Regarding, page 559, Section 4 (Discussion), paragraph 4 of the above article, the authors regret that this paragraph has not been referenced to the work of Collison and coauthors. The original paragraph said: ‘‘The cardiac anomalies associated with SMR have not been well described. From our study, we proposed that the associated cardiac anomalies can be grouped broadly into two categories: SMR associated with ventricular septal defect (VSD; including tetralogy of Fallot) and SMR associated with LVOT pathologies, especially subaortic membrane, bicuspid aortic valve and coarctation of aorta (Shone’s anomaly). In the first scenario, this is important in the context of patients with VSD and turbulence across the MV in which an SMR needs to be ruled out. In the second scenario, in patients with multi-level left heart obstructions, an SMR should be excluded to prevent residual defects, as has been excluded to prevent residual defects, as has been reported previously [13].’’ However, it should be corrected to say: ‘‘The cardiac anomalies associated with SMR have not been well described. Collison et al. proposed that the associated cardiac anomalies can be grouped broadly into two categories: SMR associated with ventricular septal defect (VSD; including tetralogy of Fallot) and SMR associated with LVOTpathologies,especiallysub-aorticmembrane,bicuspid aortic valve and coarctation of aorta (Shone’s anomaly). In thefirstscenario,thisisimportantinthe context ofpatients withVSDandturbulenceacrosstheMVinwhichanSMRneeds to be ruled out. In the second scenario, in patients with multi-level left heart obstructions, an SMR should be excluded to prevent residual defects as has been reported previously [7].’’ [7] Collison SP, Kaushal SK, Dagar KS, Iyer PU, Girotra S, Radhakrishnan S, Shrivastava S, Iyer KS. Supramitral ring: good prognosis in a subset of patients with congenital mitral stenosis. Ann Thorac Surg 2006;81:997—1001.