Archives of cardiovascular diseases · 2025
Contemporary management of patients with native mitral regurgitation in heart valve centres.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
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.
Coisne Augustin, Scotti Andrea, Bohbot Yohann, Dreyfus Julien, Bernard Anne, Lavie Badie Yoan, Rousse Natacha, Sudre Arnaud, Tribouilloy Christophe, Peltier Marcel, Ludwig Sebastian, Marcheix Bertrand, Eyharts Damien, Steinecker Matthieu, Nejjari Mohammed, Luciani Marie, Saint Etienne Christophe, Ternacle Julien, Bonnet Guillaume, L'Official Guillaume, Galli Elena, Lancellotti Patrizio, Granada Juan, Donal Erwan, Modine Thomas
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Despite a key role in the latest guidelines, the screening process of patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) referred to Heart Valve Centres (HVCs) remains unexplored.
AIMS: To investigate characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with native MR referred to HVCs.
METHODS: Between January 2017 and May 2021, all patients with MR referred to seven French HVCs for medico-surgical evaluation were included. Individual management was left to the local interdisciplinary HVC. Patients eligible to mitral valve (MV) intervention were compared with those deemed ineligible and left on medical therapy. The primary endpoint was 2-year all-cause mortality.
RESULTS: After exclusion for treatment refusal or non-MV surgery, a total of 823 patients were analysed: 662 eligible versus 161 ineligible to MV intervention. Among the 662 eligible patients, 382 (57.7%) underwent transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, 215 (32.5%) MV surgery, 40 (6.0%) transcatheter MV replacement and 25 (3.8%) were either on the waiting list at the end of follow-up (n=12) or had died before intervention (n=13). Ineligible patients had higher surgical risk scores (median EuroSCORE II 4.2% vs. 3.3%; P=0.003; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score 4.3% vs. 3.5%; P=0.023) and more advanced left ventricular (LV) impairment (mean LV ejection fraction 49.7% vs. 56.6%; P<0.001). At 2years, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in ineligible versus eligible patients (36.3% vs. 18.0%; P<0.0001). After multivariable adjustment, HVC-defined eligibility for MV intervention was associated with lower 2-year mortality (hazard ratio: 0.54, 95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.84; P=0.006).
CONCLUSION: HVC interdisciplinary evaluation of severe native MR results in MV intervention in most cases. Eligibility for MV intervention was associated with lower risk of 2-year mortality.
AIMS: To investigate characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with native MR referred to HVCs.
METHODS: Between January 2017 and May 2021, all patients with MR referred to seven French HVCs for medico-surgical evaluation were included. Individual management was left to the local interdisciplinary HVC. Patients eligible to mitral valve (MV) intervention were compared with those deemed ineligible and left on medical therapy. The primary endpoint was 2-year all-cause mortality.
RESULTS: After exclusion for treatment refusal or non-MV surgery, a total of 823 patients were analysed: 662 eligible versus 161 ineligible to MV intervention. Among the 662 eligible patients, 382 (57.7%) underwent transcatheter edge-to-edge repair, 215 (32.5%) MV surgery, 40 (6.0%) transcatheter MV replacement and 25 (3.8%) were either on the waiting list at the end of follow-up (n=12) or had died before intervention (n=13). Ineligible patients had higher surgical risk scores (median EuroSCORE II 4.2% vs. 3.3%; P=0.003; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score 4.3% vs. 3.5%; P=0.023) and more advanced left ventricular (LV) impairment (mean LV ejection fraction 49.7% vs. 56.6%; P<0.001). At 2years, all-cause mortality was significantly higher in ineligible versus eligible patients (36.3% vs. 18.0%; P<0.0001). After multivariable adjustment, HVC-defined eligibility for MV intervention was associated with lower 2-year mortality (hazard ratio: 0.54, 95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.84; P=0.006).
CONCLUSION: HVC interdisciplinary evaluation of severe native MR results in MV intervention in most cases. Eligibility for MV intervention was associated with lower risk of 2-year mortality.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
HumansMitral Valve InsufficiencyFemaleMaleAgedTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeMitral ValveFranceRisk FactorsHeart Valve Prosthesis ImplantationMiddle AgedAged, 80 and overRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentReferral and ConsultationCardiac CatheterizationClinical Decision-MakingPatient SelectionWaiting Lists