Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to investigate the short-term effects of transapical beating-heart septal myectomy (TA-BSM) on left atrial (LA) anatomy and function and its association with clinical indicators in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM).

METHODS

A total of 105 HOCM patients who received TA-BSM were included. Clinical and comprehensive echocardiographic data were obtained before surgery, at discharge, and 3 months after myectomy. LA reverse remodelling was defined as LA maximum volume index (LAVI) ≤34 ml/m2 and a change of ≥10%.

RESULTS

At 3 months after TA-BSM, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and 6-min walking test were significantly improved, N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) decreased, left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) peak gradient and mitral regurgitation were significantly reduced. LAVI decreased in 76%, with a median change of 20%, and the criteria for LA reverse remodelling were met in 48%. LA strain parameters were improved at 3 months after TA-BSM. Moreover, left ventricular (LV) diastolic function was significantly improved, but LV global longitudinal strain was not significantly changed at 3 months after operation. Improvement in LVOT peak gradient, LAVI, LA reservoir strain (LASr) and conduit strain (LAScd) were associated with reduction in NT-proBNP.

CONCLUSIONS

Along with effectively relieving the obstruction of the LVOT and mitral regurgitation, TA-BSM could significantly improve LA size and function during the short-term follow-up for HOCM patients. The indicators of LA reverse remodelling were associated with reduction in a biomarker of myocardial wall stress, indicating the early recovery of LV relaxation and clinical status for patients.

INTRODUCTION

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is an inherited heart disease with left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (LVOTO) in 70% of patients [1]. HCM patients, particularly those with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy (HOCM), often experience left atrial (LA) remodelling and left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction, which increase the risk of sudden cardiac death, atrial fibrillation, stroke and heart failure [2]. Recent research has highlighted the dynamic role of the LA in overall cardiac performance during treatment [3]. Nuzzi et al. [4] investigated LA reverse remodelling in dilated cardiomyopathy, defining it as LA maximum volume index (LAVI) ≤34 ml/m2 with >10% change, and found that patients with such remodelling had lower risks of adverse outcomes at 1-year follow-up. These studies indicated that the LA reverse remodelling could be a marker of the positive treatment and has a close relationship with the outcome.

Surgical septal myectomy remains the preferred treatment for most HOCM patients [5]. Transapical beating-heart septal myectomy (TA-BSM) is a newer, minimally invasive approach for septal reduction in HOCM, offering real-time haemodynamic assessment [6]. In our first group of 47 HOCM patients who underwent TA-BSM procedures, 89.4% achieved procedural success within 3 months [7]. While early outcomes of TA-BSM may not surpass those of conventional transaortic myectomy in terms of surgical risk or LVOTO relief, its avoidance of cardiopulmonary bypass and minimally invasive nature support faster patient recovery. This study aims to explore TA-BSM’s early effects on cardiac structure and function, particularly focusing on early changes in LA size and function and their correlation with clinical indicators.

METHODS

This was a single-centre, single-arm, first-in-human registry study. The study followed ethical standards and received approval from the Ethics Committee of Tongji Medical College. It has been registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05332691).

Study population

From April 2022 to July 2023, 105 HOCM patients undergoing TA-BSM were included if they were aged ≥12 years with septal thickness ≥15 mm, left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient >50 mmHg (rest/provoked), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II+, and refractory symptoms or drug intolerance. Exclusions were native valvular disease, coronary artery disease, LV ejection fraction (LVEF) <40%, pregnancy, life expectancy <1 year, poor compliance, or other conditions deemed unsuitable by the medical team. The apical puncture site is located accurately using finger palpation under transthoracic echocardiogrpahy. Then an 18-G needle punctures the apex, and a 0.035-inch wire is inserted into the LV. After dilating the puncture site, a myectomy device is inserted under transoesophageal echocardiography guidance. It precisely navigates the device entering into LVOT and contacting the target septum without interfering with the mitral valve or aortic valve. The more detailed procedures can be referred to our previously study published on JACC [7].

