Clinical cardiology · 2022
Stage-based approach to predict left ventricular reverse remodeling after mitral repair.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hibino Makoto, Dhingra Nitish K, Chan Vincent, Mazer C David, Teoh Hwee, Quan Adrian, Verma Raj, Leong-Poi Howard, Bisleri Gianluigi, Connelly Kim A, Verma Subodh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although predictors of reverse left ventricular (LV) remodeling postmitral valve repair are critical for guiding perioperative decision-making, there remains a paucity of randomized, prospective data to support the criteria that potential predictor variables must meet.
METHODS AND RESULTS: The CAMRA CardioLink-2 randomized trial allocated 104 patients to either leaflet resection or preservation strategies for mitral repair. The correlation of indexed left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESVI), indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDVI), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were tested with univariate analysis and subsequently with multivariate analysis to determine independent predictors of reverse remodeling at discharge and at 12 months postoperatively. At discharge, both LVESVI and LVEDVI were independently associated with their preoperative values (p < .001 for both) and LVEF by preoperative LVESVI (p < .001). Mitral ring size was favorably associated with the change in LVESVI (p < .05) and LVEF (p < .01) from predischarge to 12 months, while the mean mitral valve gradient after repair was adversely associated with the change in LVESVI (p < .05) and LVEDVI (p < .05). No significant associations were found between reverse remodeling and coaptation height nor mitral repair technique.
CONCLUSIONS: Beyond confirming the lack of impact of mitral repair technique on reverse remodeling, this investigation suggests that recommending surgery before significant LV dilatation or dysfunction, as well as higher postoperative mitral valve hemodynamic performance, may enhance remodeling capacity following mitral repair.
METHODS AND RESULTS: The CAMRA CardioLink-2 randomized trial allocated 104 patients to either leaflet resection or preservation strategies for mitral repair. The correlation of indexed left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESVI), indexed left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDVI), and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were tested with univariate analysis and subsequently with multivariate analysis to determine independent predictors of reverse remodeling at discharge and at 12 months postoperatively. At discharge, both LVESVI and LVEDVI were independently associated with their preoperative values (p < .001 for both) and LVEF by preoperative LVESVI (p < .001). Mitral ring size was favorably associated with the change in LVESVI (p < .05) and LVEF (p < .01) from predischarge to 12 months, while the mean mitral valve gradient after repair was adversely associated with the change in LVESVI (p < .05) and LVEDVI (p < .05). No significant associations were found between reverse remodeling and coaptation height nor mitral repair technique.
CONCLUSIONS: Beyond confirming the lack of impact of mitral repair technique on reverse remodeling, this investigation suggests that recommending surgery before significant LV dilatation or dysfunction, as well as higher postoperative mitral valve hemodynamic performance, may enhance remodeling capacity following mitral repair.