Journal of Chest Surgery

The Korean Society for Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery (대한심장혈관흉부외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Clinical Effect of Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients with Mitral Stenosis after Mitral Valve Replacement

  • Park, Kwon Jae (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine) ;
  • Woo, Jong Soo (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine) ;
  • Park, Jong Yoon (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jung, Jae Hwa (Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Dong-A University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2015.07.20
  • Accepted : 2016.05.19
  • Published : 2016.10.05
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: Mitral stenosis (MS) remains one of the important heart diseases. There are many factors that influence the clinical outcomes, and little is known about how left ventricular (LV) dysfunction clinically affects the prognosis of the patient with MS after mitral valve replacement (MVR). We reviewed our clinical experiences of MVR in patients with MS who had LV dysfunction. Methods: Between January 1991 and January 2013, 110 patients with MS who underwent MVR were analyzed and divided into two groups according to ejection fraction (EF). Group 1 ($EF{\leq}45%$) included 13 patients and group 2 (EF>45%) included 97 patients. Results: Thromboembolism occurred in 8 patients after MVR (group 1: n=3, 23.1%; group 2: n=5, 5.2%) and its incidence was significantly higher in group 1 than in group 2 (p=0.014). There were 3 deaths each in groups 1 and 2 during follow-up. The overall rate of cardiac-related death in group 1 was significantly higher than in group 2 (group 1: n=3, 23.1%; group 2: n=3, 3.1%; p=0.007). The cumulative survival rate at 1 and 15 years was 83.9% and 69.9% in group 1 and 97.9% and 96.3% in group 2 (p=0.004). The Cox regression analysis revealed that survival was significantly associated with postoperative stroke (p=0.011, odds ratio=10.304). Conclusion: This study identified postoperative stroke as an adverse prognostic factor in patients with MS after MVR, and a s more prevalent in patients with LV dysfunction. Postoperative stroke should be reduced to improve clinical outcomes for patients. Preventive care should be made in multiple ways, such as management of LV dysfunction, atrial fibrillation, and anticoagulation.

Keywords

References

  1. Ward C, Hancock BW. Extreme pulmonary hypertension caused by mitral valve disease. Natural history and results of surgery. Br Heart J 1975;37:74-8. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.37.1.74
  2. Rowe JC, Bland EF, Sprague HB, White PD. The course of mitral stenosis without surgery: ten- and twenty-year perspectives. Ann Intern Med 1960;52:741-9. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-52-4-741
  3. Olesen KH. The natural history of 271 patients with mitral stenosis under medical treatment. Br Heart J 1962;24: 349-57. https://doi.org/10.1136/hrt.24.3.349
  4. Klein AJ, Carroll JD. Left ventricular dysfunction and mitral stenosis. Heart Fail Clin 2006;2:443-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hfc.2006.09.006
  5. Wisenbaugh T, Essop R, Middlemost S, Skoularigis J, Sareli P. Excessive vasoconstriction in rheumatic mitral stenosis with modestly reduced ejection fraction. J Am Coll Cardiol 1992;20:1339-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0735-1097(92)90246-J
  6. Surdacki A, Legutko J, Turek P, Dudek D, Zmudka K, Dubiel JS. Determinants of depressed left ventricular ejection fraction in pure mitral stenosis with preserved sinus rhythm. J Heart Valve Dis 1996;5:1-9.
  7. Anter E, Jessup M, Callans DJ. Atrial fibrillation and heart failure: treatment considerations for a dual epidemic. Circulation 2009;119:2516-25. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.108.821306
  8. Albertsen IE, Rasmussen LH, Overvad TF, Graungaard T, Larsen TB, Lip GY. Risk of stroke or systemic embolism in atrial fibrillation patients treated with warfarin: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Stroke 2013;44:1329-36. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.000883
  9. Cox JL, Ad N, Palazzo T. Impact of the maze procedure on the stroke rate in patients with atrial fibrillation. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1999;118:833-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5223(99)70052-8
  10. Bando K, Kobayashi J, Sasako Y, Tagusari O, Niwaya K, Kitamura S. Effect of maze procedure in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing valve replacement. J Heart Valve Dis 2002;11:719-24.
  11. Emery RW, Krogh CC, Arom KV, et al. The St. Jude Medical cardiac valve prosthesis: a 25-year experience with single valve replacement. Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:776-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.08.047
  12. Potter DD, Sundt TM 3rd, Zehr KJ, et al. Risk of repeat mitral valve replacement for failed mitral valve prostheses. Ann Thorac Surg 2004;78:67-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2004.02.014
  13. Vohra HA, Whistance RN, Roubelakis A, et al. Outcome after redo-mitral valve replacement in adult patients: a 10-year single-centre experience. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 2012;14:575-9. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivs005
  14. Mazzucco A, Milano A, Mazzaro E, Bortolotti U. Reoperation in patients with a bioprosthesis in the mitral position: indications and early results. J Heart Valve Dis 1993; 2:646-8.
  15. Edwards FH, Peterson ED, Coombs LP, et al. Prediction of operative mortality after valve replacement surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001;37:885-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0735-1097(00)01202-X