AHA: MR Flashcards
bp v mech
class 1 recommendation(s) for mitral valve choice
- shared decision-making (1)
- bp if warfarin contraindicated (1)
“For patients who require heart valve replacement, the choice of prosthetic valve should be based on a shared decision-making process that accounts for the patient’s values and preferences and includes discussion of the indications for and risks of anticoagulant therapy and the potential need for and risks associated with valve reintervention.”
“For patients of any age requiring valve replacement for whom anticoagulant therapy is contraindicated, cannot be managed appropriately, or is not desired, a bioprosthetic valve is recommended.”
bp v mech
class 1 recommendation(s) for mitral valve choice
(2)
- shared decision-making (1)
- bp if warfarin contraindicated (1)
“For patients who require heart valve replacement, the choice of prosthetic valve should be based on a shared decision-making process that accounts for the patient’s values and preferences and includes discussion of the indications for and risks of anticoagulant therapy and the potential need for and risks associated with valve reintervention.”
“For patients of any age requiring valve replacement for whom anticoagulant therapy is contraindicated, cannot be managed appropriately, or is not desired, a bioprosthetic valve is recommended.”
bp v mech
age-based recommendation(s) for mitral valve choice
- <65yo = mech (2a)
- ≥65yo = bp (2a)
assuming no contraindication to warfarin
“For patients <65 years of age who have an indication for MVR, do not have a contraindication to anticoagulation, and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a mechanical prosthesis over a bioprosthetic valve.”
“For patients ≥65 years of age who require MVR and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a bioprosthesis over a mechanical valve.”
bp v mech
mitral valve choice if warfarin contraindicated
bp (1)
“For patients who require heart valve replacement, the choice of prosthetic valve should be based on a shared decision-making process that accounts for the patient’s values and preferences and includes discussion of the indications for and risks of anticoagulant therapy and the potential need for and risks associated with valve reintervention.”
“For patients of any age requiring valve replacement for whom anticoagulant therapy is contraindicated, cannot be managed appropriately, or is not desired, a bioprosthetic valve is recommended.”
bp v mech
mitral valve choice in <65yo
assuming no contraindication to warfarin
mech
(2a)
“For patients <65 years of age who have an indication for MVR, do not have a contraindication to anticoagulation, and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a mechanical prosthesis over a bioprosthetic valve.”
“For patients ≥65 years of age who require MVR and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a bioprosthesis over a mechanical valve.”
bp v mech
mitral valve choice in ≥65yo
assuming no contraindication to warfarin
bp
(2a)
“For patients <65 years of age who have an indication for MVR, do not have a contraindication to anticoagulation, and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a mechanical prosthesis over a bioprosthetic valve.”
“For patients ≥65 years of age who require MVR and are unable to undergo MVRx, it is reasonable to choose a bioprosthesis over a mechanical valve.”
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) in mild MR
<20
%
vena contracta in mild MR
<0.3
cm
RVol/Vregurg in mild MR
regurgitant volume
<30
mL/beat
RF in mild MR
regurgitant fraction
<30
%
EROA in mild MR
effective regurgitant orifice area
<0.2
cm2
grade in mild MR
1+
PV flow reversal in mild MR
systolic dominance
only specified in ASE
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) in moderate MR
20-40
%
vena contracta in moderate MR
0.3-0.7
cm
RVol/Vregurg in moderate MR
regurgitant volume
30-60
mL/beat
RF in moderate MR
regurgitant fraction
30-50
%
EROA in moderate MR
effective regurgitant orifice area
0.2-0.4
cm2
grade in moderate MR
2+
PV flow reversal in moderate MR
systolic blunting
only specified in ASE
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) in severe MR
>40
%
vena contracta in severe MR
≥0.7
cm
RVol/Vregurg in severe MR
regurgitant volume
≥60
mL/beat
RF in severe MR
regurgitant fraction
≥50
%
EROA in severe MR
effective regurgitant orifice area
≥0.4
cm2
grade in severe MR
3-4+
PV flow reversal in severe MR
holosystolic
only specified in ASE
mitral valve
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) <20 %
mild MR
mitral valve
vena contracta <0.3 cm
mild MR
mitral valve
RVol/Vregurg <30 mL/beat
regurgitant volume
mild MR
mitral valve
RF <30 %
regurgitant fraction
mild MR
mitral valve
EROA <0.2 cm2
effective regurgitant orifice area
mild MR
mitral valve
