Immediate and long-term outcome of multiple percutaneous interventions in patients with rheumatic valvular stenosis.

AIMS: We sought to explore the immediate and long-term outcome of combined percutaneous valvuloplasty of the mitral and/or aortic and/or tricuspid valves in a series of patients with rheumatic valvular stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 11 patients (three underwent percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty [PMV], percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty [PAV] and percutaneous tricuspid valvuloplasty [PTV], six underwent PMV and PAV, and two underwent PMV and PTV) were enrolled. PMV was performed by the standard double balloon technique. PAV was always performed after PMV, employing the retrograde approach in eight patients and the antegrade approach in one patient. PTV was performed by the double balloon technique. Echocardiographic assessment was performed before and after the procedures. Follow-up was performed in all patients for a period that ranged from 12 and up to 60 months. PMV was successful in 10 out of 11 cases (91%); PAV was successful in all nine procedures (100%), while PTV was successful in four out of five cases (80%). At long-term follow-up, one case of restenosis occurred following PMV (9%), two following PTV (40%), and no restenosis occurred following PAV. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous balloon dilatation of rheumatic valvular stenosis is feasible with fairly adequate immediate and long-term outcome.

Percutaneous mitral valvotomy versus closed surgical commissurotomy. Up to 15 years of follow-up of a prospective randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Immediate and intermediate term results of percutaneous mitral valvotomy (PMV) are comparable to closed surgical commissurotomy (CSC). We aimed at exploring this relation in the long term. METHODS: Previously, we randomized 40 consecutive patients with moderate to severe mitral stenosis [defined as mitral valve area (MVA) less than 1.5 cm²] to undergo either PMV (PMV group = 20 patients) or CSC (CSC group = 20 patients). For all patients, full echocardiographic assessment was performed before the procedure/operation. Patients assigned to PMV underwent the double balloon technique. Echocardiographic assessment was done following both procedures before discharge and repeated 1 and 6 months later. Echocardiographic follow-up was performed, thereafter, on a yearly basis for up to 15 years, with a mean follow-up period of 99 ± 12 months. RESULTS: Immediate echocardiographic results showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding the final MVA or mean diastolic gradient across the mitral valve. Two patients dropped out from the CSC group and one from the PMV group. MVA was 1.8 ± 0.3 cm² versus 1.8 ± 0.4 cm² (p > 0.05) and mean diastolic pressure gradient across the mitral valve was 7 ± 4 mmHg versus 6.6 ± 4 mmHg (p > 0.05) in the PMV and CSC groups, respectively. Mitral restenosis occurred in 5 (26.3%) patients in the PMV group versus 5 (27.8%) patients in the CSC group (p > 0.05). Kaplan-Meier curves for restenosis-free survival showed no difference between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: PMV achieves comparable results to CSC both in the short and long term.