Diastolic versus Systolic Left Ventricular Dysfunction as Independent Predictors for Unfavorable Postoperative Evolution in Patients with Aortic Regurgitation Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement

Background and Objectives: Chronic severe aortic valve disease is associated with important changes in left ventricle (LV) performance associated with eccentric or concentric LV hypertrophy. We aimed to assess the immediate prognostic implications of the type of the LV diastolic filling pattern (LVDFP) compared with LV systolic performance in patients with severe aortic regurgitation (AR) undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) and to define the independent echographic predictors for the immediate and long-term prognoses. Materials and Methods: We performed a prospective study enrolling 332 AR patients undergoing AVR, divided into two groups: Group A—201 pts with normal LV systolic function, divided into two subgroups (A1: 129 pts with a nonrestrictive LVDFP and A2: 72 pts with restrictive LVDFP), and Group B—131 pts with LV systolic dysfunction (LV ejection fraction LVEF < 50%), divided into two subgroups (B1: 83 pts with a nonrestrictive LVDFP and B2: 48 pts with restrictive LVDFP). Results: The early postoperative mortality rate was higher in patients with a restrictive LVDFP (11.12% in A2 and 12.5% in B2) compared with normal LV filling (2.32% in A1 and 7.63% in B1, p < 0.0001), regardless of the LVEF. The restrictive LVDFP—defined by at least one of the following echographic parameters: an E/A > 2 with an E wave deceleration time (EDt) < 100 ms; an isovolumetric relaxation time (IVRT) < 60 ms; or an S/D ratio < 1 in the pulmonary vein flow—was an independent predictor for early postoperative mortality, increasing the relative risk by 8.2-fold. Other independent factors associated with early poor prognosis were an LV end-systolic diameter (LVESD) > 58 mm, an age > 75 years, and the presence of comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-COPD or diabetes mellitus). On a medium-term, an unfavorable evolution was associated with: an age > 75 years (RR = 8.1), an LV end-systolic volume (LVESV) > 95 cm3 (RR = 6.7), a restrictive LVDFP (RR = 9.8, p < 0.0002), and pulmonary hypertension (RR = 8.2). Conclusions: The presence of a restrictive LVDFP in patients with AR undergoing AVR is associated with both increased early and medium-term mortality rates. The LV diastolic function is a more reliable parameter for prognosis than LV systolic performance (RR 9.2 versus 2.1). Other independent predictors for increased early postoperative mortality rate were: an age > 75 years, an LVESD > 58 mm, and comorbidities (diabetes mellitus, COPD), and for unfavorable evolution at 2 years postoperatively: an age > 75 years, an LVESV > 95 cm3, and severe pulmonary hypertension

Challenges for Management of Dilated Cardiomyopathy during COVID-19 Pandemic—A Telemedicine Application

Background and Objectives: The 2019 coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19) represented a significant challenge for the medical community. The first aim of this study was to examine the COVID-19 impact on the follow-up of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and to establish the advantages of multiparametric home monitoring. Also, we tried to establish the main prognostic predictors at 2-years follow-up and the value of LV diastolic filling pattern (LVDFP) in increasing mortality and morbidity. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective study of 142 patients with DCM assessed by in-patient visit in the pre-pandemic period and hybrid (face-to-face, online consultation and telemedicine home monitoring with a dedicated application) during the pandemic period. The statistical analysis compared the strategy used in the pre-pandemic with management during the pandemic, in terms of clinical assessment, hospitalizations/emergency room visits due to HF exacerbation and total mortality. Results: We did not observe significant changes in blood pressure (BP), heart rate (FC), weight and symptoms or an increased rate of adverse drug events between the two periods. We successfully titrated HF medications with close monitoring of HF decompensations, which were similar in number, but were mostly managed at home during the pandemic. There was also no statistically significant difference in emergency room visits due to severe decompensated HF. Mortality in the first and second year of follow-up was between 12.0 and 13%, similar in the pre-pandemic and pandemic periods, but significantly higher in patients with restrictive LVDFP. Clinical improvement or stability after 2 years was more frequent in patients with nonrestrictive LVDFP. The main prognostic predictors at 1 and 2-years follow-up were: the restrictive LVDFP, significantly dilated LV, comorbidities (DM, COPD), older age, associated severe mitral regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension. Conclusions: The pandemic restrictions determined a marked decrease of the healthcare use, but no significant change in the clinical status of DCM patients under multiparametric home monitoring. At 2-years follow-up, the presence of the restrictive LVDFP was associated with an increased risk of death and with a worse clinical status in DCM patients

Challenges Regarding the Value of Routine Perioperative Transesophageal Echocardiography in Mitral Valve Surgery

Background and Objectives: Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is considered an indispensable tool for perioperative evaluation in mitral valve (MV) surgery. TEE is routinely performed by anesthesiologists competent in TEE; however, in certain situations, the expertise of a senior cardiologist specializing in TEE is required, which incurs additional costs. The purpose of this study is to determine the indications for specialized perioperative TEE based on its utility and the correlation between intraoperative TEE diagnoses and surgical findings, compared with routine TEE performed by an anesthesiologist. Materials and Methods: We conducted a three-year prospective study involving 499 patients with MV disease undergoing cardiac surgery. Patients underwent intraoperative and early postoperative TEE and at least one other perioperative echocardiographic evaluation. A computer application was dedicated to calculating the utility of each type of specialized TEE indication depending on the type of MV disease and surgical intervention. Results: The indications for performing specialized perioperative TEE identified in our study can be categorized into three groups: standard, relative, and uncertain. Standard indications for specialized intraoperative TEE included establishing the mechanism and severity of MR (mitral regurgitation), guiding MV valvuloplasty, diagnosing associated valvular lesions post MVR (mitral valve replacement), routine evaluations in triple-valve replacements, and identifying the causes of acute, intraoperative, life-threatening hemodynamic dysfunction. Early postoperative specialized TEE in the intensive care unit (ICU) is indicated for the suspicion of pericardial or pleural effusions, establishing the etiology of acute hemodynamic dysfunction, and assessing the severity of residual MR post valvuloplasty. Conclusions: Perioperative TEE in MV surgery can generally be performed by a trained anesthesiologist for standard measurements and evaluations. In certain cases, however, a specialized TEE examination by a trained senior cardiologist is necessary, as it is indirectly associated with a decrease in postoperative complications and early postoperative mortality rates, as well as an improvement in immediate and long-term prognoses. Also, for standard indications, the correlation between surgical and TEE diagnoses was superior when specialized TEE was used