Kimura Yuki, Okumura Takahiro, Kazama Shingo, Shibata Naoki, Oishi Hideo, Arao Yoshihito, Kuwayama Tasuku, Kato Hiroo, Yamaguchi Shogo, Hiraiwa Hiroaki, Kondo Toru, Morimoto Ryota, Mutsuga Masato, Fujimoto Kazuro, Usui Akihiko, Murohara Toyoaki
Department of Cardiology, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Department of Cardiac Surgery, Nagoya University Graduate School of Medicine, Nagoya, Japan.
Int J Artif Organs. 2021 Feb;44(2):101-109. doi: 10.1177/0391398820942526. Epub 2020 Jul 17.
Patients with advanced heart failure often have functional mitral regurgitation. Left ventricular assist device implantation improves functional mitral regurgitation through left ventricular unloading. However, residual mitral regurgitation after left ventricular assist device implantation leads to adverse outcomes, and whether patients need concomitant mitral valve surgery is not fully elucidated. Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the predictors of residual mitral regurgitation and to describe the temporal changes in residual mitral regurgitation. We retrospectively enrolled 15 patients with implantable continuous-flow left ventricular assist device, who had significant mitral regurgitation on echocardiography before left ventricular assist device implantation. Three patients had residual mitral regurgitation (mitral regurgitation color jet area/left atrial area >0.2) 1 month after left ventricular assist device implantation. We investigated factors associated with residual mitral regurgitation and compared patients with or without residual mitral regurgitation. On univariate analysis, mitral valve tethering area and mitral regurgitation vena contracta before left ventricular assist device implantation were significantly associated with residual mitral regurgitation (odds ratio, 1.03; = 0.036 and odds ratio, 10.45; = 0.0087). One month after left ventricular assist device implantation, the mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and pulmonary artery pressure were higher in patients with residual mitral regurgitation (pulmonary capillary wedge pressure: 11.3 ± 3.5 vs 6.4 ± 3.4 mmHg, = 0.029 and pulmonary artery pressure: 21.3 ± 4.0 vs 15.9 ± 3.3 mmHg, = 0.023). However, the mitral regurgitation grading and hemodynamics were not significantly different 6 months after left ventricular assist device implantation. The hospitalization-free survival was not significantly different between the two groups. Mitral valve tethering area and mitral regurgitation vena contracta were predictors of residual mitral regurgitation. Residual mitral regurgitation improved until 6 months after left ventricular assist device implantation and might not affect the prognosis.
晚期心力衰竭患者常伴有功能性二尖瓣反流。植入左心室辅助装置可通过减轻左心室负荷来改善功能性二尖瓣反流。然而,左心室辅助装置植入后残留的二尖瓣反流会导致不良后果,且患者是否需要同期进行二尖瓣手术尚未完全阐明。因此,本研究旨在阐明残留二尖瓣反流的预测因素,并描述残留二尖瓣反流的时间变化。我们回顾性纳入了15例植入可植入式连续血流左心室辅助装置的患者,这些患者在左心室辅助装置植入前经超声心动图检查显示有明显的二尖瓣反流。3例患者在左心室辅助装置植入1个月后出现残留二尖瓣反流(二尖瓣反流彩色血流束面积/左心房面积>0.2)。我们研究了与残留二尖瓣反流相关的因素,并比较了有或无残留二尖瓣反流的患者。单因素分析显示,左心室辅助装置植入前的二尖瓣瓣叶受限面积和二尖瓣反流的缩流颈与残留二尖瓣反流显著相关(比值比,1.03;P = 0.036和比值比,10.45;P = 0.0087)。左心室辅助装置植入1个月后,有残留二尖瓣反流的患者平均肺毛细血管楔压和肺动脉压较高(肺毛细血管楔压:11.3±3.5 vs 6.4±3.4 mmHg,P = 0.029;肺动脉压:21.3±4.0 vs 15.9±3.3 mmHg,P = 0.023)。然而,左心室辅助装置植入6个月后,二尖瓣反流分级和血流动力学无显著差异。两组的无住院生存率无显著差异。二尖瓣瓣叶受限面积和二尖瓣反流的缩流颈是残留二尖瓣反流的预测因素。残留二尖瓣反流在左心室辅助装置植入后6个月内有所改善,可能不影响预后。