Key result
Mitral stenosis with sinus rhythm was associated with a significantly higher mean platelet volume compared to healthy volunteers (9.2 vs 8.1 fl; p<0.001).
Why the study?
Is mean platelet volume (MPV) elevated in patients with mitral stenosis and sinus rhythm compared to healthy controls?
Case-Control (n=66)
Is mean platelet volume (MPV) elevated in patients with mitral stenosis and sinus rhythm compared to healthy controls?
Absolute Event Rate: 9.2% vs 8.1%
p-value: p=<0.001
Mean platelet volume is elevated in patients with mitral stenosis in sinus rhythm, suggesting increased platelet activation which may contribute to thromboembolic risk.
May indicate heightened thromboembolic risk via platelet activation; hypothesis-generating for risk stratification in mitral stenosis.
Systemic thromboembolism is a serious major complication in patients with mitral stenosis. However, the pathogenesis of thromboembolism in mitral stenosis is not fully understood. Previous studies have demonstrated that platelet activation occurs in serum of patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS). The aim of this study was to assess the mean platelet volume (MPV), an indicator of platelet activation, in patients with MS. The study group consisted of 36 patients with MS who were in sinus rhythm. An age and gender matched control group was composed of 30 healthy volunteers. We measured serum MPV values in patients and control subjects. MPV was significantly higher among MS patients with sinus rhythm (SR) when compared with the control group (9.2+/-1.4 vs 8.1+/-0.9 fl respectively; p<0.001). We have shown that MPV was significantly elevated in patients with MS who were in SR compared to control subjects.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Varol et al. (2009) conducted a case-control in Mitral stenosis (n=66). Mitral stenosis with sinus rhythm vs. Healthy volunteers was evaluated on Mean platelet volume (MPV) (p=<0.001). Mitral stenosis with sinus rhythm was associated with a significantly higher mean platelet volume compared to healthy volunteers (9.2 vs 8.1 fl; p<0.001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: