| Literature DB >> 29623557 |
Sigurdur Ragnarsson1, Johan Sjögren2, Martin Stagmo3, Per Wierup2, Shahab Nozohoor2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the right ventricular (RV) performance during exercise in patients who underwent mitral valve repair for chronic mitral valve insufficiency relative to healthy individuals and to assess exercise capacity using a semisupine ergometer.Entities:
Keywords: Exercise echocardiography; Mitral valve repair; Right ventricular function
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29623557 PMCID: PMC6015604 DOI: 10.1007/s11748-018-0918-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg ISSN: 1863-6705
Preoperative patient characteristics and operative data
| Preoperative characteristics of the study group | |
| Age at surgery (years) | 60.0 ± 9.7 |
| Female gender | 17 (30%) |
| NYHA class III–IV | 24 (43%) |
| LVEF < 50% | 3 (5.4%) |
| PASP > 60 mmHg | 17 (30%) |
| Logistic EuroSCORE | 3.0 ± 1.6 |
| Operative data | |
| Ring type | |
| Cosgrove-Edwards® mitral annuloplasty system | 3 (5.4%) |
| Duran Ancore® band | 46 (82%) |
| Physio II® semirigid ring | 7 (12.5%) |
| Affected scallop | |
| P1 | 3 (5.4%) |
| P2 | 55 (98%) |
| P3 | 8 (14.3%) |
| Prolapse of 2 or 3 scallops | 9 (16%) |
| Type of repair | |
| Leaflet resection | 32 (57%) |
| Artificial chordae | 24 (43%) |
| Ring size (mm) | 31.4 ± 2.7 |
| ECC time (min) | 110 ± 29 |
| Cross-clamp time (min) | 84 ± 23 |
Dichotomous variables are given as n (%); continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD
ECC extracorporeal circulation, EuroSCORE European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, PASP pulmonary artery systolic pressure
Comparison of clinical assessment, heart rate, blood pressure, and measurements from exercise echocardiography between study and control groups
| Study group ( | Control group ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical assessment | |||
| Age at assessment (years) | 65.5 ± 10.0 | 64.0 ± 9.7 | 0.63 |
| Female gender | 17 (30%) | 4 (30%) | 1.0 |
| NYHA I/II/III/IV | 46/9/1/0 | 12/1/0/0 | |
| Short form assessment (Duke Activity Status Index) | 52 ± 10 | 55 ± 4 | 0.26 |
| BSA according to DuBois formula | 1.95 ± 0.21 | 2.0 ± 0.18 | 0.47 |
| Current medications | |||
| Beta blocker | 35 (63%) | 3 (23%) | 0.01 |
| Calcium channel blocker | 7 (13%) | 0 | 0.33 |
| ACE inhibitor or ARB | 21 (38%) | 1 (8%) | 0.03 |
| Resting heart rate and blood pressure | |||
| Atrial fibrillation | 0 | 0 | |
| Resting heart rate (BPM) | 75 ± 11 | 74 ± 11 | 0.74 |
| Resting systolic BP (mmHg) | 137 ± 15 | 138 ± 13 | 0.9 |
| Measurements during exercise | |||
| Maximum heart rate (BPM) | 128 ± 20 | 129 ± 18 | 0.87 |
| Maximum systolic BP (mmHg) | 174 ± 31 | 181 ± 45 | 0.48 |
| Duration (min) | 9.1 ± 3.5 | 11.1 ± 4.1 | 0.33 |
| Maximum effort (W) | 133 ± 41 | 154 ± 47 | 0.12 |
Dichotomous variables are given as n (%); continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD, unless they are nonparametric, in which case they are expressed as median (IQR)
ACE angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor, ARB angiotensin II receptor blocker, BP blood pressure, BSA Body Surface Area, NYHA New York Heart Association
Comparison of resting and exercise hemodynamics between study and control groups
| Measure |
| Study group ( |
| Control group ( | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline measures | |||||
| Any mitral insufficiency | 56 | 10 (18%) | 13 | 0 | 0.19 |
| Mild | 9 (16%) | 0 | |||
| Moderate | 0 | 0 | |||
| Severe | 1 (2%) | 0 | |||
| SAM | 56 | 5 (9%) | 13 | 0 | 1.0 |
| Indexed LA volume (mL/m2) | 45 | 35.7 ± 11.2 | 0 | ||
| LVEF (%) | 51a | 62.0 ± 6.0 | 6a | 59.7 ± 3.1 | 0.29 |
| LVIDd (mm) | 53 | 45.5 ± 5.4 | 11 | 43.7 ± 6.5 | 0.31 |
| LVPWd (mm) | 53 | 12.1 ± 1.8 | 11 | 11.3 ± 1.1 | 0.17 |
| Mean mitral valve gradient (mmHg) | 52 | 3.0 ± 1.1 | 2 | 0.7 ± 0.1 | 0.005 |
| | 48 | 15.9 ± 4.3 | 11 | 7.1 ± 2.9 | < 0.001 |
| Peak aortic gradient (mmHg) | 53 | 6.1 ± 2.9 | 12 | 9.4 ± 10.2 | 0.042 |
| TRmaxPG (mmHg) | 42 | 23.8 ± 5.5 | 3 | 22.1 ± 4.0 | 0.54 |
| Interventricular septal movement (mm) | 48 | 7.0 ± 1.3 | 10 | 8.9 ± 2.0 | < 0.001 |
| TAPSE (mm) | 52 | 16.7 ± 3.3 | 12 | 24.4 ± 4.3 | < 0.001 |
| | 55 | 10.6 ± 2.6 | 12 | 14.3 ± 2.5 | < 0.001 |
| Peak exercise measures | |||||
| Any mitral insufficiency (grade 1–4) | 56 | 11 (20%) | 13 | 0 | 0.11 |
| Mild | 10 (18%) | 0 | |||
| Moderate | 0 | 0 | |||
| Severe | 1 (2%) | 0 | |||
| SAM | 56 | 5 (9%) | 13 | 0 | 1.0 |
| Mean mitral gradient (mmHg) | 51 | 10.1 ± 7.2 | 0 | ||
| Peak aortic gradient (mmHg) | 46 | 11.1 ± 3.8 | 12 | 17.2 ± 13.9 | 0.01 |
| TRmaxPG (mmHg) | 29 | 38.8 ± 11.9 | 4 | 23.9 ± 9.4 | 0.03 |
| TAPSE (mm) | 40 | 19.8 ± 4.2 | 12 | 34.6 ± 3.8 | < 0.001 |
| | 33 | 14.5 ± 6.7 | 13 | 20.7 ± 5.1 | 0.005 |
Dichotomous variables are given as n (%); continuous variables are expressed as mean ± SD, unless they are nonparametric, in which case they are expressed as median (IQR)
ACE angiotensin converting enzyme, ARB angiotensin II receptor blocker, BP blood pressure, BSA body surface area according to DuBois formula, E/e′ ratio of mitral peak velocity of early filling (E) to early diastolic mitral annular velocity (e′), LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, LVIDd left ventricular internal diameter end diastole, LVPWd left ventricular posterior wall end diastole, NYHA New York Heart Association classification, S′ Tissue doppler-derived systolic velocity of the annulus, SAM systolic anterior motion, TAPSE tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, TRmaxPG tricuspid regurgitation maximum pulse gradient
aAccording to Simpson’s method, the remaining participants did not have sufficient image quality for the Simpson’s method, but all had normal ejection fractions based on visual judgment
Fig. 1Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) during rest and peak exercise
Fig. 2Tissue doppler-derived systolic velocity of the annulus (S′) during rest and peak exercise