Echocardiography

Comprehensive echocardiograms were performed on all patients before surgery, at discharge, and at 3 months after TA-BSM. Ultrasound used GE Vivid E95 with an M5Sc transducer. Parameters followed American Society of Echocardiography guidelines [8]. Mitral valve distance to septum were measured at late-systole [9]. Systolic anterior motion (SAM) were categorized by SAM-septal distance and leaflet-septal contact duration [10]. Mitral regurgitation (MR) grades (0 to 4+) were assessed [11]. Peak LVOT gradient was measured in apical views; provocation tests were used for patients with resting gradient under 50 mmHg [12]. LA reverse remodelling was defined as LAVI ≦34 ml/m2 and a change of ≧10% [4].

Statistical analysis

Continuous variables were normality verified using Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Statistical tests accounted for paired data comparing pre- and postintervention characteristics. For categorical data, McNemar test replaced chi-squared. Paired Student’s t-test compared normally distributed continuous data, and repeated-measures ANOVA for multiple groups. Wilcoxon’s signed rank test compared non-normally distributed continuous data between two groups, and Friedman test for multiple groups. Log2-transformed N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT-proBNP] and high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I [hs-cTnI] data underwent simple linear regression with echocardiographic parameters. P < 0.05 indicated significance. SPSS Version 23.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY, USA) performed all analyses.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics

The baseline characteristics of 105 patients with HOCM who underwent the TA-BSM are listed in Table 1. The median (IQR) of age was 48 (34, 59) years, 95 patients were adults and 10 were paediatric, and 68 (64.8) were men.

Table 1:

Baseline clinical characteristics

CharacteristicNo. (%)
Clinical characteristic
Male68 (65)
Female37 (35)
Age, y48 (12, 77)
BSA, m21.78 ± 0.20
Clinical symptoms
Shortness of breath56 (53)
 Chest pain52 (50)
 Chest tightness53 (51)
 Syncope14 (13)
 Palpitations51 (49)
 Dizziness15 (14)
 Amaurosis18 (17)
 Hypodynamic8 (8)
NYHA functional classification
 I1 (1)
 II48 (46)
 III53 (50)
 IV3 (3)
Family history of HCM21 (20)
Comorbidities
 Hypertension31 (30)
 Diabetes mellitus4 (4)
 Kidney disease8 (8)
 Coronary artery disease12 (11)
Medications
 β-Blocker59 (56)
 Calcium channel blocker31 (30)
CharacteristicNo. (%)
Clinical characteristic
Male68 (65)
Female37 (35)
Age, y48 (12, 77)
BSA, m21.78 ± 0.20
Clinical symptoms
Shortness of breath56 (53)
 Chest pain52 (50)
 Chest tightness53 (51)
 Syncope14 (13)
 Palpitations51 (49)
 Dizziness15 (14)
 Amaurosis18 (17)
 Hypodynamic8 (8)
NYHA functional classification
 I1 (1)
 II48 (46)
 III53 (50)
 IV3 (3)
Family history of HCM21 (20)
Comorbidities
 Hypertension31 (30)
 Diabetes mellitus4 (4)
 Kidney disease8 (8)
 Coronary artery disease12 (11)
Medications
 β-Blocker59 (56)
 Calcium channel blocker31 (30)

BSA: body surface area; HCM: hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; NYHA: New York Heart Association.

