| Literature DB >> 22460092 |
Puneet Ghayal1, Ali Haider, Wilbert S Aronow, Ythan Goldberg, Richard Bello, Mario J Garcia, Daniel M Spevack.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Chronic mitral regurgitation (MR) results in a state of chronic left ventricular (LV) volume overload, resulting in compensatory dilatation. Mitral valve (MV) surgery for regurgitation reduces LV preload but increases LV afterload. Few data are available documenting subsequent changes in LV size and function over time following MV surgery for severe regurgitation in unselected populations. MATERIAL/Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22460092 PMCID: PMC3560836 DOI: 10.12659/msm.882620
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, echo findings at the time of surgery. Normal data are presented ± SD. Non-normal data are presented [inter-quartile range]. Data are also present stratified by whether or not CABG was performed at the time of mitral valve surgery.
| Overall (n=108) | CABG (n=43) | No CABG (n=65) | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 64±13 | 67±11 | 62±13 | 0.05 |
| Male (%) | 38 | 42 | 35 | 0.48 |
| Mitral replacement (%) | 61 | 51 | 68 | 0.08 |
| Mitral leaflet disease (%) | 40 | 16 | 35 | 0.03 |
| Median LVEF (%) | 46 [36,60] | 42 [35,60] | 50 [36,60] | 0.37 |
| Mean LVEF (%) | 47±14 | 45±13 | 48±15 | 0.38 |
| LA diameter (mm) | 50±8 | 48±8 | 51±8 | 0.09 |
| LV diastolic diameter | 58±9 | 56±6 | 59±10 | 0.11 |
| LV systolic diameter | 45±12 | 45±10 | 45±13 | 0.96 |
| Renal Insufficiency (%) | 27 | 23 | 29 | 0.49 |
| Hematocrit (%) | 36 [32,41] | 36 [32,39] | 36 [32,40] | 0.90 |
| Body Mass Index | 26±5 | 26±4 | 27±5 | 0.74 |
| Race | ||||
| White (%) | 26 | 35 | 20 | 0.08 |
| Black (%) | 30 | 19 | 37 | 0.04 |
| Hispanic (%) | 10 | 7 | 12 | 0.37 |
| Other/unkown (%) | 34 | 40 | 31 | 0.35 |
Figure 1Left ventricular (LV) diastolic diameter before and after mitral valve surgery.
Figure 2Left ventricular (LV) diastolic diameter following mitral valve surgery. Graphs stratify patients into group with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. those without CABG.
Multivariate linear regression models. Model #1 examines the association between LV diastolic diameter and years after surgery, adjusting for multiple potential confounders. Model #2 examines the association between LV fractional shortening and years after surgery, adjusting for multiple potential confounders.
| Dependent variable | Independent variables | Coefficient (β) | 95% Conf Interval | p-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model #1 | LV diast diam (mm) | ||||
| Years after surgery | −0.12 mm/year | [−0.97, 0.73] | 0.79 | ||
| Age (years) | −0.07 | [−0.16, 0.02] | 0.13 | ||
| Male | 3.57 | [1.42, 5.71] | 0.001 | ||
| Black (c/w white) | 0.78 | [−2.34, 3.91] | 0.62 | ||
| Hispanic (c/w white) | 5.59 | [1.97, 9.23] | 0.003 | ||
| Unkn Race (c/w white) | 1.62 | [−1.40, 4.64] | 0.29 | ||
| CABG | −2.70 | [−5.03, −0.38] | 0.02 | ||
| EF < 50% | 10.03 | [7.76, 12.32] | <0.001 | ||
| Mitral leaflet disease | −2.19 | [−4.74, 0.36] | 0.09 | ||
| Mitral repair | −0.34 | [−2.56, 1.87] | 0.76 | ||
| Model #2 | Fractional shortening (%) years after surgery | ||||
| 3.8 %/year | [0.67, 6.88] | 0.02 | |||
| Age (years) | 0.001 | [−0.002, 0.004] | 0.54 | ||
| Male | −0.06 | [−0.13, 0.02] | 0.17 | ||
| Black (c/w white) | 0.02 | [−0.09, 0.14] | 0.67 | ||
| Hispanic (c/w white) | 0.03 | [−0.10, 0.16] | 0.66 | ||
| Unkn Race (c/w white) | −0.03 | [−0.14, 0.08] | 0.60 | ||
| CABG | −0.02 | [−0.11, 0.06] | 0.58 | ||
| EF < 50% | −0.007 | [−0.09, 0.08] | 0.86 | ||
| Mitral leaflet disease | 0.09 | [−0.004, 0.18] | 0.06 | ||
| Mitral repair | 0.01 | [−0.07, 0.09] | 0.10 |
Figure 3Left ventricular (LV) fractional shortening before and after mitral valve surgery.
Figure 4Left ventricular (LV) fractional shortening following mitral valve surgery. Graphs stratify patients into group with concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. those without CABG.