Bileaflet Mitral Valve Prolapse and Risk of @entity943 and XXXX .

@entity1 @entity1479 @entity1164 @entity1165 @entity3454 @entity2224 @entity1167 @entity943 @entity204
INTRODUCTION: Bileaflet @entity3454 (BiMVP) is common among survivors of otherwise unexplained @entity1164 , but prognostic implications of BiMVP are unknown. This study evaluated whether @entity1 with BiMVP are at higher risk for @entity943 , @entity1479 placement, or @entity204 compared to controls with either single-leaflet @entity3454 (SiMVP) or no @entity3454 ( @entity3454 ). METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective, matched cohort study included 18,786 @entity1 who underwent echocardiography at Mayo Clinic between June 1990 and September 2014. The study included three cohorts: BiMVP, SiMVP, and controls without @entity3454 . We assessed rates of @entity943 , @entity1479 placement, and all-cause mortality between groups. BiMVP was associated with higher rates of @entity1165 compared to SiMVP and controls (adjusted HR 1.48 [1.14-1.92], p = 0.003 and 1.40 [1.04-1.88], p = 0.026 respectively); however, there were no statistically significant differences in rates of @entity1167 or @entity1479 placement between groups. BiMVP was associated with a lower rate of all-cause mortality compared to SiMVP and controls (adjusted HR 0.86 [0.79-0.94], p = 0.0008, and 0.55 [0.50-0.60], p < 0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSION: Although BiMVP is associated with @entity1165 , it is not associated with an increased risk of @entity1167 / @entity2224 or @entity1479 implantation and is, paradoxically, associated with a better survival compared to SiMVP or matched controls. The findings suggest that, despite its association with @entity1165 , BiMVP in the absence of other risk factors does not seem to portend a poor prognosis at the population level. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
