| Literature DB >> 35787297 |
Thomas Schmidt1,2, Marek Kowalski3, Birna Bjarnason-Wehrens4, Frank Ritter3, Gerold Mönnig3, Nils Reiss3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date, no studies on the feasibility or outcomes of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after percutaneous mitral valve reconstruction using clipping procedures have been published. The aim of this study was to report on our first experiences with this special target group.Entities:
Keywords: Cardiac rehabilitation; Exercise intervention; Mitraclip; Mitral regurgitation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35787297 PMCID: PMC9254646 DOI: 10.1186/s13102-022-00517-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Sports Sci Med Rehabil ISSN: 2052-1847
Fig. 1Percutaneous mitral valve reconstruction using the MitraClip™ device. (MitraClip™ is a trademark of Abbott or its related companies. Reproduced with permission of Abbott, © 2022. All rights reserved.)
Fig. 279 years old patient after percutaneous mitral valve reconstruction while performing a handgrip-strength-test during inpatient cardiac rehabilitation
Patient characteristics (n = 27)
| SD or % | ||
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Age (years) | 73 | ± 12 |
| Female (n) | 14 | 52% |
| Body mass index | 26.5 | ± 4.4 |
| Barthel index (points) | 92 | ± 9 |
| Clinical condition before intervention | ||
| NYHA classification | 3.1 | ± 0.5 |
| Left ventricular ejection fraction (%) | 42 | ± 13 |
| Mitral valve insufficiency (grade) | 3.2 | ± 0.4 |
| Logistic EuroSCORE I (%) | 32 | ± 20 |
| Percutaneous intervention | ||
| 1 MitraClip™ (n) | 21 | 78% |
| 2 MitraClips™ (n) | 5 | 18% |
| 3 MitraClips™ (n) | 1 | 4% |
| ASD occluder needed (n) | 4 | 15% |
| Clinical condition after intervention and before CR | ||
| Left ventricular ejection fraction (%) | 45 | ± 12 |
| Mitral valve insufficiency (grade) | 1.0 | ± 0.5 |
| Mean gradient mitral valve (mmHg) | 3.0 | ± 1.4 |
| Most common comorbidities at start of CR | ||
| Hypertension (n) | 25 | 93% |
| Orthopaedic problems (n) | 19 | 70% |
| Coronary artery disease (n) | 16 | 59% |
| Atrial fibrillation (n) | 16 | 59% |
| Renal insufficiency (n) | 11 | 41% |
| Diabetes mellitus (n) | 5 | 18% |
| Time | ||
| Implantation to CR (days) | 16 | ± 13 |
| Duration of CR (days) | 22 | ± 4 |
NYHA, New York Heart Association; ASD, atrial septal defect; CR, cardiac rehabilitation
Changes during inpatient cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in exercise intensities, functional performance values and device-related echocardiographic parameters (n = 24)
| Start of CR | End of CR | Changes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Training intensities during CR | ||||
| Load during bicycle ergometer training (watts) | 18.3 ± 6.3 | 24.6 ± 10 | 6.3 ± 6.5 | .000*** |
| Weight during leg press (kg) | 27.5 ± 5.5 | 33.1 ± 9.7 | 5.6 ± 7.5 | .006** |
| Functional performance values | ||||
| 6MWD (m) | 272 ± 97 | 304 ± 111 | 32 ± 64 | .028* |
| 6MWD (% of predicted) | 60 ± 26 | 67 ± 29 | 7 ± 14 | .033* |
| 6MWD below 300 m (n) | 14 | 8 | − 6 | .074 |
| Use of rollator walker or walking aids during 6MWT (n) | 9 | 4 | − 5 | .014* |
| Handgrip dominant hand (lbs) | 38.8 ± 22.6 | 41.1 ± 22.9 | 2.3 ± 5.2 | .073 |
| Handgrip dominant hand (% of predicted) | 60 ± 27 | 64 ± 24 | 4 ± 8 | .064 |
| Handgrip non-dominant hand (lbs) | 32.8 ± 18.4 | 36.5 ± 19.7 | 3.7 ± 5.8 | .014* |
| Handgrip non-dominant hand (% of predicted) | 61 ± 25 | 68 ± 22 | 7 ± 10 | .011* |
| Berg balance scale (points) | 53.1 ± 3.2 | 54.1 ± 2.4 | 1 ± 1.6 | .013* |
| Device-related echocardiography parameters | ||||
| Mitral valve insufficiency (grade) | 0.98 ± 0.5 | 1.04 ± 0.5 | 0.06 ± 0.4 | .503 |
| Mean gradient mitral valve (mmHg) | 3.07 ± 1.2 | 3.00 ± 1.3 | − 0.07 ± 1.3 | .849 |
| Left ventricular ejection fraction (%) | 47 ± 12 | 53 ± 13 | 6 ± 9 | .013* |
CR, cardiac rehabilitation; 6MWD, six-minute walking distance; 6MWT, six-minute walking test
Fig. 3Potential benefits for participating in multimodal cardiac rehabilitation program after percutaneous mitral valve reconstruction using clipping procedures: a prolonged observation period and possibility for supplementary diagnostics, b individualised exercise interventions to improve functional capacity, c personalised preparation for activities of daily living