International journal of cardiology · 2018
Predicting device failure after percutaneous repair of functional mitral regurgitation in advanced heart failure: Implications for patient selection.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНаблюдательное 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.
Stolfo Davide, De Luca Antonio, Morea Gaetano, Merlo Marco, Vitrella Giancarlo, Caiffa Thomas, Barbati Giulia, Rakar Serena, Korcova Renata, Perkan Andrea, Pinamonti Bruno, Pappalardo Aniello, Berardini Alessandra, Biagini Elena, Saia Francesco, Grigioni Francesco, Rapezzi Claudio, Sinagra Gianfranco
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) and severe symptomatic functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) may benefit from MitraClip implantation. With increasing numbers of patients being treated the success of procedure becomes a key issue. We sought to investigate the pre-procedural predictors of device failure in patients with advanced HF treated with MitraClip.
METHODS: From April 2012 to November 2016, 76 patients with poor functional class (NYHA class III-IV) and severe left ventricular (LV) remodeling underwent MitraClip implantation at University Hospitals of Trieste and Bologna (Italy). Device failure was assessed according to MVARC criteria. Patients were subsequently followed to additionally assess the patient success after 12months.
RESULTS: Mean age was 67±12years, the mean Log-EuroSCORE was 23.4±16.5%, and the mean LV end-diastolic volume index and ejection fraction (EF) were 112±33ml/m2 and 30.6±8.9%, respectively. At short-term evaluation, device failure was observed in 22 (29%) patients. Univariate predictors of device failure were LVEF, LV and left atrial volumes and anteroposterior mitral annulus diameter. Annulus dimension (OR 1.153, 95% CI 1.002-1.327, p=0.043) and LV end-diastolic volume (OR 1.024, 95% CI 1.000-1.049, p=0.049) were the only variables independently associated with the risk of device failure at the multivariate model.
CONCLUSIONS: Pre-procedural anteroposterior mitral annulus diameter accurately predicted the risk of device failure after MitraClip in the setting of advanced HF. Its assessment might aid the selection of the best candidates to percutaneous correction of FMR.
METHODS: From April 2012 to November 2016, 76 patients with poor functional class (NYHA class III-IV) and severe left ventricular (LV) remodeling underwent MitraClip implantation at University Hospitals of Trieste and Bologna (Italy). Device failure was assessed according to MVARC criteria. Patients were subsequently followed to additionally assess the patient success after 12months.
RESULTS: Mean age was 67±12years, the mean Log-EuroSCORE was 23.4±16.5%, and the mean LV end-diastolic volume index and ejection fraction (EF) were 112±33ml/m2 and 30.6±8.9%, respectively. At short-term evaluation, device failure was observed in 22 (29%) patients. Univariate predictors of device failure were LVEF, LV and left atrial volumes and anteroposterior mitral annulus diameter. Annulus dimension (OR 1.153, 95% CI 1.002-1.327, p=0.043) and LV end-diastolic volume (OR 1.024, 95% CI 1.000-1.049, p=0.049) were the only variables independently associated with the risk of device failure at the multivariate model.
CONCLUSIONS: Pre-procedural anteroposterior mitral annulus diameter accurately predicted the risk of device failure after MitraClip in the setting of advanced HF. Its assessment might aid the selection of the best candidates to percutaneous correction of FMR.