Table 1:

Baseline clinical characteristics

CharacteristicNo. (%)
Clinical characteristic
Male68 (65)
Female37 (35)
Age, y48 (12, 77)
BSA, m21.78 ± 0.20
Clinical symptoms
Shortness of breath56 (53)
 Chest pain52 (50)
 Chest tightness53 (51)
 Syncope14 (13)
 Palpitations51 (49)
 Dizziness15 (14)
 Amaurosis18 (17)
 Hypodynamic8 (8)
NYHA functional classification
 I1 (1)
 II48 (46)
 III53 (50)
 IV3 (3)
Family history of HCM21 (20)
Comorbidities
 Hypertension31 (30)
 Diabetes mellitus4 (4)
 Kidney disease8 (8)
 Coronary artery disease12 (11)
Medications
 β-Blocker59 (56)
 Calcium channel blocker31 (30)
CharacteristicNo. (%)
Clinical characteristic
Male68 (65)
Female37 (35)
Age, y48 (12, 77)
BSA, m21.78 ± 0.20
Clinical symptoms
Shortness of breath56 (53)
 Chest pain52 (50)
 Chest tightness53 (51)
 Syncope14 (13)
 Palpitations51 (49)
 Dizziness15 (14)
 Amaurosis18 (17)
 Hypodynamic8 (8)
NYHA functional classification
 I1 (1)
 II48 (46)
 III53 (50)
 IV3 (3)
Family history of HCM21 (20)
Comorbidities
 Hypertension31 (30)
 Diabetes mellitus4 (4)
 Kidney disease8 (8)
 Coronary artery disease12 (11)
Medications
 β-Blocker59 (56)
 Calcium channel blocker31 (30)

BSA: body surface area; HCM: hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; NYHA: New York Heart Association.

Follow-up clinical outcomes

Device success was achieved in 103 of the 105 patients, except for 2 patients who were converted to sternotomy. During the short-term follow-up, 64 patients developed left bundle branch block. The representative clinical outcomes are shown in Table 2. At 3 months after TA-BSM, % of patients with NYHA III/IV symptoms decreased from 53% to 1%. All 105 patients showed the disappearance or significant alleviation of their symptoms and improvements in exertional capacity. There was a significant increase in median (IQR) 6-min walking distance from 342 (298, 379) m to 420 (380, 475) m (P < 0.001). The LV mass index was significantly lower than that before surgery (97.52 ± 28.55 g/m2 vs 88.42 ± 27.50 g/m2, P = 0.020). Compared with baseline, the level of NT-proBNP was significantly lower [1062 (476, 2153) pg/ml vs 585 (337, 1759) pg/ml, P = 0.038], while the level of hs-cTnI showed no significant change [23 (12, 85) pg/ml vs 28 (14, 91) pg/ml, P = 0.474] (Table 2, Fig. 1).

Table 2:

Clinical outcomes after myectomy 1–3 months

VariableBaseline (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
NYHA functional classification<0.001
 I1 (1)55 (52)
 II48 (46)49 (47)
 III53 (50)0 (0)
 IV3 (3)1 (1)
 III or IV56 (53)1 (1)
Clinical symptoms
 Shortness of breath56 (53)10 (10)<0.001
 Chest pain52 (50)3 (3)<0.001
 Chest tightness53 (51)12 (11)<0.001
 Syncope14 (13)0 (0)<0.001
 Palpitations51 (49)3 (3)<0.001
 Dizziness15 (14)2 (2)0.002
 Amaurosi18 (17)3 (3)<0.001
 Hypodynamic8 (8)5 (5)0.567
6-min walking test (m)342 (298, 379)420 (380, 475)<0.001
Laboratory examination
 NT-proBNP (pg/ml)1062 (476, 2153)585 (337, 1759)0.038
 cTnI (pg/ml)23 (12, 85)28 (14, 91)0.474
CMR
 LV mass index (g/m2)97.52 ± 28.5588.42 ± 27.500.020
VariableBaseline (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
NYHA functional classification<0.001
 I1 (1)55 (52)
 II48 (46)49 (47)
 III53 (50)0 (0)
 IV3 (3)1 (1)
 III or IV56 (53)1 (1)
Clinical symptoms
 Shortness of breath56 (53)10 (10)<0.001
 Chest pain52 (50)3 (3)<0.001
 Chest tightness53 (51)12 (11)<0.001
 Syncope14 (13)0 (0)<0.001
 Palpitations51 (49)3 (3)<0.001
 Dizziness15 (14)2 (2)0.002
 Amaurosi18 (17)3 (3)<0.001
 Hypodynamic8 (8)5 (5)0.567
6-min walking test (m)342 (298, 379)420 (380, 475)<0.001
Laboratory examination
 NT-proBNP (pg/ml)1062 (476, 2153)585 (337, 1759)0.038
 cTnI (pg/ml)23 (12, 85)28 (14, 91)0.474
CMR
 LV mass index (g/m2)97.52 ± 28.5588.42 ± 27.500.020

