Delgado, Victoria

Importance Primary mitral regurgitation (MR) is a prevalent valvular lesion. Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines include class I recommendations for intervention for severe primary MR at the onset of symptoms, significant left ventricular (LV) enlargement (end-systolic dimension ≥40 mm), or dysfunction (ejection fraction ≤60%), with a class IIA recommendation for mitral valve repair when performed at an experienced surgical center. Recent data suggest a survival penalty when waiting for class I surgical guideline indications, and novel markers of decompensation are under investigation. Observations Comprehensive assessment of MR severity using echocardiography is critical, and when warranted, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is complementary. Assessment of LV size and function, as well as serial changes in both, is crucial for determining timing of surgery. New-onset atrial fibrillation, left atrial enlargement, pulmonary hypertension, and exercise-induced changes in LV function should also be considered in borderline scenarios. The roles of LV volumes, global longitudinal strain, CMR-derived measures of myocardial dysfunction, and cardiac biomarkers are worthy of further investigation regarding consideration for early surgical intervention. Conclusions and Relevance A more refined approach incorporating assessment of extravalvular cardiac injury, novel imaging markers, and biomarkers is needed to optimize surgical timing in primary MR. Further research is warranted to validate these emerging parameters and refine guidelines to improve patient outcomes.

Abstract Aims Indications for surgery in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR) are increasingly liberal in all clinical guidelines but the role of secondary outcome determinants (left atrial volume index ≥60 mL/m2, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary artery systolic pressure ≥50 mmHg and moderate to severe tricuspid regurgitation) and their impact on post-operative outcome remain disputed. Whether these secondary outcome markers are just reflective of the DMR severity or intrinsically affect survival after DMR surgery is uncertain and may have critical importance in the management of patients with DMR. To address these gaps of knowledge the present study gathered a large cohort of patients with quantified DMR, accounted for the number of secondary outcome markers and examined their independent impact on survival after surgical correction of the DMR. Methods and results The Mitral Regurgitation International DAtabase-Quantitative registry includes patients with isolated DMR from centres across North America, Europe, and the Middle East. Patient enrolment extended from January 2003 to January 2020. All patients undergoing mitral valve surgery within 1 year of registry enrolment were selected. A total of 2276 patients [65 (55–73) years, 32% male] across five centres met study eligibility criteria. Over a median follow-up of 5.6 (3.6 to 8.7) years, 278 patients (12.2%) died. In a comprehensive multivariable Cox regression model adjusted for age, EuroSCORE II, symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LV ESD) and DMR severity, the number of secondary outcome determinants was independently associated with post-operative all-cause mortality, with adjusted hazard ratios of 1.56 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11–2.20, P = 0.011], 1.78 (95% CI: 1.23–2.58, P = 0.002) and 2.58 (95% CI: 1.73–3.83, P < 0.0001) for patients with one, two, and three or four secondary outcome determinants, respectively. A model incorporating the number of secondary outcome determinants demonstrated a higher C-index and was significantly more concordant with post-operative mortality than models incorporating traditional Class I indications alone [the presence of symptoms (P = 0.0003), or LVEF ≤60% (P = 0.006), or LV ESD ≥40 mm (P = 0.014)], while there was no significant difference in concordance observed compared with a model that incorporated the number of Class I indications for surgery combined (P = 0.71). Conclusion In this large cohort of patients treated surgically for DMR, the presence and number of secondary outcome determinants was independently associated with post-surgical survival and demonstrated better outcome discrimination than traditional Class I indications for surgery. Randomised controlled trials are needed to determine if patients with severe DMR who demonstrate a cardiac phenotype with an increasing number of secondary outcome determinants would benefit from earlier surgery.

