Key result
A 59-year-old female with severe multiple-valve diseases, heart failure, and left atrial thrombus chose conservative medical therapy over intervention procedures despite having no contraindications.
Why the study?
In patients with heart failure and valvular heart disease, decision-making between intervention and conservative medical therapy requires a comprehensive evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio.
Case Report (n=1)
This case highlights the importance of shared decision-making in complex patients with heart failure and multiple valvular diseases, where patients may opt for conservative management despite being candidates for intervention.
Highlights patient preference for conservative therapy in complex valvular HF with thrombus; hypothesis-generating for shared decision-making research.
Structural valvular heart disease (VHD) may be the cause of heart failure or may worsen the clinical status of patients with heart failure. Heart failure patients with VHD are at increased risk of events including sudden cardiac death. Before considering intervention (surgical or percutaneous) all patients should receive appropriate medical therapy. Numerous percutaneous and/or hybrid procedures have been introduced in the past few years and they are changing the management of VHD. In patients with heart failure and valvular heart disease, either primary or functional, the whole process of decision-making should be staged through a comprehensive evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio of different treatment strategies. In this case, a heart failure patient with multiple-valve diseases, LA thrombus, and dilated cardiomyopathy was referred to a faraway cardiac center to undergo intervention procedures. This is a case report of a 59-yo female who presented to the emergency ward, she was referred with the diagnosis of Chronic Heart Failure due to multiple-valve diseases, atrial fibrillation, hypo-potassium, and low blood pressure. From echocardiography, we found severe mitral stenosis, severe aortic stenosis, moderate aortic insufficiency, moderate tricuspid stenosis, severe tricuspid insufficiency, mild pulmonic insufficiency, with left atrial thrombus, and dilated cardiomyopathy. However, after the evaluation was made and had a discussion with the patient about the risk-benefit of intervention procedures, the patient chose to not undergoing the intervention procedures even though there was no contraindication found in the patients to the procedures that should be done to the patient.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
M.R.D. et al. (2021) conducted a case report in Chronic Heart Failure with multiple-valve diseases and left atrial thrombus (n=1). Conservative medical therapies vs. Intervention procedures was evaluated. A 59-year-old female with severe multiple-valve diseases, heart failure, and left atrial thrombus chose conservative medical therapy over intervention procedures despite having no contraindications.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: