Balogh Zsuzsanna, Mizukami Takuya, Bartunek Jozef, Collet Carlos, Beles Monika, Albano Marzia, Katbeh Asim, Casselman Filip, Vanderheyden Marc, Van Camp Guy, Van Praet Frank, Penicka Martin
Cardiovascular Center, OLV Clinic, 9300 Aalst, Belgium.
Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, OLV Clinic, 9300 Aalst, Belgium.
J Clin Med. 2020 Oct 26;9(11):3432. doi: 10.3390/jcm9113432.
Our objective was to describe the long-term effects of endoscopic mitral valve (MV) repair on outcome in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) and atrial functional mitral regurgitation (AFMR). In patients with HFpEF, even mild AFMR has been associated with poor outcome. The study population consisted of consecutive patients with HFpEF (left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50%, HFPEF score ≥ 5) and AFMR, who underwent isolated, minimally invasive endoscopic MV repair (MVRepair group) ( = 131) or remained on standard of care (StanCare group) ( = 139). Patients with coronary artery disease or organic mitral regurgitation (MR) were excluded. Patients were matched using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Endpoints were all-cause mortality and a composite of all-cause mortality and HFpEF readmissions. The median follow-up was 5.03 years (interquartile range (IQR) 2.6-7.9 years). In the MVRepair group, the perioperative, 30-day, 1-year, and 5-year mortality were 0, 1%, 1%, and 12%, respectively. Additionally, 13 (10%) patients were readmitted for worsening HFpEF, while 2 (1%) individuals underwent redo MV surgery for recurrent MR. MVRepair compared with StanCare showed 21-29% (Standard Error (SE) 6-8%) and 19-26% (SE 6-8%) absolute risk reduction of all-cause mortality and HFpEF readmissions, respectively (all < 0.05). MVRepair emerged as the strongest independent predictor of all-cause mortality (Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.16, 95% (Confidence Interval (CI) 0.07-0.34, < 0.001) and HFpEF readmissions (HR 0.21, 95% CI 0.09-0.51, < 0.001). At 5-year follow-up, in the MVRepair group, a total of 88% were alive and 80% were alive without readmission for HFpEF. We can conclude that endoscopic MV repair is associated with low perioperative mortality as well as high long-term efficacy, and appears to improve clinical outcome in patients with AFMR and HFpEF.
我们的目标是描述内镜下二尖瓣修复术对射血分数保留的心力衰竭(HFpEF)和心房功能性二尖瓣反流(AFMR)患者预后的长期影响。在HFpEF患者中,即使是轻度AFMR也与不良预后相关。研究人群包括连续的HFpEF(左心室射血分数(LVEF)≥50%,HFPEF评分≥5)和AFMR患者,他们接受了单纯的微创内镜二尖瓣修复术(MV修复组)(n = 131)或维持标准治疗(标准治疗组)(n = 139)。排除冠状动脉疾病或器质性二尖瓣反流(MR)患者。采用治疗权重的逆概率对患者进行匹配。终点指标为全因死亡率以及全因死亡率和HFpEF再入院率的综合指标。中位随访时间为5.03年(四分位间距(IQR)2.6 - 7.9年)。在MV修复组中,围手术期、30天、1年和5年死亡率分别为0、1%、1%和12%。此外,13例(10%)患者因HFpEF恶化再次入院,2例(1%)患者因复发性MR接受再次二尖瓣手术。与标准治疗组相比,MV修复组全因死亡率和HFpEF再入院率的绝对风险分别降低了21 - 29%(标准误(SE)6 - 8%)和19 - 26%(SE 6 - 8%)(均P < 0.05)。MV修复术成为全因死亡率(风险比(HR)0.16,95%置信区间(CI)0.07 - 0.34,P < 0.001)和HFpEF再入院率(HR 0.21,95%CI 0.09 - 0.51,P < 0.001)最强的独立预测因素。在5年随访时,MV修复组中,共有88%的患者存活,80%的患者存活且未因HFpEF再次入院。我们可以得出结论,内镜下二尖瓣修复术围手术期死亡率低,长期疗效高,似乎可改善AFMR和HFpEF患者的临床结局。