CMR: cardiac magnetic resonance; hs-cTnI: high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I; LV: left ventricular; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; NYHA: New York Heart Association.

Table 2:

Clinical outcomes after myectomy 1–3 months

VariableBaseline (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
NYHA functional classification<0.001
 I1 (1)55 (52)
 II48 (46)49 (47)
 III53 (50)0 (0)
 IV3 (3)1 (1)
 III or IV56 (53)1 (1)
Clinical symptoms
 Shortness of breath56 (53)10 (10)<0.001
 Chest pain52 (50)3 (3)<0.001
 Chest tightness53 (51)12 (11)<0.001
 Syncope14 (13)0 (0)<0.001
 Palpitations51 (49)3 (3)<0.001
 Dizziness15 (14)2 (2)0.002
 Amaurosi18 (17)3 (3)<0.001
 Hypodynamic8 (8)5 (5)0.567
6-min walking test (m)342 (298, 379)420 (380, 475)<0.001
Laboratory examination
 NT-proBNP (pg/ml)1062 (476, 2153)585 (337, 1759)0.038
 cTnI (pg/ml)23 (12, 85)28 (14, 91)0.474
CMR
 LV mass index (g/m2)97.52 ± 28.5588.42 ± 27.500.020
VariableBaseline (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
NYHA functional classification<0.001
 I1 (1)55 (52)
 II48 (46)49 (47)
 III53 (50)0 (0)
 IV3 (3)1 (1)
 III or IV56 (53)1 (1)
Clinical symptoms
 Shortness of breath56 (53)10 (10)<0.001
 Chest pain52 (50)3 (3)<0.001
 Chest tightness53 (51)12 (11)<0.001
 Syncope14 (13)0 (0)<0.001
 Palpitations51 (49)3 (3)<0.001
 Dizziness15 (14)2 (2)0.002
 Amaurosi18 (17)3 (3)<0.001
 Hypodynamic8 (8)5 (5)0.567
6-min walking test (m)342 (298, 379)420 (380, 475)<0.001
Laboratory examination
 NT-proBNP (pg/ml)1062 (476, 2153)585 (337, 1759)0.038
 cTnI (pg/ml)23 (12, 85)28 (14, 91)0.474
CMR
 LV mass index (g/m2)97.52 ± 28.5588.42 ± 27.500.020

CMR: cardiac magnetic resonance; hs-cTnI: high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I; LV: left ventricular; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; NYHA: New York Heart Association.

Follow-up echocardiographic parameters

The comparison of echocardiographic parameters among all patients before surgery, at discharge, and three months after surgery is shown in Fig. 2 and Table 3. There was a significant reduction in LVOT peak gradient [69 (37, 97) mmHg vs 13 (9, 18) mmHg, P < 0.001], and a LVOT peak gradient of <30 mmHg was achieved in 99 of 105 patients at 3 months after TA-BSM. Compared with baseline, there was a significant reduction in the proportion of mitral regurgitation ≥ 2+ [88(84%) vs 9(9%), P < 0.001] and SAM grade ≥ 2 [91(87%) vs 6(6%), P < 0.001] at 3 months after operation. The LVOT diameter [13 (11, 16) mm vs 17 (16, 19) mm, P < 0.001] and closest distance between coaptation point of mitral valve and ventricular septum [6.14 (4.62, 9.00) mm vs 17.00 (14.00, 20.70) mm, P < 0.001] was increased at 3 months after TA-BSM. LV dimensional parameters showed improvements at 3 months after TA-BSM, including decreased thickness of the interventricular septum at the end-diastolic, and enlarged LV end-diastolic volume.

