Key result
Cardiac rehab yields similar 6MWT improvements in mitral and aortic valve patients.
Why the study?
The physical capacity and psychological well-being outcomes of mitral valve patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation compared to aortic valve patients were not well characterized.
Does cardiac rehabilitation yield similar improvements in physical capacity and psychological well-being for patients following mitral valve procedures compared to aortic valve procedures?
Cohort (n=140)
Does cardiac rehabilitation yield similar improvements in physical capacity and psychological well-being for patients following mitral valve procedures compared to aortic valve procedures?
Cardiac rehabilitation provides comparable physical and psychological benefits for patients recovering from mitral valve procedures as it does for those recovering from aortic valve procedures.
CR may benefit mitral valve patients; leaves open whether outcomes match aortic valve patients in prospective trials.
PURPOSE: Patients participating in cardiac rehabilitation (CR) following an aortic valve procedure demonstrate improvements in physical capacity and psychological well-being. The primary aim of this study is to evaluate baseline exercise capacity and psychological well-being for mitral valve patients participating in CR and to compare physical and psychological outcomes between mitral valve and aortic valve patients. METHODS: The primary endpoint was improvement in 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance. Secondary endpoints included change in exercise min/wk, depression scores (Patient Health Questionnaire-9 [PHQ-9]), anxiety scores (General Anxiety Disorder-7 [GAD-7]), and overall quality of life (Dartmouth Cooperative Functional Assessment [COOP]) scores. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and December 2019, 94 patients who underwent an aortic valve procedure and 46 patients who underwent mitral valve procedures were enrolled prospectively in CR. At the completion of their CR program, patients had similar improvements in their 6MWT (mitral valve: 173 ft [125, 238] vs aortic valve 197 ft [121, 295], P = .42); exercise min/wk (mitral valve: 90 min [45, 175] vs aortic valve: 80 min [40, 130], P = .44). Changes in anxiety (GAD-7), depression (PHQ-9), and COOP scores were smaller but similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: CR participation resulted in similar improvements in physical activity between patients undergoing mitral valve and aortic valve procedures. Psychological well-being and quality of life scores improved minimally and similarly between the two groups.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2021 study conducted a cohort in Post-mitral and aortic valve procedures (n=140). Mitral valve procedure vs. Aortic valve procedure was evaluated on Improvement in 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance (p=.42). Following cardiac rehabilitation, patients who underwent mitral valve procedures had similar improvements in 6-minute walk test distance compared to aortic valve patients (173 ft vs 197 ft; P=.42).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: