↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic Impact of Residual Moderate Mitral Regurgitation Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Overview of attention for article published in Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular, January 2024
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
1 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prognostic Impact of Residual Moderate Mitral Regurgitation Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation
Published in
Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular, January 2024
DOI 10.21470/1678-9741-2023-0012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tomasz Stankowski, Sleiman Sebastian Aboul-Hassan, Mohammed Salem, Kristin Rochor, Soeren Schenk, Temirlan Erkenov, Farzaneh Seifi Zinab, Anja Muehle, Volker Herwig, Axel Harnath, Michel Pompeu Sá, Basel Ramlawi, Dirk Fritzsche, Bartłomiej Perek

Abstract

The impact of mitral regurgitation (MR) on valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (VIV-TAVI) in patients with failed bioprostheses remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of residual moderate MR following VIV-TAVI. We retrospectively analyzed 127 patients who underwent VIV-TAVI between March 2010 and November 2021. At least moderate MR was observed in 51.2% of patients before the procedure, and MR improved in 42.1% of all patients. Patients with postoperative severe MR, previous mitral valve intervention, and patients who died before postoperative echocardiography were excluded from further analyses. The remaining 114 subjects were divided into two groups according to the degree of postprocedural MR: none-mild MR (73.7%) or moderate MR (26.3%). Propensity score matching yielded 23 pairs for final comparison. No significant differences were found between groups before and after matching in early results. In the matched cohort, survival probabilities at one, three, and five years were 95.7% vs. 87.0%, 85.0% vs. 64.5%, and 85.0% vs. 29.0% in the none-mild MR group vs. moderate MR-group, respectively (log-rank P=0.035). Among survivors, patients with moderate MR had worse functional status according to New York Heart Association (NYHA) class at follow-up (P=0.006). MR is common in patients with failed aortic bioprostheses, and improvement in MR-status was observed in over 40% of patients following VIV-TAVI. Residual moderate MR after VIV-TAVI is not associated with worse early outcomes, however, it was associated with increased mortality at five years of follow-up and worse NYHA class among survivors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 1 Mendeley reader of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 1 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 1 100%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 100%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2023.
All research outputs
#22,963,239
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#284
of 366 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,720
of 347,634 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Revista Brasileira de Cirurgia Cardiovascular
#1
of 3 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 366 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.1. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,634 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them