Functional mitral regurgitation combined with increased early diastolic transmitral velocity to early mitral annulus diastolic velocity ratio is associated with a poor prognosis in patients with shock.
10.1097/CM9.0000000000001756
- Author:
Ran ZHOU
1
;
Tongjuan ZOU
1
;
Wanhong YIN
1
;
Xiaoting WANG
2
;
Yan KANG
1
Author Information
1. Department of Critical Care Medicine, West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine, Sichuan University, Chengdu, Sichuan 610041, China.
2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100730, China.
- Collective Name:Chinese Critical Ultrasound Study Group (CCUSG)
- Publication Type:Observational Study
- MeSH:
Humans;
Mitral Valve/diagnostic imaging*;
Mitral Valve Insufficiency/diagnostic imaging*;
Prognosis;
Retrospective Studies;
Shock
- From:
Chinese Medical Journal
2021;134(19):2299-2305
- CountryChina
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND:Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is common in critically ill patients and may cause left atrial (LA) pressure elevation. This study aims to explore the prognostic impact of synergistic LA pressure elevation and FMR in patients with shock.
METHODS:We retrospectively screened 130 consecutive patients of 175 patients with shock from April 2016 to June 2017. The incidence and impact of FMR and early diastolic transmitral velocity to early mitral annulus diastolic velocity ratio (E/e') ≥ 4 within 6 h of shock on the prognosis of patients were evaluated. Finally, the synergistic effect of FMR and E/e' were assessed by combination, grouping, and trend analyses.
RESULTS:Forty-four patients (33.8%) had FMR, and 15 patients (11.5%) had E/e' elevation. A multivariate analysis revealed FMR and E/e' as independent correlated factors for 28-day mortality (P = 0.043 and 0.028, respectively). The Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed a significant difference in survival between patients with and without FMR (χ2 = 7.672, P = 0.006) and between the E/e' ≥ 14 and E/e' < 14 groups (χ2 = 19.351, P < 0.010). Twenty-eight-day mortality was significantly different among the four groups (χ2 = 30.141, P < 0.010). The risk of 28-day mortality was significantly higher in group 4 (E/e' ≥ 14 with FMR) compared with groups 1 (E/e' < 14 without FMR) and 2 (E/e' < 14 with FMR) (P = 0.001 and 0.046, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS:Patients with shock can be identified by the presence of FMR. FMR and E/e' are independent risk factors for a poor prognosis in these patients, and prognosis is worst when FMR and E/e' ≥ 14 are present. It may be possible to improve prognosis by reducing LA pressure and E/e'.
TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03082326.
