Short-term study of atrial shunt and improvement of functional mitral regurgitation.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study used an atrial septal shunt to compare the treatment progress and prognosis for patients with heart failure (HF) who have different ejection fractions. METHODS: Twenty HF patients with pulmonary hypertension, who required atrial septal shunt therapy, were included in this study. The patients underwent surgery between December 2012 and December 2020. They were divided into two groups based on their ejection fraction a group with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and a group with preserved ejection fraction(HFpEF) + mid-range ejection fraction (HfmrEF). Echocardiography was utilized to evaluate parameters such as left ventricular dimension (LVD), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV). Hemodynamic parameters were measured using cardiac catheterization. The patient's cardiac function was assessed using the six-minute walking test (6MWT), KCCQ score, NYHA classification, and the degree of functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Followed-up visits were conducted at 1, 3, and 6 months, and any adverse effects were recorded. RESULTS: The LVEF values were consistently higher in the HFpEF+HFmrEF group than HFrEF group at all periods (P < 0.05). Differences in LVD were observed between the two groups before the surgery. Statistically, significant differences were found at the preoperative stage, 1 month, and 3 months (P < 0.05, respectively). However, the LVEDV showed a significant difference between the two groups only at 3 months (P = 0.049). Notably, there were notable variations in LAPm, LAPs, and the pressure gradient between the LA-RA gradient at baeline, after implantation, and during the 6 months follow-up (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Following treatment, the HFpEF+HFmrEF group exhibited more significant improvements in echocardiographic and cardiac catheterization indices than the HFrEF group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups regarding the 6MWT and KCCQ scores. It is important to note that the findings of this study still require further investigation in a large sample size of patients.