4.5 Article

The impact of residual mitral regurgitation after MitraClip therapy in functional mitral regurgitation

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEART FAILURE
卷 22, 期 10, 页码 1840-1848

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ejhf.1774

关键词

MitraClip; Residual mitral regurgitation; Long-term outcome

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims MitraClip therapy for the treatment of functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is an increasingly used intervention for high-risk surgical patients. The aim of this observational study was to assess the impact of residual mitral regurgitation (rMR) at discharge on long-term outcome after MitraClip therapy in patients with FMR. Methods and results Overall, 458 patients (mean age 73.8 +/- 8.9 years) underwent MitraClip implantation between September 2008 and December 2017. The impact of rMR <= 1+ at discharge (n= 251) was retrospectively compared to patients graded as rMR 2+ (n= 173) and rMR >= 3+ (n= 34) at discharge. Median follow-up time was 5.09 years (5.00-5.26) with maximum follow-up of 10.02 years. The primary outcome was survival, and Kaplan-Meier analyses revealed significant differences among all rMR subgroups with highest survival rates for rMR <= 1+ patients. This was further confirmed by composite outcome analyses (P < 0.02). The inferior outcomes of rMR 2+ and rMR >= 3+ at discharge were confirmed by increased adjusted hazard ratios when rMR 2+ (1.54,P= 0.0039) and rMR >= 3+ (2.16,P= 0.011) were compared to rMR <= 1+. Moreover, patients with stable rMR <= 1+ grades within 12 months showed significantly higher survival rates compared to patients with rMR <= 1+ at discharge and rMR >= 2+ at 12-month follow-up or rMR >= 2+ at discharge and 12-month follow-up (P= 0.029). Conclusions Patients with optimal and durable rMR <= 1+ at discharge and 12-month follow-up showed better outcome compared to patients with rMR 2+ and rMR >= 3+. Treatment success and durability characterized by rMR <= 1+ at discharge and 12 months seem to be important factors for long-term outcomes, which has to be further confirmed by prospective randomized trials.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据