Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Original research
Haemodynamic determinants of improved aerobic capacity after tricuspid valve surgery in Ebstein anomaly
  1. Alexander Egbe,
  2. William Miranda,
  3. Heidi Connolly,
  4. Joseph Dearani
  1. Cardiovascular Medicine, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Alexander Egbe, Mayo Clinic Minnesota, Rochester, MN 55905, USA; cegbe2001{at}yahoo.com

Abstract

Background Although tricuspid valve surgery improves functional capacity in patients with Ebstein anomaly, it is not always associated with improvement in aerobic capacity. The purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of improved aerobic capacity after tricuspid valve surgery in adults with Ebstein anomaly with severe tricuspid regurgitation.

Methods Retrospective study of patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation due to Ebstein anomaly that had tricuspid valve surgery at Mayo Clinic Rochester (2000–2019) and had preoperative and postoperative cardiopulmonary exercise tests and echocardiograms. The patients were divided into aerobic capacity(+) and aerobic capacity(-) groups depending on whether they had postoperative improvement in %-predicted peak oxygen consumption (VO2).

Results Of 76 patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation due to Ebstein anomaly, 28 (37%) and 48 (63%) were in aerobic capacity(+) and aerobic capacity(-) groups, respectively. The average improvement in peak VO2 was 2.1±1.4 mL/kg/min and −0.9±0.4 mL/kg/min in the in aerobic capacity(+) and aerobic capacity(-) groups, respectively. Although both groups had similar severity of residual tricuspid regurgitation, the aerobic capacity(+) group had more postoperative improvement in right atrial (RA) function, left atrial (LA) function and left ventricular preload and stroke volume. Of the preoperative variables analysed, RA reservoir strain (relative risk 1.12; 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18); LA reservoir strain (relative risk 1.09; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.14) and LV stroke volume index (OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01 to 1.07) were predictors of postoperative improvement in peak VO2.

Conclusions One-third of patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation due to Ebstein anomaly had postoperative improvement in aerobic capacity, and atrial function indices were the best predictors of postoperative improvement in aerobic capacity. These data provide new insight into the haemodynamic determinants of exercise capacity and lay the foundation for further studies to determine whether postoperative improvement in aerobic capacity translates to improved long-term survival, and whether timing of tricuspid valve surgery based on these echocardiographic indices will improve long-term outcomes.

  • congenital heart disease surgery

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request. egbe.alexander@mayo.edu.

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

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.

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request. egbe.alexander@mayo.edu.

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors AE was responsible for the planning, conduct, reporting, drafting and critical review of the manuscript and takes responsibility for the overall content. JD, WM and HC were responsible for the drafting, critical review and final approval of the manuscript.

  • Funding Dr Egbe is supported by National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) grant K23 HL141448. The MACHD Registry is supported by the Al-Bahar Research grant.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.