Background: Mitral valve prolapse (MVP) is responsible for a considerable disease burden but is widely heterogeneous. The lack of a comprehensive prognostic instrument covering the entire MVP spectrum, encompassing the quantified consequent degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR), hinders clinical management and therapeutic trials. Methods: The new Mitral Regurgitation International Database Quantitative (MIDA-Q) registry enrolled 8187 consecutive patients (ages 63±16 years, 47% women, follow-up 5.5±3.3 years) first diagnosed with isolated MVP, without or with DMR quantified prospectively (measuring effective regurgitant orifice [ERO] and regurgitant volume) in routine practice of 5 tertiary care centers from North America, Europe, and the Middle East. The MIDA-Q score ranges from 0 to 15 by accumulating guideline-based risk factors and DMR severity. Long-term survival under medical management was the primary outcome end point. Results: MVP was associated with DMR absent/mild (ERO <20 mm 2 ) in 50%, moderate (ERO 20–40 mm 2 ) in 25%, and severe or higher (ERO ≥40 mm 2 ) in 25%, with mean ERO 24±24 mm 2 , regurgitant volume 37±35 mL. Median MIDA-Q score was 4 with a wide distribution (10%–90% range, 0–9). MIDA-Q score was higher in patients with EuroScore II ≥1% versus <1% (median, 7 versus 3; P < 0.0001) but with wide overlap (10%–90% range, 4–11 versus 0–7) and mediocre correlation ( R 2 0.18). Five-year survival under medical management was strongly associated with MIDA-Q score, 97±1% with score 0, 95±1% with score 1 to 2, 82±1% with score 3 to 4, 67±1% with score 5 to 6, 60±1% with score 7 to 8, 44±1% with score 9 to 10, 35±1% with score 11 to 12, and 5±4% with MIDA-Q score ≥13, with hazard ratio 1.31 [1.29–1.33] per 1-point increment. Excess mortality with higher MIDA-Q scores persisted after adjustment for age, sex, and EuroScore II (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13 [1.11–1.15] per 1-point increment). Subgroup analysis showed persistent association of MIDA-Q score with mortality in all possible subsets, in particular, with EuroScore II<1% (hazard ratio, 1.08 [1.02–1.14]) or ≥1% (hazard ratio, 1.11 [1.08–1.13]) and with no/mild DMR (hazard ratio, 1.14 [1.10–1.19]) or moderate/severe DMR (hazard ratio, 1.13 [1.10–1.16], all per 1-point increment with P <0.0001). Nested-model and bootstrapping analyses demonstrated incremental prognostic power of MIDA-Q score (all P <0.0001). Conclusions: This large, international cohort of isolated MVP, with prospective DMR quantification in routine practice, demonstrates the wide range of risk factor accumulation and considerable heterogeneity of outcomes after MVP diagnosis. The MIDA-Q score is strongly, independently, and incrementally associated with long-term survival after MVP diagnosis, irrespective of presentation, and is therefore a crucial prognostic instrument for risk stratification, clinical trials, and management of patients diagnosed with all forms of MVP.

Abstract Adverse cardiac remodelling is the main determinant of patient prognosis in degenerative valvular heart disease (VHD). However, to give an indication for valvular intervention, current guidelines include parameters of cardiac chamber dilatation or function which are subject to variability, do not directly reflect myocardial structural changes, and, more importantly, seem to be not sensitive enough in depicting early signs of myocardial dysfunction before irreversible myocardial damage has occurred. To avoid irreversible myocardial dysfunction, novel biomarkers are advocated to help refining indications for intervention and risk stratification. Advanced echocardiographic modalities, including strain analysis, and magnetic resonance imaging have shown to be promising in providing new tools to depict the important switch from adaptive to maladaptive myocardial changes in response to severe VHD. This review, therefore, summarizes the current available evidence on the role of these new imaging biomarkers in degenerative VHD, aiming at shifting the clinical perspective from a valve-centred to a myocardium-focused approach for patient management and therapeutic decision-making.

Abstract Aims The current definition of post ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) left ventricular (LV) remodelling is purely structural (LV dilatation) and does not consider LV function (ejection fraction, EF), even though it is known to be a predictor of long-term post-STEMI outcome. This study aimed to reclassify LV remodelling after STEMI by integrating LV dilatation and function (LVEF) and to investigate the prognostic implications. Methods and results Data from an ongoing registry of STEMI patients who were treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were retrospectively evaluated. Four distinct remodelling subgroups were identified: (i) no LV dilatation, no LVEF impairment,(ii) no LV dilatation but LVEF impairment, (iii) LV dilatation but no LVEF impairment, and (iv) LV dilatation and LVEF impairment. The impact of functional LV remodelling on outcomes was analysed. A total of 2346 patients were studied (mean age 60 ± 11 years, 76% men). During a median follow-up of 76 (interquartile range 52 to 107) months, 282 (12%) died, while the composite of death and heart failure hospitalization occurred in 305 (13%) patients. Those with LV remodelling and LVEF impairment had a significantly lower survival rate (P &lt; 0.001) and event-free survival rate (P &lt; 0.001) compared with other functional LV remodelling groups. Conclusions Employing a functional LV post-infarct remodelling classification has the potential to improve risk stratification beyond structural LV remodelling alone. Identification of patients with the worst prognosis by using a functional LV remodelling approach may allow institution of early preventative therapies.

Abstract This International Consensus Classification and Nomenclature for the congenital bicuspid aortic valve condition recognizes 3 types of bicuspid valves: 1. The fused type (right-left cusp fusion, right-non-coronary cusp fusion and left-non-coronary cusp fusion phenotypes); 2. The 2-sinus type (latero-lateral and antero-posterior phenotypes); and 3. The partial-fusion (forme fruste) type. The presence of raphe and the symmetry of the fused type phenotypes are critical aspects to describe. The International Consensus also recognizes 3 types of bicuspid valve-associated aortopathy: 1. The ascending phenotype; 2. The root phenotype; and 3. Extended phenotypes.