Abstract 20383: The Impact of Flow Measurement After Mitral Paravalvular Leak Closure and Survival

Le résumé fourni par la source

Introduction: Mitral paravalvular leak (PVL) occurs in 7-17% of patients after mitral valve surgery. The percutaneous closure of these defects has become a novel treatment to prevent repeat operations. Hypothesis: We hypothesize flow dynamics correlate with clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous mitral PVL closure. Methods: We retrospectively studied 148 patients who underwent percutaneous PVL closure between 2004 and 2014 at Mayo Clinic. We measured the continuous wave (CW) Doppler time velocity integral (TVI), E velocity (as a surrogate for V wave) across the mitral valve and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by transthoracic echocardiogram within 7 days before and after PVL closure. We identified patients as non-responders if there was moderate to severe residual mitral regurgitation. t-Test was used for continuous variables and Fisher exact test was used mortality. Results: Overall, the mean CW TVI was markedly reduced by PVL closure (93±14 vs. 58±5cm, p<0.02). The E velocity also decreased after closure (3.1±0.4 vs. 1.9±0.1m/sec, p<0.04). LVEF, however, was reduced after PVL closure (62%±2 vs. 53%±1.5, p<0.02). Among non-responders (34/148 patients), there was no significant difference between the CW and E velocity before and after the procedure (CW TVI: 96±16 vs. 83+13cm, E velocity: 2.5±0.5 vs. 2.3±0.3m/sec, p=NS). The estimated 5-year mortality of patients with no or mild residual mitral regurgitation was markedly lower compared to non-responders, 43% vs 71%, p<0.05. Conclusions: The flow dynamics across the mitral valve immediately after PVL closure may correlate with long term clinical outcomes. Real time assessment of flow by transesophageal echocardiogram can be used to guide the extent of PVL closure required to change the long term clinical outcomes. Further validation and prospective studies are required.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.