Risk factors for residual mitral regurgitation after aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and moderate mitral regurgitation
- 47 Downloads
While it was reported that patients with residual moderate mitral regurgitation (MR) after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) had a poorer prognosis than those without it, the risk factors for residual MR have not been fully elucidated. The aim of the study was to evaluate risk factors for residual MR after SAVR.
Of the 222 patients who underwent isolated SAVR from 2001 to 2018, 33 (11 men; age: 74 ± 7 years) had functional moderate MR before surgery. The risk factors for residual MR were evaluated by comparing patients with residual moderate MR (n = 11, 33%) with those who exhibited improved post-surgery MR (n = 22, 67%).
The left atrial diameter was significantly larger in the residual MR group (51 ± 7 mm) than in the improved MR group (46 ± 5 mm; P = 0.049). The mean pressure gradient at the aortic valve was significantly smaller in the residual MR group (52 ± 18 mmHg) than in the improved MR group (69 ± 22 mmHg; P = 0.043). A ratio of left atrial diameter (mm) and mean aortic valve pressure gradient (mmHg) greater than 0.9 predicted residual MR with a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 74% (area under the ROC curve: 0.779; P = 0.015).
In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and moderate MR, a high ratio of preoperative left atrial diameter and mean aortic valve pressure gradient would be a parameter predicting residual moderate MR post-SAVR.
KeywordsAortic valve stenosis Mitral regurgitation
We would like to thank Editage (http://www.editage.jp) for English language editing.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
- 4.Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, Guyton RA, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63:2438–88.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar