Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis: Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients

Krishnakumar Nair, Harikrishnan Sivadasanpillai, P. Sivasubramonium, Padmakumar Ramachandran, Jaganmohan A. Tharakan, Thomas Titus, V. K.Ajit Kumar, Sivasankaran Sivasubramonian, K. Mahadevan Krishnamoorthy, Santosh Dora

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aim: To compare the results of percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (BMV) for mitral restenosis in post-BMV versus postclosed mitral valvotomy (CMV) patients. Methods and Results: Ninety-two patients who underwent BMV for mitral restenosis were followed up prospectively. Of these, 28 patients had undergone previous percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (PRIOR BMV) and 64 patients had undergone previous closed mitral valvotomy (PRIOR CMV). BMV for mitral restenosis was a success in 59% patients (57.1% PRIOR BMV, 59.3% PRIOR CMV, P = 1.0). Incidence of severe mitral regurgitation was 3.25%, all in the PRIOR CMV group. In univariate analysis, the major predictor of successful BMV for mitral restenosis was Wilkins score (P = 0.004). At a follow up of 3.47 + 2.07 years, mitral valve area was similar between groups (1.45 ± 0.22, 1.46 ± 0.26, P = 0.35). The combined end points of mitral valve replacement (MVR), need for rerepeat BMV for mitral restenosis or death was higher in the PRIOR CMV group (31.2% PRIOR CMV, 7.1% PRIOR BMV, P = 0.027). Event-free survival at follow up was lower in the PRIOR CMV group (69% PRIOR CMV, 92.8% PRIOR BMV) mainly due to the higher need for MVR (11 vs. 0 patients, P = 0.03). Conclusions: In conclusion, following BMV for mitral restenosis, patients with PRIOR BMV are found to have lesser event rates on follow-up compared to patients with PRIOR CMV, though procedural success rates are similar.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)174-180
Number of pages7
JournalCatheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions
Volume76
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-08-2010

Fingerprint

Mitral Valve
Mitral Valve Insufficiency
Disease-Free Survival
Incidence

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Radiology Nuclear Medicine and imaging
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Nair, Krishnakumar ; Sivadasanpillai, Harikrishnan ; Sivasubramonium, P. ; Ramachandran, Padmakumar ; Tharakan, Jaganmohan A. ; Titus, Thomas ; Kumar, V. K.Ajit ; Sivasubramonian, Sivasankaran ; Krishnamoorthy, K. Mahadevan ; Dora, Santosh. / Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis : Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients. In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions. 2010 ; Vol. 76, No. 2. pp. 174-180.
@article{9b56c0b4077646c9994226d74047a489,
title = "Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis: Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients",
abstract = "Aim: To compare the results of percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (BMV) for mitral restenosis in post-BMV versus postclosed mitral valvotomy (CMV) patients. Methods and Results: Ninety-two patients who underwent BMV for mitral restenosis were followed up prospectively. Of these, 28 patients had undergone previous percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (PRIOR BMV) and 64 patients had undergone previous closed mitral valvotomy (PRIOR CMV). BMV for mitral restenosis was a success in 59{\%} patients (57.1{\%} PRIOR BMV, 59.3{\%} PRIOR CMV, P = 1.0). Incidence of severe mitral regurgitation was 3.25{\%}, all in the PRIOR CMV group. In univariate analysis, the major predictor of successful BMV for mitral restenosis was Wilkins score (P = 0.004). At a follow up of 3.47 + 2.07 years, mitral valve area was similar between groups (1.45 ± 0.22, 1.46 ± 0.26, P = 0.35). The combined end points of mitral valve replacement (MVR), need for rerepeat BMV for mitral restenosis or death was higher in the PRIOR CMV group (31.2{\%} PRIOR CMV, 7.1{\%} PRIOR BMV, P = 0.027). Event-free survival at follow up was lower in the PRIOR CMV group (69{\%} PRIOR CMV, 92.8{\%} PRIOR BMV) mainly due to the higher need for MVR (11 vs. 0 patients, P = 0.03). Conclusions: In conclusion, following BMV for mitral restenosis, patients with PRIOR BMV are found to have lesser event rates on follow-up compared to patients with PRIOR CMV, though procedural success rates are similar.",
author = "Krishnakumar Nair and Harikrishnan Sivadasanpillai and P. Sivasubramonium and Padmakumar Ramachandran and Tharakan, {Jaganmohan A.} and Thomas Titus and Kumar, {V. K.Ajit} and Sivasankaran Sivasubramonian and Krishnamoorthy, {K. Mahadevan} and Santosh Dora",
year = "2010",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1002/ccd.22510",
language = "English",
volume = "76",
pages = "174--180",
journal = "Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions",
issn = "1522-1946",
publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
number = "2",

}

Nair, K, Sivadasanpillai, H, Sivasubramonium, P, Ramachandran, P, Tharakan, JA, Titus, T, Kumar, VKA, Sivasubramonian, S, Krishnamoorthy, KM & Dora, S 2010, 'Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis: Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients', Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, vol. 76, no. 2, pp. 174-180. https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.22510

Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis : Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients. / Nair, Krishnakumar; Sivadasanpillai, Harikrishnan; Sivasubramonium, P.; Ramachandran, Padmakumar; Tharakan, Jaganmohan A.; Titus, Thomas; Kumar, V. K.Ajit; Sivasubramonian, Sivasankaran; Krishnamoorthy, K. Mahadevan; Dora, Santosh.

