Jonik Szymon, Marchel Michał, Pędzich-Placha Ewa, Pietrasik Arkadiusz, Rdzanek Adam, Huczek Zenon, Kochman Janusz, Budnik Monika, Piątkowski Radosław, Scisło Piotr, Kochanowski Janusz, Czub Paweł, Wilimski Radosław, Hendzel Piotr, Grabowski Marcin, Filipiak Krzysztof J, Opolski Grzegorz, Mazurek Tomasz
1st Department of Cardiology, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Department of Cardiac Surgery, Medical University of Warsaw, Poland.
Cardiol J. 2024;31(1):62-71. doi: 10.5603/CJ.a2022.0011. Epub 2022 Mar 14.
This study was purposed to investigate which treatment strategy was associated with the most favourable prognosis for patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) following Heart Team (HT)-decisions implementation.
In this retrospective study, long-term outcomes of patients with severe MR qualified after HT discussion to: optimal medical treatment (OMT) alone, OMT and MitraClip (MC) procedure or OMT and mitral valve replacement (MVR) were evaluated. The primary endpoint was defined as cardiovascular (CV) death and the secondary endpoints included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarctions (MI), strokes, hospitalizations for heart failure exacerbation and CV events during a mean (standard deviation [SD]) follow-up of 29 (15) months.
From 2016 to 2019, 176 HT meetings were held and a total of 157 participants (mean age [SD] = 71.0 [9.2], 63.7% male) with severe MR and completely implemented HT decisions (OMT, MC or MVR for 53, 58 and 46 patients, respectively) were included into final analysis. Comparing OMT, MC and MVR groups statistically significant differences between the implemented procedures and occurrence of primary and secondary endpoints with the most frequent in OMT-group were observed (p < 0.05). However, for interventional strategy MC was non-inferior to MVR for all endpoints (p > 0.05). General health status assessed at the end of follow-up were significantly the lowest for MVR, then for MC and the highest for OMT-group (p < 0.01).
In the present study it was demonstrated that after careful HT evaluation of patients with severe MR at high risk of surgery, percutaneous strategy (MC) can be considered as equivalent to surgical treatment (MVR) with non-inferior outcomes.
本研究旨在探讨在实施心脏团队(HT)决策后,哪种治疗策略与重度二尖瓣反流(MR)患者的最佳预后相关。
在这项回顾性研究中,评估了经HT讨论后符合条件的重度MR患者接受单纯最佳药物治疗(OMT)、OMT联合MitraClip(MC)手术或OMT联合二尖瓣置换术(MVR)的长期预后。主要终点定义为心血管(CV)死亡,次要终点包括全因死亡率、心肌梗死(MI)、中风、因心力衰竭加重住院以及在平均(标准差[SD])29(15)个月的随访期间的CV事件。
2016年至2019年,共召开了176次HT会议,最终分析纳入了157名重度MR患者(平均年龄[SD]=71.0[9.2],63.7%为男性),他们均完全实施了HT决策(分别有53、58和46例患者接受OMT、MC或MVR)。比较OMT、MC和MVR组,观察到实施的手术与主要和次要终点的发生之间存在统计学显著差异,OMT组最为常见(p<0.05)。然而,对于所有终点,介入策略MC不劣于MVR(p>0.05)。随访结束时评估的总体健康状况,MVR组显著最低,其次是MC组,OMT组最高(p<0.01)。
在本研究中表明,在对手术高风险的重度MR患者进行仔细的HT评估后,经皮策略(MC)可被视为与手术治疗(MVR)等效,预后不劣。