| Literature DB >> 32358886 |
Stephan Stöbe1, Kristin Kreyer1, Daniel Jurisch1, Dietrich Pfeiffer1, Daniel Lavall1, Gerardo Farese1, Ulrich Laufs1, Andreas Hagendorff1.
Abstract
AIMS: Percutaneous mitral annuloplasty (PMA) represents a new treatment option for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) being associated with higher morbidity and mortality. The present study was aimed to evaluate whether or not acute effects on SMR severity can quantitatively be assessed after PMA. METHODS ANDEntities:
Keywords: Percutaneous mitral annuloplasty; Secondary mitral regurgitation; Transthoracic echocardiography
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32358886 PMCID: PMC7373905 DOI: 10.1002/ehf2.12719
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ESC Heart Fail ISSN: 2055-5822
Baseline characteristics
| Baseline characteristics | Moderate or severe SMR ( |
|---|---|
| Male (%) | 11 (37) |
| Female (%) | 19 (63) |
| Age (years) | 76 ± 9 |
| Blood pressure (mmHg) | 124 ± 19/65 ± 11 |
| NYHA II (%) | 5 (17) |
| NYHA III (%) | 15 (50) |
| NYHA IV (%) | 10 (33) |
| Coronary artery disease (%) | 19 (63) |
| Diabetes mellitus (%) | 10 (33) |
| Arterial hypertension (%) | 25 (83) |
| Hyperlipidaemia (%) | 20 (67) |
| Obesity (%) | 3 (10) |
| Atrial fibrillation (%) | 14 (47) |
| Pacemaker (%) | 6 (20) |
SMR, secondary mitral regurgitation; NYHA, New York Heart Association.
Figure 1Example of a patient with (A and B) moderate secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) prior to and (C and D) mild SMR after percutaneous mitral annuloplasty. Pre‐ and Postinterventional evaluations both approaches for the assessment of regurgitant volume (RVol) and regurgitant fraction (RF) [(A and C) proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA); (B and D) volume measurements by biplane left ventricular planimetry by Simpson's rule and Doppler echocardiography] as well as VTIMV/LVOT and vena contracta are considered. LVOT, left ventricular outflow tract; MV, mitral valve; SVtot, total stroke volume; VTI, velocity time integral.
Echocardiographic assessment of parameters describing mitral valve morphology and semi‐quantitative and quantitative evaluation of secondary mitral regurgitation
| Parameters | Mean ± SD prior to annuloplasty ( | Mean ± SD after annuloplasty ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| DMV (cm) | 3.6 ± 0.6 | 3.4 ± 0.6 | <0.001 |
| Tenting area (cm2) | 2.2 ± 0.7 | 1.9 ± 0.6 | <0.001 |
| Coaptation depth (cm) | 1.4 ± 0.4 | 1.3 ± 0.3 | <0.05 |
| VTIMV/LVOT | 1.9 ± 0.4 | 1.6 ± 0.5 | <0.05 |
| Vena contracta (mm) | 5.2 ± 0.1 | 4.1 ± 0.2 | <0.001 |
| EROAPISA (cm2) | 0.24 ± 0.1 | 0.19 ± 0.1 | <0.05 |
| RVolvolume (mL) | 28 ± 17 | 20 ± 14 | <0.05 |
| RFvolume (%) | 46 ± 10 | 34 ± 13 | <0.001 |
| RVolPISA (mL) | 33 ± 13 | 25 ± 12 | <0.001 |
| RFPISA (%) | 49 ± 11 | 34 ± 13 | <0.001 |
D, diameter; EROA, effective regurgitant orifice area; LVOT, left ventricular outflow tract; MV, mitral valve; PISA, proximal isovelocity surface area; RF, regurgitant fraction; RVol, regurgitant volume; SD, standard deviation; VTI, velocity time integral.
Figure 2Comparison of semi‐quantitative and quantitative parameters for evaluation of secondary mitral regurgitation prior to and after percutaneous mitral annuloplasty. (A) RFPISA, (B) RVolPISA, (C) vena contracta, and (D) VTIMV/LVOT were significantly lower after percutaneous mitral annuloplasty (P < 0.05). RF, regurgitant fraction; RVol, regurgitant volume; VTI, velocity time integral.
Echocardiographic assessment of parameters describing left ventricular and left atrial morphology and function
| Parameters | Mean ± SD prior to annuloplasty ( | Mean ± SD after annuloplasty ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| LVEDD (cm) | 5.9 ± 1.0 | 5.9 ± 1.0 | 0.79 |
| LVESD (cm) | 4.6 ± 1.1 | 4.5 ± 1.2 | 0.31 |
| Sphericity indexdiast | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.5 ± 0.1 | 0.27 |
| Sphericity indexsyst | 0.4 ± 0.2 | 0.4 ± 0.2 | 0.32 |
| Indexed LVEDV (mL/m2) | 93 ± 38 | 95 ± 37 | 0.70 |
| Indexed LVESV (mL/m2) | 57 ± 31 | 55 ± 33 | 0.60 |
| LVEF (%) | 42 ± 13 | 45 ± 15 | 0.06 |
| SVtot (biplane) (mL) | 67 ± 24 | 72 ± 25 | 0.17 |
| SVeff (mL) | 35 ± 14 | 45 ± 16 |
|
| Indexed LAEDV (mL) | 47 ± 22 | 46 ± 21 | 0.58 |
| Indexed LAESV (mL) | 56 ± 20 | 55 ± 20 | 0.65 |
| E/E′ | 18 ± 5 | 19 ± 7 | 0.72 |
LAEDV, left atrial end‐diastolic volume; LAESV, left atrial end‐systolic volume; LVEDD, left ventricular end‐diastolic diameter; LVEDV, left ventricular end‐diastolic volume; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction; LVESD, left ventricular end‐systolic diameter; LVESV, left ventricular end‐systolic volume; SD, standard deviation; SVeff, effective stroke volume; SVtot, total stroke volume.
Echocardiographic assessment of parameters describing cardiac performance
| Parameters | Mean ± SD prior to annuloplasty ( | Mean ± SD after annuloplasty ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Global longitudinal strain (%) | −12.2 ± 5.59 | −12.3 ± 5.34 | 0.39 |
| Cardiac output (L/min) | 5.1 ± 1.87 | 5.4 ± 1.80 | 0.13 |
| Cardiac index (L/min/m2) | 2.7 ± 0.88 | 2.9 ± 0.84 | 0.13 |
| Total vascular resistance (WU) | 2.2 ± 0.84 | 2.0 ± 0.68 | 0.06 |
| Stroke work (mmHg × mL) | 6234 ± 2435 | 6362 ± 2492 | 0.35 |
| End‐systolic wall stress (mmHg/cm) | 256 ± 444 | 201 ± 369 | 0.09 |
| Preload recruitable stroke work (mmHg) | 64 ± 21 | 66 ± 20 | 0.35 |
| Peak power index (mmHg/s) | 406 ± 162 | 387 ± 157 | 0.25 |
SD, standard deviation.