Objective Appropriate timing of mitral valve surgery in asymptomatic mitral regurgitation (MR) remains controversial. Peak mitral inflow velocity (peak E wave velocity) has been reported as a simple and easy predictor of quantitative MR severity; however, its prognostic significance in asymptomatic MR remains unclear. Therefore, we sought to investigate the prognostic impact of peak E wave velocity in asymptomatic MR.
Methods Among 529 consecutive patients with degenerative MR of grade 3+ (moderate to severe) or 4+ (severe), 188 asymptomatic patients in sinus rhythm without left ventricular (LV) dysfunction (end-systolic dimension ≥40 mm or ejection fraction <60%) or pulmonary hypertension were studied. Cardiovascular events were defined as a composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or events that indicated mitral surgery including congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, LV dysfunction or pulmonary hypertension.
Results Average peak E wave velocity was 1.05±0.26 m/s, and was significantly higher in grade 4+ than grade 3+ (1.20±0.28 vs 0.98±0.21 m/s, p<0.001). Peak E wave velocity was associated with quantitative MR severity, as well as clinical characteristics of advanced MR (higher brain natriuretic peptide, larger LV and left atrium, higher tricuspid regurgitation pressure gradient and dilated inferior vena cava). During a median follow-up of 4.3 years, 66 (35%) patients developed cardiovascular events. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis showed that peak E wave velocity was an independent predictor of cardiovascular events (adjusted HR 1.245 (95% CI 1.126 to 1.378) per 0.1 m/s, p<0.001).
Conclusions Peak E wave velocity was an independent predictor of cardiovascular events in asymptomatic degenerative MR with preserved LV function.
- mitral regurgitation
- valvular heart disease
- valve disease surgery
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Contributors Substantial contribution to conception and design: CO, AO, HK, YH, MA, HT, MA, TH, SY and CI. Collection of data: CO, AO, HK, YH, MA, HT, MA, TH and CI. Analysis and interpretation of data: CO, AO, HK, KN, TF, JK, SY and CI. All authors have given critical review of the article and approved the final version of the manuscript submitted.
Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent Not required.
Ethics approval Institutional Review Board of National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center (M29-061).
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.