1+ grade regurg
mild MR
mitral valve
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) = 20-40 %
moderate MR
mitral valve
vena contracta = 0.3-0.7 cm
moderate MR
mitral valve
RVol/Vregurg = 30-60 mL/beat
regurgitant volume
moderate MR
mitral valve
RF = 30-50 %
regurgitant fraction
moderate MR
mitral valve
EROA = 0.2-0.4 cm2
effective regurgitant orifice area
moderate MR
mitral valve
2+ grade regurg
moderate MR
mitral valve
regurgitant jet width (% of LA) >40 %
severe MR
mitral valve
vena contracta ≥0.7 cm
severe MR
mitral valve
RVol/Vregurg ≥60 mL/beat
regurgitant volume
severe MR
mitral valve
RF ≥50 %
regurgitant fraction
severe MR
mitral valve
EROA ≥0.4 cm2
effective regurgitant orifice area
severe MR
mitral valve
3-4+ grade regurg
severe MR
indication(s) for intervention in moderate 1° MR
NONE
regardless of sx status
indication(s) for intervention in moderate 2° MR
NONE
regardless of sx status
indication(s) for intervention in moderate MR
NONE
regardless of sx status
neither 1° nor 2°
indication(s) for intervention in severe 2° MR
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status - sx (NYHA ≥II) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% AND EF>20% + LVESD≤70mm + PASP≤70mmHg ⇒ TEER (2a)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LA annular dil + LVEF≥50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
indication(s) for intervention in sx severe 2° MR
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status - sx (NYHA ≥II) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% AND EF>20% + LVESD≤70mm + PASP≤70mmHg ⇒ TEER (2a)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LA annular dil + LVEF≥50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
indication(s) for intervention in sx severe 2° MR
(4)
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status - sx (NYHA ≥II) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% AND EF>20% + LVESD≤70mm + PASP≤70mmHg ⇒ TEER (2a)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LA annular dil + LVEF≥50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
indication(s) for intervention in asx severe 2° MR
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status
ONLY indication for intervention in asx severe 2° MR
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status
indication(s) for surgical intervention in sx severe 2° MR
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status - v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LA annular dil + LVEF≥50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
indication(s) for surgical intervention in sx severe 2° MR
(3)
- concomitant CABG ⇒ MVR/x (2a)
regardless of sx status - v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LA annular dil + LVEF≥50% ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
indication(s) for transcatheter intervention in sx severe 2° MR
- sx (NYHA ≥II) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% AND EF>20% + LVESD≤70mm + PASP≤70mmHg ⇒ TEER (2a)
indication(s) for transcatheter intervention in sx severe 2° MR
(1)
- sx (NYHA ≥II) ⊕GDMT + MR r/t LVEF<50% AND EF>20% + LVESD≤70mm + PASP≤70mmHg ⇒ TEER (2a)
preferred surgical intervention in 2° MR
chordal-sparing MVR (>MVRx)
(2b)
preferred surgical intervention in 1° MR
MVRx (>MVR) in degen dz
(1)
indication(s) for intervention in severe 1° MR
- sx (regardless of EF) (1)
- v sx (NYHA ≥III) + high/prohib-risk ⇒ TEER (2a)
- rheumatic etio & rx likely @ CVC ⇒ MVR/x (2b)
- asx + LV dysfxn (EF≤60% OR LVESD≥40mm) (1)
- asx + EF=WNL AND >95% rx & <1% mort @ CVC (2a)
- asx + EF=WNL BUT progressive ↓ EF OR ↑ LVESD on 3 studies (2b)
CTSNet severe ischemic MR trial: primary endpoint
LVESD volume index (i.e. LV remodeling)
⇒∅
CTSNet severe ischemic MR trial: outcomes
↓HF SAEs (incl re-adm) & ↓mod+MR with replacement
2° severe MR feature/anatomy most predictive of recurrent MR after MVRx
basal inferior dyskinesis
(in post-hoc analysis of CTSNet severe MR trial; SESATS)
preferred ring/band choice for a MVRx for 2° MR
complete (slightly undersized) ring
(still semi-rigid?)
pulmonary edema laterality 2/2 mitral dz
R
2/2 flow reversal into PVs during systole, with relative obstr to R-sided pulm venous return, with retrograde increase in hydrostatic pressure
mgmt of acute MR 2/2 chordal rupture
emergent MVRx (usu not 2/2 MI)
unilateral R pulm edema, fever, leukocytosis, acute onset, +systolic murmur
acute MR 2/2 chordal rupture
Where & what structures are at risk around the mitral annulus?
- LCx @ P1 > anterolat commissure
- NCC @ anterior leaflet (A3)
(>>LCC@A1) - coronary sinus @ posterior leaflet P3>P2
- ± bundle of His @ A3/posteromed commissure (next to R trigone in membranous septum)
What are the 2 papillary muscles and their blood supply?
- anterolateral = LAD + LCx
- posteromedial = RCA (PDA)