| Literature DB >> 27543470 |
Gautam Sharma1, R Anantha Krishnan2, Vijay Bohra2, Sivasubramanian Ramakrishnan3, Nitish Naik4, Sandeep Seth4, Rajnish Juneja4, M Kalaivani5, Vinay Kumar Bahl6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS) and atrial fibrillation (AF) are at risk for thromboembolism and restoration of sinus rhythm (SR) may be the preferred strategy. Percutaneous balloon mitral valvotomy (PBMV) improves hemodynamics, but may not be enough to restore SR.Entities:
Keywords: Mitral stenosis; Rheumatic atrial fibrillation; Rheumatic heart disease
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27543470 PMCID: PMC4990730 DOI: 10.1016/j.ihj.2015.11.013
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Indian Heart J ISSN: 0019-4832
Fig. 1Flowchart of the study.
Baseline characters of study patients (n = 35).
| Variable | PTMC only ( | PTMC + DCCV ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age in years | 33.85 ± 12.0 | 37.73 ± 9.0 | 0.30 |
| Sex | |||
| Males | 7 (35.0) | 7 (47.0) | 0.48 |
| Females | 13 (65.0) | 8 (53.0) | |
| Mean duration of symptoms in years | 6.15 ± 2.9 | 6.73 ± 2.9 | 0.56 |
| Duration of AF in months | 23.9 ± 8.0 | 24.9 ± 7.6 | 0.76 |
| Intervention in past | 0.10 | ||
| PTMC | 3 (15.0) | 2 (13.3) | |
| Surgery | 2 (10.0) | 2 (13.3) | |
| NYHA class | 0.83 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | |
| 2 | 0 | 0 | |
| 3 | 19 | 14 | |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | |
| Preintervention drugs | |||
| Digoxin | 20 (100.0) | 15 (100.0) | 1.00 |
| Beta-blockers | 11 (55.0) | 8 (53.3) | 0.07 |
| CCBs | 8 (40.0) | 7 (46.7) | 0.16 |
| OAC | 19 (95.0) | 15 (100.0) | 1.00 |
| Diuretics | 17 (85.0) | 14 (93.3) | 0.59 |
| Height in cm | 158.3 ± 8.8 | 159.07 ± 10.5 | 0.83 |
| BMI in kg/m2 | 20.3 ± 5.5 | 21.0 ± 5.7 | 0.71 |
| Baseline resting heart rate in bpm | 96.4 ± 7.1 | 98.2 ± 6.5 | 0.69 |
| Baseline mitral valve area in cm2 | 0.79 ± 0.2 | 0.77 ± 0.2 | 0.77 |
| Mean Wilkins score | 7.6 ± 0.8 | 7.8 ± 0.4 | 0.29 |
| Indexed LA volume in mL | 55.9 ± 15.3 | 66.7 ± 20.9 | 0.09 |
| SEC | 7 (35.0) | 4 (26.7) | 1.23 |
| LV function % | 62.25 ± 4.4 | 61.3 ± 5.5 | 0.59 |
| Systolic PA pressure in mmHg | 57.7 ± 13.7 | 54.9 ± 11.4 | 0.62 |
| Mean transmitral gradient in mmHg on catheterization | 16.6 ± 3.4 | 16.5 ± 3.4 | 0.93 |
| Post-PTMC parameters | |||
| Mitral valve area in cm2 | 1.7 ± 0.3 | 1.8 ± 0.3 | 0.45 |
| Systolic PA pressure in mmHg | 39 ± 10.3 | 36.3 ± 7.8 | 0.41 |
| Baseline heart rate at 4 weeks of follow-up | 82.25 ± 4.4 | 81.3 ± 5.5 | 0.41 |
| Indexed LA volume in mL/m2* | 24.1 ± 5.6 | 29.2 ± 10.7 | 0.08 |
| LV function % | 63.8 ± 2.8 | 62.9 ± 3.5 | 0.41 |
Parameters measured at 4 weeks of follow-up.
Fig. 2Number of patients in SR during follow-up period.
Primary outcome of rate of SR/AF in both groups.
| Follow-up at 6 months | Group 1 | Group 2 |
|---|---|---|
| Patients in AF | 19 (95.0) | 2 (13.0) |
| Patients in SR | 1 (05.0) | 13 (87.0) |
| Difference (95% CI) | 0.820 (0.2, 1.01) | |
| RR (95% CI) | 7.1 (1.9, 25.9) | |
Fig. 3QOL assessed by SF-36 at Baseline and after 6 months. PF – physical functioning; RP – role limitations due to physical health problems; BP – bodily pain; GH – general health; VT – vitality, energy and fatigue; SF – social functioning; RE – emotional problems; MH – mental health.