Key result
Volumetric assessment of residual mitral regurgitation after TEER showed poor agreement with the guideline-recommended integrative method (Kappa = 0.053, P<0.001), often grading severity as milder.
Why the study?
Common color flow Doppler methods for evaluating residual MR after TEER may be misleading due to multiple jets and high velocities created by the devices.
Does volumetric assessment of residual mitral regurgitation differ from the guideline-recommended integrated qualitative approach in patients post-TEER?
Observational (n=112)
No
Does volumetric assessment of residual mitral regurgitation differ from the guideline-recommended integrated qualitative approach in patients post-TEER?
Effect estimate: Kappa 0.053
p-value: p=< 0.001
The guideline-recommended integrative method often overestimates residual mitral regurgitation severity after TEER compared to volumetric assessment, suggesting alternative methods may be needed.
Guideline method may overestimate residual MR post-TEER; leaves open whether volumetric assessment improves outcome prediction.
Objectives: This article aims to evaluate the accuracy of the color-Doppler-based technique to evaluate residual mitral regurgitation post TEER. Background: The evaluation of residual mitral regurgitation (MR) post-mitral transcutaneous edge-to-edge repair (mitral TEER) is a critical determinant in patients’ outcomes. The common methods used today, based on the integration of color flow Doppler parameters, may be misleading because of the multiple jets and high velocities created by the TEER devices. Methods: Patients undergoing TEER at Hadassah hospital were recruited between 2015 and 2019. Post-procedural MR was evaluated using the integrated qualitative approach as recommended by the guidelines. In addition, the MR volume for each patient was calculated by subtracting the forward stroke volume (calculated by multiplying the LVOT area with the velocity time integral of the LVOT systolic flow) from the total stroke volume (calculated by the biplane Simpson method of discs). We compared the two methods for concordance. Results: Overall, 112 cases were enrolled. In 55.4% of cases, the volumetric residual MR was milder than the MR severity assessed by the guidelines’ recommended method. In 25.1%, the MR severity was similar in both methods. In 16.2%, the MR severity was worse when calculated using the volumetric method (pValue < 0.001, Kappameasure of agreement = 0.053). The lower residual MR degree using the volumetric approach was mostly observed in patients classified as “moderate” by the integrated approach. Conclusions: MR severity after TEER is often overestimated by the guideline-recommended integrative method when compared with a volumetric method. Alternative methods should be considered to assess the MR severity after mitral TEER.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shekel et al. (2023) conducted an observational in Residual mitral regurgitation post-TEER (n=112). Volumetric assessment method vs. Guideline-recommended integrated qualitative approach was evaluated on Concordance of mitral regurgitation severity between volumetric and integrated qualitative methods (Kappa 0.053, p=< 0.001). Volumetric assessment of residual mitral regurgitation after TEER showed poor agreement with the guideline-recommended integrative method (Kappa = 0.053, P<0.001), often grading severity as milder.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: