Key result
Preoperative LVMI >200 g/m2 linked to ~136% higher MACCE risk in AVR for AR.
Why the study?
The study was conducted to determine the LVMI cut-off value for MACCE risk and investigate the effect of preoperative LV remodeling on long-term postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing AVR for AR.
Does preoperative left ventricular mass index affect the risk of MACCE in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation?
Cohort (n=263)
No
Does preoperative left ventricular mass index affect the risk of MACCE in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation?
Hazard Ratio: 2.356 (95% CI 1.283–4.327)
Absolute Event Rate: 25.6% vs 13.5%
p-value: p=0.006
Preoperative left ventricular mass index is a significant predictor of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation.
BACKGROUND: We determined the left ventricular mass index (LVMI) cut-off value for the risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for aortic regurgitation (AR) and investigated the effect of preoperative left ventricular remodeling on long-term outcomes postoperatively. METHODS AND RESULTS: was significantly associated with a higher risk of MACCE (hazard ratio 2.356, P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: was associated with a higher rate of MACCE in patients undergoing AVR for AR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hachiro et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Aortic regurgitation (n=263). Preoperative left ventricular mass index >200 g/m2 vs. Preoperative left ventricular mass index ≤200 g/m2 was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (HR 2.356, 95% CI 1.283-4.327, p=0.006). Preoperative left ventricular mass index >200 g/m2 was significantly associated with a higher risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR 2.356) compared to ≤200 g/m2 in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement for aortic regurgitation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: