6. 1. Nunes MCP, Tan TC, Elmariah S, et al. The echo score revisited: impact of incorporating commissural morphology and leaflet displacement to the prediction of outcome for patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valvu- loplasty. Circulation. 2014;129:886 95. 2. Bouleti C, Iung B, Laou nan C, et al. Late results of percutaneous mitral commissurotomy up to 20 years: development and validation of a risk score predicting late functional results from a series of 912 patients. Cir- culation. 2012;125:2119 27. 3. Meneguz-Moreno RA, Costa JR Jr, Gomes NL, et al. Very long term follow- up after percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty. JACC Cardiovasc In- terv. 2018;11:1945 52. 4. Rifaie O, Abdel-Dayem MK, Ramzy A, et al. Percutaneous mitral valvoto- my versus closed surgical commissurotomy. Up to 15 years of follow-up of a prospective randomized study. 