Why the study?
Current surgical thresholds rely on LV diameters and LVEF, but data examining LV volumes and newer markers of LV performance on surgical outcomes in mitral valve prolapse are sparse.
Do pre-operative left ventricular volumes and global longitudinal strain predict post-operative left ventricular impairment in patients undergoing surgery for mitral valve prolapse?
Do pre-operative left ventricular volumes and global longitudinal strain predict post-operative left ventricular impairment in patients undergoing surgery for mitral valve prolapse?
Pre-operative indexed left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESVi > 36.3 mL/m2) is a strong independent predictor of post-operative left ventricular impairment in patients undergoing surgery for degenerative mitral regurgitation.
LVESVi may aid pre-operative risk stratification in mitral valve prolapse surgery; extends volumetric predictors beyond current guidelines but remains hypothesis-generating.
AIMS: Chronic degenerative mitral regurgitation leads to volume overload causing left ventricular (LV) enlargement and eventually LV impairment. Current guidelines determining thresholds for intervention are based on LV diameters and ejection fraction (LVEF). There are sparse data examining the value of LV volumes and newer markers of LV performance on outcomes of surgery in mitral valve prolapse. The aim of this study is to identify the best marker of LV impairment after mitral valve surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective, observational study of patients with mitral valve prolapse undergoing mitral valve surgery. Pre-operative LV diameters, volumes, LVEF, global longitudinal strain (GLS), and myocardial work measured. Post-operative LV impairment defined as LVEF < 50% at 1 year post-surgery. Eighty-seven patients included. Thirteen percent developed post-operative LV impairment. Patients with post-operative LV dysfunction showed significantly larger indexed LV end-systolic diameters, indexed LV end-systolic volumes (LVESVi), lower LVEF, and more abnormal GLS than patients without post-operative LV dysfunction. In multivariate analysis, LVESVi [odds ratio 1.11 (95% CI 1.01-1.23), P = 0.039] and GLS [odds ratio 1.46 (95% CI 1.00-2.14), P = 0.054] were the only independent predictors of post-operative LV dysfunction. The optimal cut-off of 36.3 mL/m2 for LVESVi had a sensitivity of 82% and specificity of 78% for detection of post-operative LV impairment. CONCLUSION: Post-operative LV impairment is common. Indexed LV volumes (36.3 mL/m2) provided the best marker of post-operative LV impairment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Althunayyan et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: