Cardiovascular Institute, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Department of Internal Medicine, Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
JACC Heart Fail. 2017 Feb;5(2):81-88. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2016.09.014. Epub 2016 Dec 21.
This study hypothesized that the presence of residual mitral regurgitation (MR) post-continuous flow (CF) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation based on quantitative assessment would be negatively associated with right ventricular (RV) size and function and clinical outcomes.
MR is associated with elevated left atrial pressure, secondary pulmonary hypertension and RV dysfunction. Implantation of a LVAD leads to mechanical unloading of the left ventricle and generally improves MR. The clinical significance of residual MR in patients supported with CF LVADs is uncertain. Most studies evaluating the presence of MR in LVAD patients have utilized predominantly qualitative assessments of MR.
We retrospectively identified patients implanted with CF LVADs at our institution from 2007 to 2013 who had a pre-operative transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) within 3 months of LVAD implant and who had a post-operative TTE at least 1 month post-LVAD. MR was assessed quantitatively using the ratio of MR color jet area (CJA)/left atrial area (LAA) in apical views. We also compared quantitative RV metrics, hospitalizations, and mortality in patients with and without significant residual MR (defined as MR CJA/LAA >0.2) on post-implantation TTE.
Sixty-nine patients were included in this study. Post-LVAD implantation, 55 patients (80%) had mild or less MR (mean MR CJA/LAA 0.08) but 14 (20%) had significant residual MR (mean MR CJA/LAA 0.34). Patients with residual MR had significantly larger RV size (right ventricular end diastolic dimension 49 mm vs. 45 mm; p = 0.04) and worse RV function (tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion 10 mm vs. 12 mm; p = 0.02; and right ventricular fractional area change 29% vs. 34%; p = 0.02). Post-implantation pulmonary artery pressures were higher in patients with residual MR (pulmonary artery systolic 43 mm Hg vs. 35 mm Hg; p = 0.05). In patients with residual MR there was slightly greater posterior displacement of the mitral coaptation point on pre-operative TTE (28 mm vs. 26 mm; p = 0.16) but this difference was not significant. Time from LVAD implantation to first hospitalization was shorter in patients with residual MR (62 days vs. 103 days; p = 0.05) as was time from LVAD implantation to death (80 days vs. 421 days; p = 0.03).
Significant residual MR post-LVAD implantation assessed by a quantitative measure is associated with persistent pulmonary hypertension, worse RV function, and significantly shorter time to hospitalization and death. MR post-LVAD implantation may serve as a surrogate for adverse outcomes post-LVAD implantation.
本研究假设,基于定量评估,连续流(CF)左心室辅助装置(LVAD)植入术后存在残余二尖瓣反流(MR)与右心室(RV)大小和功能以及临床结局呈负相关。
MR 与左心房压力升高、继发性肺动脉高压和 RV 功能障碍有关。LVAD 的植入会导致左心室机械性卸载,通常会改善 MR。在接受 CF LVAD 支持的患者中,残余 MR 的临床意义尚不确定。评估 LVAD 患者 MR 存在的大多数研究主要使用 MR 的定性评估。
我们回顾性地确定了 2007 年至 2013 年在我们机构植入 CF LVAD 的患者,他们在 LVAD 植入前 3 个月内进行了经胸超声心动图(TTE)检查,并在 LVAD 植入后至少 1 个月进行了术后 TTE 检查。MR 采用心尖位 MR 彩色喷射面积(CJA)/左心房面积(LAA)比值进行定量评估。我们还比较了术后 TTE 显示有或无明显残余 MR(定义为 MR CJA/LAA>0.2)的患者的定量 RV 指标、住院和死亡率。
本研究共纳入 69 例患者。LVAD 植入后,55 例(80%)患者 MR 为轻度或更低(平均 MR CJA/LAA 0.08),但 14 例(20%)患者存在明显残余 MR(平均 MR CJA/LAA 0.34)。残余 MR 患者的 RV 大小明显更大(右心室舒张末期内径 49 毫米 vs. 45 毫米;p=0.04),RV 功能更差(三尖瓣环平面收缩期位移 10 毫米 vs. 12 毫米;p=0.02;和右心室分数面积变化 29% vs. 34%;p=0.02)。残余 MR 患者术后肺动脉压更高(肺动脉收缩压 43 毫米汞柱 vs. 35 毫米汞柱;p=0.05)。残余 MR 患者术前 TTE 显示二尖瓣瓣环后向移位稍大(28 毫米 vs. 26 毫米;p=0.16),但差异无统计学意义。残余 MR 患者从 LVAD 植入到首次住院的时间更短(62 天 vs. 103 天;p=0.05),从 LVAD 植入到死亡的时间也更短(80 天 vs. 421 天;p=0.03)。
通过定量测量评估,LVAD 植入术后存在明显残余 MR 与持续性肺动脉高压、RV 功能更差以及住院和死亡时间明显缩短有关。LVAD 植入术后的 MR 可能是 LVAD 植入术后不良结局的替代指标。