Jakob Ledwoch1, Jennifer Franke2, Edith Lubos2, Peter Boekstegers3, Miriam Puls4, Taoufik Ouarrak5, Stephan von Bardeleben6, Christian Butter7, Joachim Schofer8, Ralf Zahn9, Hüsseyin Ince10, Jochen Senges5, Horst Sievert11,12. 1. CardioVascular Center Frankfurt, Seckbacher Landstraße 65, 60389, Frankfurt, Germany. 2. Universitäres Herzzentrum Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany. 3. Klinik für Kardiologie und Angiologie, Klinikum Siegburg, Siegburg, Germany. 4. Herzzentrum, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany. 5. Stiftung Institut für Herzinfarktforschung, Ludwigshafen, Germany. 6. Medizinische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Mainz, Germany. 7. Herzzentrum Brandenburg, Bernau, Germany. 8. Medizinisches Versorgungszentrum Prof. Mathey, Prof. Schofer GmbH, Hamburg, Germany. 9. Herzzentrum Ludwigshafen, Ludwigshafen, Germany. 10. Universitätsklinik Rostock, Rostock, Germany. 11. CardioVascular Center Frankfurt, Seckbacher Landstraße 65, 60389, Frankfurt, Germany. info@cvcfrankfurt.de. 12. Anglia Ruskin University, Chelmsford, UK. info@cvcfrankfurt.de.
Abstract
AIMS: The 6-min walk test (6 MWT) has been established as an important tool for functional assessment in heart failure patients. However, its prognostic impact on the outcome in subjects with mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair is unknown. METHODS: This present work represents a sub-analysis of the German, prospective, multicenter, Transcatheter Mitral Valve Interventions (TRAMI) registry. Of the main study cohort (n = 828) 326 patients underwent 6 MWT prior to the procedure. Patients were assigned to two groups depending on the preprocedural 6 MWT distance using the median (< 200 m [group 1] vs. ≥ 200 m [group 2]). RESULTS: No differences regarding procedural success (97 vs. 96%; p = 0.71) and 30-day mortality (3 vs. 4%; p = 0.96) were observed between the groups. With regards to 1-year outcome, patients with a walking distance < 200 m had higher all-cause mortality (26 vs. 14%; p = 0.013) as compared to those with a 6 MWT distance 200 m. After adjustment of baseline risk factors, 6 MWT distance < 200 m still showed a strong trend towards increased 1-year all-cause mortality (HR 1.63, 95% confidence interval 0.96-2.76; p = 0.071). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study preprocedural 6 MWT distance < 200 m showed a strong trend towards increased 1-year mortality in patients undergoing MitraClip implantation.
AIMS: The 6-min walk test (6 MWT) has been established as an important tool for functional assessment in heart failurepatients. However, its prognostic impact on the outcome in subjects with mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair is unknown. METHODS: This present work represents a sub-analysis of the German, prospective, multicenter, Transcatheter Mitral Valve Interventions (TRAMI) registry. Of the main study cohort (n = 828) 326 patients underwent 6 MWT prior to the procedure. Patients were assigned to two groups depending on the preprocedural 6 MWT distance using the median (< 200 m [group 1] vs. ≥ 200 m [group 2]). RESULTS: No differences regarding procedural success (97 vs. 96%; p = 0.71) and 30-day mortality (3 vs. 4%; p = 0.96) were observed between the groups. With regards to 1-year outcome, patients with a walking distance < 200 m had higher all-cause mortality (26 vs. 14%; p = 0.013) as compared to those with a 6 MWT distance 200 m. After adjustment of baseline risk factors, 6 MWT distance < 200 m still showed a strong trend towards increased 1-year all-cause mortality (HR 1.63, 95% confidence interval 0.96-2.76; p = 0.071). CONCLUSIONS: In the present study preprocedural 6 MWT distance < 200 m showed a strong trend towards increased 1-year mortality in patients undergoing MitraClip implantation.
Authors: Martin J Swaans; Annelies L M Bakker; Arash Alipour; Martijn C Post; Johannes C Kelder; Thom L de Kroon; Frank D Eefting; Benno J W M Rensing; Jan A S Van der Heyden Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Lee Ingle; Alan S Rigby; Sean Carroll; Ron Butterly; Rod F King; Carlton B Cooke; John G J F Cleland; Andrew L Clark Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2007-02-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Murray J Leikis; Michael J McKenna; Aaron C Petersen; Annette B Kent; Kate T Murphy; James A Leppik; Xiaofei Gong; Lawrence P McMahon Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2006-04-19 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Daniel E Forman; Jerome L Fleg; Dalane W Kitzman; Clinton A Brawner; Ann M Swank; Robert S McKelvie; Robert M Clare; Stephen J Ellis; Mark E Dunlap; Vera Bittner Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Roshan Prakash; Matthew Horsfall; Andrew Markwick; Marsus Pumar; Leong Lee; Ajay Sinhal; Majo X Joseph; Derek P Chew Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Steffen D Kriechbaum; Niklas F Boeder; Luise Gaede; Martin Arnold; Ursula Vigelius-Rauch; Peter Roth; Michael Sander; Andreas Böning; Matthias Bayer; Albrecht Elsässer; Helge Möllmann; Christian W Hamm; Holger M Nef Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2019-08-26 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Thomas Schmidt; Marek Kowalski; Birna Bjarnason-Wehrens; Frank Ritter; Gerold Mönnig; Nils Reiss Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil Date: 2022-07-05
Authors: Charlotte Schubert; Gareth Archer; Jo M Zelis; Sarah Nordmeyer; Kilian Runte; Anja Hennemuth; Felix Berger; Volkmar Falk; Pim A L Tonino; Rod Hose; Herman Ter Horst; Titus Kuehne; Marcus Kelm Journal: NPJ Digit Med Date: 2020-07-09
Authors: Michael M Kreusser; Sonja Hamed; Andreas Weber; Bastian Schmack; Martin J Volz; Nicolas A Geis; Leonie Grossekettler; Sven T Pleger; Arjang Ruhparwar; Hugo A Katus; Philip W Raake Journal: ESC Heart Fail Date: 2020-10-26