Novel 3-dimensional effective regurgitation orifice area quantification serves as a reliable tool to identify severe mitral valve regurgitation.

A precise quantification of mitral regurgitation (MR) severity is essential for treatment and outcome of patients with MR. 3D echocardiography facilitates estimation of MR but selection of patients with necessity of invasive treatment remains challenging. We investigate effective regurgitation orifice area (EROA) quantification by 3D compared to 2D echocardiography in patients with MR and highlight the improved discrimination of MR severity. We consecutively enrolled fifty patients with primary or secondary and at least moderate MR undergoing 2D and 3D colour Doppler echocardiography prior to transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER). Improved accuracy of MR grading using 3D vena contracta area (VCA) as an estimate of EROA was compared to 2D proximal isovelocity surface area (PISA) quantification method and a multiparameter reference standard. Quantification of EROA remarkably varies between 2D and 3D echocardiography and the discrimination between moderate and severe MR was significantly (p = 0.001) different using 2D PISA or 3D VCA, respectively. 3D VCA correlated significantly (r = 0.501, p < 0.001) better with the pre-defined MR severity. We detected crucial differences in the correct identification of severe MR between 2D and 3D techniques, thus 2D PISA significantly (p < 0.0001) underestimates EROA due to clinical and morphological parameters. The assessment of 3D VCA resulted in improved diagnostic accuracy.

Impact of pulmonary hypertension on outcomes after TEER in patients suffering from mitral regurgitation.

AIM: Data on associations of invasively determined hemodynamic parameters with procedural success and outcomes in patients suffering from mitral regurgitation (MR) undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair of the mitral valve (M-TEER) is limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled 239 patients with symptomatic MR of grade 2 + , who received M-TEER. All patients underwent extensive pre-interventional invasive hemodynamic measurements via right heart catheterization (mean pulmonary arterial pressure (mPAP), systolic- (PAPsys) and diastolic pulmonary arterial pressure (PAPdia), pulmonary arterial wedge pressure (PAWP), a-wave, v-wave, pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), transpulmonary pressure gradient (TPG), cardiac index (CI), stroke volume index (SVI)). mPAP and PAWP at baseline were neither associated with procedural success, immediate reduction of MR, nor residual MR after 6 months of follow-up. The composite outcome (All-cause mortality (ACM) and/or heart failure induced rehospitalization (HFH)) and HFH differed significantly after M-TEER when stratified according to mPAP, PAWP, PAPdia, a-wave and v-wave. ACM was not associated with the afore mentioned parameters. Neither PVR, TPG, CI nor SVI were associated with the composite outcome and HFH, respectively. In multivariable analyses, PAWP was independently associated with the composite outcome and HFH. PVR and SVI were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSION: PAWP at baseline was significantly and independently associated with HFH and might serve as a valuable parameter for identifying patients at high risk for HFH after M-TEER. ACM and procedural success were not affected by pulmonary arterial pressure before M-TEER. We suggest that the post-capillary component of PH serves as the driving force behind the risk of HFH.

Improved Knee Function with Customized vs. Off-the-Shelf TKA Implants-Results of a Single-Surgeon, Single-Center, Single-Blinded Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have been able to show certain benefits of Customized, Individually Made (CIM) compared to Off-the-Shelf (OTS) total knee arthroplasties (TKAs), but evidence is still lacking regarding the benefits of these implant systems. This study aimed to find differences in scores and functional outcome by comparing CIM and OTS implants, using Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and functional tests for activities of daily living in a single-surgeon setup. METHODS: A total of 48 patients (16 CIM vs. 32 OTS) were consecutively enrolled and blindly examined. Functional testing was performed using four timed functional tests (TUG, WALK, TUDS, and BBS) and the VAS for pain. The Aggregated Locomotor Function (ALF) score was then calculated based on the addition of the average times of the three functional tests. RESULTS: The CIM group showed significantly faster times in all functional tests and significantly better ALF scores. There were remarkable differences in the assessment of maximum pain sensation between the two groups, with superiority in the CIM group. The PROMs analysis revealed a higher proportion of excellent and good ratings for the items objective and function (KSS) in the CIM group. CONCLUSION: The study showed that time-limited activities of daily living (ADLs) can be completed significantly faster with a CIM prosthesis and that a significantly higher percentage in this group reports freedom from pain during certain loads. Partial aspects of the PROM scores are also better in this group; however, this superiority could not be shown with regard to most PROM scores collected in this study.

Thromboprophylaxis in Patients with COVID-19: Systematic Review of National and International Clinical Guidance Reports.

BACKGROUND: Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) is common among patients with severe Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). Anticoagulation in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been associated with survival benefit; however, the optimal thromboprophylaxis strategy has not yet been defined. OBJECTIVE: To identify published guidance reports by national and international societies regarding thromboprophylaxis strategies in COVID-19 patients in different settings (outpatients, hospitalized, post-discharge). METHODS: A systematic review of the literature (Pubmed/EMBASE) was conducted independently by two investigators. RESULTS: Among 1942 initially identified articles, 33 guidance documents were included: 20 published by national and 13 by international societies. These documents provide recommendations mainly for hospitalized (97% of reports) and post-discharge (75%) COVID-19 patients, and less so for outpatients (34%). Thrombotic and bleeding risk stratification prior to any treatment decision is the cornerstone of all suggested thromboprophylaxis strategies; 81% of the documents recommend thromboprophylaxis for all hospitalized patients with a prophylactic dosage of low molecular weight heparin irrespective of VTE risk. Intermediate or therapeutic dose intensity is recommended in high VTE risk patients by 56% and 28% of documents, respectively. Mechanical thromboprophylaxis is suggested in case of high bleeding risk or contraindication to pharmacological thromboprophylaxis (59% of documents). Extended pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is recommended for patients with high VTE risk after hospital discharge (63% of documents). For non-hospitalized outpatients, 28% of documents recommend pharmacological thromboprophylaxis for high VTE risk. CONCLUSION: The current guidance identifies thromboprophylaxis in COVID-19 patients, especially during hospitalization, as of major importance for the prevention of VTE. Recommendations are derived from limited evidence from observational studies.