HIT Poster session 3Transcatheter procedures (TAVI/MitralClip)P937Comparison between 3d transesophageal echocardiography and multislice computed tomography for the aortic annulus sizing in tavi patients: implication for prosthesis sizingP938Left ventricular remodelling in chronic mitral regurgitation: from geometry to mechanics by speckle tracing imageP939Direct TAVI of a self-expanding bioprosthesis: long-term clinical outcomes.P940Prognostic value of coronary flow reserve in the culprit artery following previous myocardial infarctionP941Both MitraClip and heartport surgery prevent progressive left ventricular remodeling in very severe systolic heart failureP942Predictors for the development of microvascular obstruction in patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention.P943Usefulness of exercise stress echocardiography in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic patients with chronic degenerative mitral regurgitationP944Left ventricular myo

Le résumé fourni par la source

Background: The effect of aortic valve repair (AVr) on left ventricular (LV) myocardial deformation for patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) have not been compared with aortic valve replacement (AVR).We aimed to evaluate late changes in LV myocardial systolic deformation in patients with chronic AR and preserved LV ejection fraction (EF) who underwent AVr and in patients in whom surgical repair techniques were not feasible and who were treated with surgical AVR. Methods: Middle agedmenwith moderate or severe chronicARwith or without aortic root pathology undergoing AVr (n=7) or AVR (n=8) were studied preoperatively and at 6, 12 months after surgery using conventional and 2D speckle tracking echocardiography. Measurements of LV end-diastolic (LVEDD), end-systolic (LVESD) dimensions and volumes respectively, LV EF and LV longitudinal, circumferential, radial global peak systolic strain (GPSS), global systolic strain rate (GSSr), global apical and basal rotation were performed by off-line analysis. Results: The operation caused decreases in LV dimensions and volumes in both groups, but significantly in AVR group (LVEDD preoperative 61+5,71mm, postoperative at 6 months 53,75+3,2mm, at 12 months 55,5+3,31mm, p,0,05, LVEDV 172,0+48,8ml, 101,75+20,85ml, 104,0+11,91ml resp., p,0,05, LVESD 41,8+5,58mm, 33,12+ 2,52mm, 35,25+5,56mm resp., p,0,05, LVESV 73,0+20,14ml, 42,25+6,23ml, 44,25+12,5ml, p,0,05; in AVr group LVEDD 59,67+7,17mm, 52,5+3,1mm, 53,5+ 4,32mm resp., p.0,05, LVEDV 180,83+72,6ml, 123,83+28,18ml, 123,67+31,82ml resp., p.0,05, LVESD 40,0+7,84mm, 33,83+4,7mm, 33,0+4,42mm resp., p.0,05, LVESV 72,33+38,34ml, 43,17+10,34ml, 46,83+15,58ml, p.0,05). LV EF in both groups preoperatively and postoperatively during the study was in normal ranges. Circumferential GPSS and longitudinal GSSr improved significantly only in AVr group (-19,26+ 1,74%, -20,65+1,87%, -23,38+2,02% and -1,1+0,13 1/s, -1,13+0,1 1/s, -1,22+0,1 1/ s re

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