Key result
A small left ventricular cavity in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement for severe mitral stenosis was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative heart failure in the ICU compared to a normal or dilated cavity (11.6% vs 2.0%).
Why the study?
Mitral valve stenosis may be associated with a smaller than normal left ventricular cavity, which can lead to hemodynamic instability or low cardiac output syndrome following mitral valve replacement.
Does a small left ventricular cavity increase the risk of postoperative hemodynamic instability and heart failure in patients undergoing elective isolated mitral valve replacement for severe mitral stenosis?
Cohort (n=184)
No
Does a small left ventricular cavity increase the risk of postoperative hemodynamic instability and heart failure in patients undergoing elective isolated mitral valve replacement for severe mitral stenosis?
Patients with severe mitral stenosis and a small left ventricle undergoing mitral valve replacement are at significantly higher risk for postoperative low cardiac output syndrome and heart failure requiring inotropic or mechanical support.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Small LV cavity signals higher perioperative support needs after MVR; leaves open independent prognostic value and optimal strategies.
BACKGROUND: Mitral valve stenosis in adults especially due to rheumatic heart disease may be associated with a smaller than normal left ventricular cavity. Mitral valve replacement in such cases may lead to hemodynamic instability either during weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass or in the early postoperative period manifested by the need for inotropic support and even mortality due to low cardiac output syndrome. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 184 patients with predominately severe stenotic mitral valves who underwent elective isolated mitral valve replacement in the period between January 2012 and January 2018 at our hospital were included in this study. Patients were divided into 2 matched groups; (small LV group) consisting of 86 cases and (normal or dilated LV group) consisting of 98 cases. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in operative details among both groups apart from the need for inotropic support and intra-aortic balloon pump due to low cardiac output which were statistically significantly higher in (small LV group) than (normal or dilated LV group) with a p-values of 0.01 and 0.03 respectively. Within the ICU stay only the incidence of occurrence of heart failure was significantly higher in (small LV group) with a p-value of 0.008. No statistically significant difference could be elicited in the in-hospital mortality between both groups (p-value = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Patients with mitral valve stenosis and small left ventricular cavity are in a higher need for inotropic and even mechanical support after mitral valve replacement as well as at a higher risk for the development of heart failure before hospital discharge than patients with mitral stenosis and normal-sized left ventricular cavity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alkady et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Mitral valve stenosis (n=184). Small left ventricular cavity vs. Normal or dilated left ventricular cavity was evaluated on Incidence of heart failure within ICU stay (p=0.008). A small left ventricular cavity in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement for severe mitral stenosis was associated with a significantly higher incidence of postoperative heart failure in the ICU compared to a normal or dilated cavity (11.6% vs 2.0%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: