| Literature DB >> 25880165 |
Yohsuke Yanase1, Nobuyuki Takagi2, Hiroyuki Yamada3, Toshitaka Watanabe4, Mayuko Uehara5, Kazutoshi Tachibana6, Yasuko Miyaki7, Toshiro Ito8, Tetsuya Higami9.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We invented novel mitral valve repair technique; rough-zone trimming procedure (RZT) for anterior mitral valve prolapse. Prolapse site was resected in obtuse triangle shape and sutured edges to creates deep coaptation and improves regurgitation. Though it is simple and reproducible technique, functional mitral stenosis is a risk. Valve function and hemodynamics were investigated using dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in patients after mitral valve repair using RZT.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25880165 PMCID: PMC4351842 DOI: 10.1186/s13019-015-0232-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg ISSN: 1749-8090 Impact factor: 1.637
Figure 1Preoperative and postoperative echocardiographic grade of mitral regurgitation (MR). Preoperative MR grades were severe and moderate 20 and 5 patients, respectively. Mitral valves were repaired using rough-zone trimming (RZT). All grades improved to below mild MR grades within early postoperative period of 30 days. By mid-term (>12 months), 13 of 14 patients had better than mild MR. Only one patient worsened to moderate MR because of progressive sclerotic valve changes.
Figure 2Schema of enhanced stay sutures (ESS). Mitral valve leaflet and medial site of anterior leaflet is elongated and prolapsed. (a) Horizontal mattress sutures (3–0 polyester suture with pledgets) for anterior and posterior commissures. Stitches pulled bigger bites out of posterior annular side. (b) After ESS. Anterior and posterior commissures are compressed and coaptation is deeper. ESS allowed not only deeper coaptation, but also pulled posterior leaflet upwards to the same plane as anterior leaflet by taking bigger bites out of the posterior annular side. This also rendered prolapse sites highly visible.
Figure 3Schema of rough-zone trimming (RZT). (a) Medial scallop (A2) of anterior mitral valve leaflet (AML) is elongated and prolapsed after previous ESS. (b) Prolapsed A2 site resected in shape of obtuse triangle limited to rough-zone. (c) Resected edges repaired with 6–0 monofilament sutures. Repaired site of valve leaflet was taken down into left ventricular side and deeper coaptation improved mitral valve regurgitation.
Patients’ characteristics
| AML (n = 10) | PML (n = 4) | Bileaflet (n = 4) | Control (n = 10) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex (M:F) (n) | 8:2 | 4:0 | 3:1 | 10:0 |
| Age (y) | 56.5 ± 19.3 | 59.0 ± 6.1 | 53.3 ± 6.1 | 25.0 ± 3.7 |
| Infective endocarditis (n) | 1 | 0 | 1 | - |
| Annuloplasty ring size (mm) | ||||
| 26 (n) | 2 | 1 | 1 | - |
| 27 (n) | 0 | 1 | 0 | - |
| 28 (n) | 3 | 1 | 2 | - |
| 30 (n) | 1 | 1 | 1 | - |
| No annuloplasty | 4 | 0 | 0 | - |
| Residual mitral regurgitation | ||||
| None-Trivial (grade 0) (n) | 9 | 4 | 3 | - |
| Mild (grade 1) (n) | 1 | 0 | 1 | - |
AML, anterior mitral leaflet; F, female; M, male; PML, posterior mitral leaflet.
Figure 4Echocardiographic data of mitral valve area (MVA). Echocardiographic data of mitral valve area (MVA) at rest and peak stress in AML, PML, bileaflet and control groups.
Figure 5Echocardiographic data of mitral valve mean pressure gradient (MVmeanPG). Echocardiographic data of mitral valve mean pressure gradient (MVmeanPG) at rest and peak stress in AML, PML, bileaflet and control groups.
Figure 6Echocardiographic data of systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP). Echocardiographic data of systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) at rest and peak stress in AML, PML, bileaflet and control groups.
Hemodynamic data at rest and peak stress during dobutamine stress echocardiography
| Variable | AML (n = 10) | PML (n = 4) | Bileaflet (n = 4) | Control (n = 10) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rest | Stress | p | Rest | Stress | p | Rest | Stress | p | Rest | Stress | p | |
| Mitral valve area (cm2) | 2.8 ± 0.4 | 3.4 ± 0.3 | 0.0005 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 3.2 ± 0.3 | 0.0010 | 2.5 ± 0.1 | 2.9 ± 0.1 | 0.0220 | 4.1 ± 0.4 | 5.1 ± 0.5 | 0.0001 |
| MVmaxPG (mmHg) | 9.2 ± 3.0 | 16.3 ± 6.0 | 0.0079 | 12.0 ± 2.5 | 22.3 ± 5.0 | 0.0077 | 9.3 ± 4.2 | 17.5 ± 4.7 | 0.0071 | 3.8 ± 0.9 | 9.4 ± 3.7 | 0.0003 |
| MVmeanPG (mmHg) | 3.3 ± 1.1 | 7.4 ± 4.1 | 0.0026 | 5.5 ± 1.0 | 10.5 ± 2.4 | 0.0058 | 3.5 ± 1.7 | 8.8 ± 3.1 | 0.0146 | 1.1 ± 0.3 | 3.6 ± 0.7 | 0.0222 |
| sPAP (mmHg) | 25.7 ± 4.7 | 49.1 ± 4.1 | 0.0000 | 30 ± 1.4 | 47.0 ± 1.4 | a | 28.3 ± 1.9 | 44.8 ± 2.1 | 0.0034 | 26.9 ± 2.3 | 43.9 ± 7.6 | 0.0001 |
| MR grade (mean) | 0.1 ± 0.3 | 0.1 ± 0.3 | - | 0 | 0 | -. | 0.3 ± 0.5 | 0 | 0.3910 | 0 | 0 | - |
| HR (beats/min) | 73 ± 16 | 107 ± 24 | 0.0002 | 76 ± 2 | 127 ± 25 | 0.0225 | 68 ± 3 | 111 ± 19 | 0.0138 | 64 ± 11 | 115 ± 16 | 0.0000 |
| sBP (mmHg) | 115 ± 13 | 150 ± 20 | 0.0008 | 127 ± 14.0 | 143.3 ± 26.5 | 0.1495 | 115 ± 14 | 145 ± 33 | 0.1991 | 104 ± 8 | 153 ± 18 | 0.0000 |
| dBP (mmHg) | 69 ± 13 | 71 ± 13 | 0.5426 | 76.3 ± 9.2 | 71 ± 6.9 | 0.1261 | 69 ± 16 | 75 ± 17 | 0.6440 | 53 ± 9 | 65 ± 9 | 0.0069 |
| CO (L/min) | 4.4 ± 1.0 | 7.9 ± 1.4 | 0.0000 | 5.0 ± 0.4 | 9.6 ± 2.5 | 0.0234 | 4.2 ± 0.3 | 7.5 ± 1.0 | 0.0023 | 3.9 ± 0.7 | 9.2 ± 1.4 | 0.0000 |
| EF (%) | 64.7 ± 2.9 | 81.9 ± 2.5 | 0.0000 | 61.9 ± 6.7 | 81.9 ± 4.5 | 0.0006 | 62.8 ± 1.5 | 83.9 ± 4.7 | 0.0045 | 62.6 ± 3.6 | 82.0 ± 2.7 | 0.0000 |
| LVEDV (ml) | 92.5. ± 10.3 | 91.3 ± 8.0 | 0.5931 | 107.9 ± 19.6 | 89.4 ± 13.5 | 0.0262 | 98.3 ± 10.7 | 82.7 ± 16.2 | 0.0323 | 99.6 ± 13.4 | 99.0 ± 14.0 | 0.8726 |
| LVESV (ml) | 31.7 ± 4.7 | 16.6 ± 3.4 | 0.0000 | 42.3 ± 15.0 | 15.0 ± 4.6 | 0.0195 | 36.5 ± 3.7 | 13.9 ± 5.7 | 0.0015 | 38.0 ± 6.7 | 18.1 ± 5.4 | 0.0000 |
AML, anterior mitral leaflet; CO, cardiac output; dBP, diastolic blood pressure; EF, ejection fraction; LVEDV, left ventricular end diastolic volume; LVESV, left ventricular end systolic volume; MR, mitral valve regurgitation; MVmaxPG, mitral valve maximum pressure gradient; MVmeanPG, mitral valve mean pressure gradient; p, p value; PML, posterior mitral leaflet; sBP, systolic blood pressure; sPAP, systolic pulmonary artery pressure. aPML sPAP data were not statistically analyzed due to small sample size.
Echocardiographic comparison between AML and other groups that underwent mitral valve repair
| Variable | AML | PML | Bileaflet | Control | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| 2.8 ± 0.4 | 2.8 ± 0.3 | 2.5 ± 0.1a | 4.1 ± 0.4b |
|
| 3.3 ± 1.1 | 5.5 ± 1.0a | 3.5 ± 1.7 | 1.1 ± 0.3b | |
|
| 25.7 ± 4.7 | 30 ± 1.4a | 28.3 ± 1.9 | 26.7 ± 2.3 | |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| 3.4 ± 0.3 | 3.2 ± 0.3 | 2.9 ± 0.1b | 5.1 ± 0.5b |
|
| 7.4 ± 4.1 | 10.5 ± 2.4 | 8.8 ± 3.1 | 3.6 ± 0.7a | |
|
| 49.1 ± 4.1 | 47.0 ± 1.4 | 44.8 ± 2.1a | 43.9 ± 7.6 |
AML, anterior mitral leaflet; MVA, mitral valve area; MVmeanPG, mitral valve mean pressure gradient; PML, posterior mitral leaflet; sPAP, systolic pulmonary artery pressure. ap < 0.05 and bp < 0.01 vs. AML.
Figure 7Postoperative echocardiographic images of anterior mitral leaflet (AML) plasty. (a) Long axis view. Sclerotic tissue remains in AML (white arrow). (b) Four chamber view. Mosaic pattern of transmitral blood flow near sclerotic tissue of AML on color Doppler image suggests that direction of transmitral blood flow became distorted by surging against sclerotic AML tissue (dotted arrow).