In: Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions, Vol. 76, No. 2, 01.08.2010, p. 174-180.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Percutaneous valvuloplasty for mitral valve restenosis

T2 - Postballoon valvotomy patients fare better than postsurgical closed valvotomy patients

AU - Nair, Krishnakumar

AU - Sivadasanpillai, Harikrishnan

AU - Sivasubramonium, P.

AU - Ramachandran, Padmakumar

AU - Tharakan, Jaganmohan A.

AU - Titus, Thomas

AU - Kumar, V. K.Ajit

AU - Sivasubramonian, Sivasankaran

AU - Krishnamoorthy, K. Mahadevan

AU - Dora, Santosh

PY - 2010/8/1

Y1 - 2010/8/1

N2 - Aim: To compare the results of percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (BMV) for mitral restenosis in post-BMV versus postclosed mitral valvotomy (CMV) patients. Methods and Results: Ninety-two patients who underwent BMV for mitral restenosis were followed up prospectively. Of these, 28 patients had undergone previous percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (PRIOR BMV) and 64 patients had undergone previous closed mitral valvotomy (PRIOR CMV). BMV for mitral restenosis was a success in 59% patients (57.1% PRIOR BMV, 59.3% PRIOR CMV, P = 1.0). Incidence of severe mitral regurgitation was 3.25%, all in the PRIOR CMV group. In univariate analysis, the major predictor of successful BMV for mitral restenosis was Wilkins score (P = 0.004). At a follow up of 3.47 + 2.07 years, mitral valve area was similar between groups (1.45 ± 0.22, 1.46 ± 0.26, P = 0.35). The combined end points of mitral valve replacement (MVR), need for rerepeat BMV for mitral restenosis or death was higher in the PRIOR CMV group (31.2% PRIOR CMV, 7.1% PRIOR BMV, P = 0.027). Event-free survival at follow up was lower in the PRIOR CMV group (69% PRIOR CMV, 92.8% PRIOR BMV) mainly due to the higher need for MVR (11 vs. 0 patients, P = 0.03). Conclusions: In conclusion, following BMV for mitral restenosis, patients with PRIOR BMV are found to have lesser event rates on follow-up compared to patients with PRIOR CMV, though procedural success rates are similar.

AB - Aim: To compare the results of percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (BMV) for mitral restenosis in post-BMV versus postclosed mitral valvotomy (CMV) patients. Methods and Results: Ninety-two patients who underwent BMV for mitral restenosis were followed up prospectively. Of these, 28 patients had undergone previous percutaneous mitral valvuloplasty (PRIOR BMV) and 64 patients had undergone previous closed mitral valvotomy (PRIOR CMV). BMV for mitral restenosis was a success in 59% patients (57.1% PRIOR BMV, 59.3% PRIOR CMV, P = 1.0). Incidence of severe mitral regurgitation was 3.25%, all in the PRIOR CMV group. In univariate analysis, the major predictor of successful BMV for mitral restenosis was Wilkins score (P = 0.004). At a follow up of 3.47 + 2.07 years, mitral valve area was similar between groups (1.45 ± 0.22, 1.46 ± 0.26, P = 0.35). The combined end points of mitral valve replacement (MVR), need for rerepeat BMV for mitral restenosis or death was higher in the PRIOR CMV group (31.2% PRIOR CMV, 7.1% PRIOR BMV, P = 0.027). Event-free survival at follow up was lower in the PRIOR CMV group (69% PRIOR CMV, 92.8% PRIOR BMV) mainly due to the higher need for MVR (11 vs. 0 patients, P = 0.03). Conclusions: In conclusion, following BMV for mitral restenosis, patients with PRIOR BMV are found to have lesser event rates on follow-up compared to patients with PRIOR CMV, though procedural success rates are similar.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77955129834&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77955129834&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/ccd.22510

DO - 10.1002/ccd.22510

M3 - Article

C2 - 20232411

AN - SCOPUS:77955129834

VL - 76

SP - 174

EP - 180

JO - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

JF - Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions

SN - 1522-1946

IS - 2

ER -