Left atrial V waves following mitral valve replacement are not specific for significant mitral regurgitation

Valvular heart diseases

Patients who have valvular heart disease coming for surgery present many challenges to the anesthesiologist. Over the past 3 decades there has been a persistent improvement in our understanding of the pathophysiology of valvular heart disease and in the surgical techniques for correcting it. With the development of efficient and safe noninvasive monitoring of cardiac function, new surgical techniques, better designs of prosthetic valves, and the development of useful guidelines for choosing the proper timing of surgical intervention, patients who have valvular disease with varying physiology can be encountered in the perioperative period. The perioperative physician has to be aware of the varying effects of hemodynamic variables on this subpopulation of patients.

What does the left atrial v wave signify during balloon commissurotomy of mitral stenosis?

Left atrial v-wave amplitude has been associated with the presence and severity of chronic mitral regurgitation (MR) but it has not been evaluated for the detection of acute MR. We evaluated the left atrial v-wave amplitude of 205 consecutive patients with mitral stenosis immediately before and after stepwise, incremental balloon mitral commissurotomy to determine predictors of large v waves at baseline and an increase in v-wave amplitude after balloon commissurotomy. The sensitivity and specificity of an increase in v-wave amplitude for detecting worsening and severe MR were determined. A large v wave was present in 44% of patients before balloon commissurotomy and was predicted by age, mean left atrial pressure, mean transmitral gradient, mean pulmonary artery pressure, and angiographic severity of MR. There was a strong inverse correlation between v-wave amplitude and calculated left atrial compliance (r = -0.92). An increase in v-wave amplitude after balloon commissurotomy was associated with an increasing probability of worsening or severe MR. This indicator had a sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of 35%, 91%, 64%, 75%, respectively, for detecting any increase in MR. For the detection of severe MR, the sensitivity was 79%, specificity 89%, positive predictive value 42%, and negative predictive value 98%. Thus, left atrial v-wave amplitude reflects left atrial compliance and severity of mitral stenosis before balloon commissurotomy. An increase in v-wave amplitude is an insensitive but very specific indicator of worsening or severe MR during stepwise, incremental balloon mitral commissurotomy.

Clinical course and hemodynamic observations after supraannular mitral valve replacement in infants and children

OBJECTIVES

We report the clinical course and unique hemodynamic findings after placement of a supraannular mitral valve prosthesis.

BACKGROUND

Children with symptomatic mitral valve disease whose annulus is too small for the smallest prosthesis are difficult to manage. One option is valve replacement with a prosthesis positioned entirely within the left atrium (LA).

METHODS

We reviewed 17 patients (median age 10 months) with symptomatic mitral valve disease who underwent placement of a supraannular valve prosthesis between 1980 and 1994.

RESULTS

The actuarial survival rates were 88% at 1 month and 71%, 62% and 53% at 1, 2 and 10 years, respectively. Preoperative hemodynamic data (mean +/- SD)) compared with those after placement of the supraannular mitral prosthesis were as follows: "a" wave to left ventricular end-diastolic pressure gradient 17 +/- 5 versus 4 +/- 4 mm Hg (p = 0.003), mean LA pressure 25 +/- 6 versus 20 +/- 6 mm Hg (p = 0.07), "a" wave 30 +/- 6 versus 19 +/- 5 mm Hg (p = 0.006), "v" wave 28 +/- 5 versus 30 +/- 9 mm Hg (p = 0.31), mean pulmonary artery pressure 54 +/- 19 versus 42 +/- 15 mm Hg (p = 0.07) and left ventricular end-diastolic pressure 14 +/- 5 versus 16 +/- 4 mm Hg (p = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

Supraannular mitral valve replacement provides relief of mitral stenosis or mitral regurgitation. However, LA to left ventricular early diastolic gradients with large atrial "v" waves contribute to elevated mean LA pressures in the absence of prosthetic valve obstruction or regurgitation. As a result of this unexpected finding, associated left heart obstructive lesions and pulmonary and left ventricular end-diastolic hypertension, the outlook remains poor.

Cost-benefit analysis of transesophageal echocardiography in cardiac surgery

This article evaluates the costs and outcomes associated with TEE during and after cardiac surgery. The costs include the direct and indirect costs--the complications of TEE. The outcomes include the positive consequences or the benefits: money and lives saved. The article uses liberal (high) estimates of the direct and indirect costs of TEE and conservative (low) estimates of the benefits. The exact cost or benefit depends on the number of cases performed. The analysis shows that patients having surgery for congenital heart disease derive the greatest overall benefit: around $600 per case studied. Patients having valvular repair surgery derive the next greatest benefit: around $450 per case studied. In contrast patients having valve replacement have an overall cost of around $150 per case studied. Patients having surgery for coronary artery disease also derive an overall benefit: around $100-$300 per case studied, depending upon assumptions regarding TEE's role in prevention of intraoperative strokes. This analysis indicates that the financial benefits of TEE are substantial and frequently outweigh costs in patients requiring cardiac surgery.

Evaluation of mitral valve repair by intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve repair is the procedure of choice in the surgical management of mitral regurgitation. Intraoperative confirmation of successful repair is essential to the effectiveness of this procedure.

AIMS

The aims of this study were: (a) to compare intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) with the surgeon's assessment of valve competence; (b) to assess the impact of routine intraoperative imaging on the hospital echocardiography laboratory.

METHODS

Eighty-six consecutive patients undergoing mitral valve repair formed the study population. Valve competence following repair was assessed intraoperatively by: TOE; saline insufflation of the flaccid left ventricle; and evaluation of the pulmonary capillary wedge pressure for the presence of a significant V wave.

RESULTS

TOE demonstrated successful valve repair (< or = 1 + residual regurgitation) in 75 patients (87%) and detected significant residual regurgitation (> or = 3+) in seven (8.2%). The mechanism of regurgitation was also clearly shown. Of these seven patients, four underwent immediate valve replacement, two had successful revision of the initial repair and one required valve replacement one week later. In all seven patients the valve repair had been assessed as successful by saline testing and only one had a post-repair V wave 10 mmHg above the mean pulmonary capillary wedge pressure. In 30 non-selected patients the imaging equipment was required in theatre for 43 +/- 18 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

TOE is currently the most sensitive method for detection and quantitation of residual mitral regurgitation following valve repair. Evaluation can be performed within a similar time to that required for one complete transthoracic study and can usually be performed with minimal disruption to the hospital echocardiography laboratory.

What's new in monitoring the coronary surgery patient?

Monitoring has been extensively reviewed in most textbooks of cardiothoracic surgery and anaesthesia, particularly in the recent textbooks on monitoring edited by Carol L Lake 1 and Casey D Blitt 2 and in the Journal of Clinical Monitoring. Although monitoring properly includes both pre- and postoperative periods, this review will concentrate exclusively on the operative period. I will also concentrate on new approaches or information which relate to more traditional approaches to monitoring. The emphasis in this review will not be on what we can monitor, but rather on what we should monitor. In this regard, I will analyse accuracy and identify sources of error and try to answer the following questions. Does the device or parameter measure (monitor) what we want to know? Does it improve patient outcome and safety? Is it cost-effective? Unfortunately, data are not always available to answer all these questions at present, but hopefully the discussions will make us aware of what we do and do not know, and what we should look for in the near future.