Treatment with transapical beating-heart septal myectomy led to significant decreased thickness of the interventricular septum, relieving the obstruction of the LVOT and MR grade, improved left atrial size and function, improve LV diastolic function during the short-term follow-up for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy patients. MR: mitral regurgitation; SAM: systolic anterior motion; LVOTG: left ventricular outflow tract grade; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASI: left atrial stiffness index.
Figure 2:

Treatment with transapical beating-heart septal myectomy led to significant decreased thickness of the interventricular septum, relieving the obstruction of the LVOT and MR grade, improved left atrial size and function, improve LV diastolic function during the short-term follow-up for hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy patients. MR: mitral regurgitation; SAM: systolic anterior motion; LVOTG: left ventricular outflow tract grade; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASI: left atrial stiffness index.

Clinical outcomes at 3 months after TA-BSM. (A) NYHA functional class; (B) 6-min walking distance; (C) LV mass index; (D) NT-proBNP; (E) hs-cTnI. NYHA: New York Heart Association; LV: left ventricular; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; hs-cTnI: high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I.
Figure 1:

Clinical outcomes at 3 months after TA-BSM. (A) NYHA functional class; (B) 6-min walking distance; (C) LV mass index; (D) NT-proBNP; (E) hs-cTnI. NYHA: New York Heart Association; LV: left ventricular; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; hs-cTnI: high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I.

Table 3:

Echocardiographic parameters and follow-up outcomes

ParametersBaseline (n = 105)At discharge (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
Anterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)20.9 (18.0, 25.0)13.0 (12.0, 15.0)*13.0 (11.5, 14.0)<0.001
Anterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)19.9 (15.0, 25.4)14.2 (12.2, 18.0)*15.0 (11.0, 17.2)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)17.1 (15.0, 21.0)13.0 (12.0, 16.8)*13.0 (11.1, 16.0)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)20.0 (16.0, 26.0)16.0 (12.8, 19.5)*15.0 (12.0, 18.0)<0.001
Maximum IVS thickness (mm)23.0 (19.0, 28.0)17.0 (15.0, 20.1)*16.0 (13.8, 20.0)<0.001
LV posterior wall (mm)9.0 (9.0, 11.0)12.0 (9.0, 16.0)*12.9 (10.0, 18.0)<0.001
LVOT diameter (mm)13 (11, 16)16 (14, 18)*17 (16, 19)#<0.001
LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)69 (37, 97)15 (10, 19)*13 (9, 18)<0.001
 <30 mmHg21 (20)97 (92)*99 (94.3)<0.001
 ≥30 mmHg84 (80)8 (8)*6 (5.7)<0.001
MV to IVS (mm)6.14 (4.62, 9.00)15.28 (12.32, 18.00)*17.00 (14.00, 20.70)#<0.001
SAM grade<0.001*
 05 (5)42 (40)48 (45.7)
 19 (9)57 (54)51 (48.6)
 224 (23)5 (5)6 (5.7)
 336 (34)1 (1)0 (0.0)
 431 (30)0 (0)0 (0.0)
MR grade<0.001*#
 00 (0)19 (18)34 (32.4)
 1+17 (16)70 (67)62 (59.0)
 2+23 (22)12 (11)8 (7.7)
 3+36 (34)3 (3)0 (0.0)
 4+29 (28)1 (1)1 (0.9)
MR area/LA area (%)32 (23, 41)11 (7, 16)*8 (6, 13)#<0.001
LVD (mm)44.0 (40.0, 47.0)48.0 (47.0, 51.0)*50.0 (46.0, 52.0)<0.001
LVEDV (ml)83.0 (73.6, 100.0)91.0 (82.0, 103.0)*104.0 (90.0, 116.0)#<0.001
LVESV (ml)27.0 (23.0, 32.4)30.0 (25.0, 36.0)*35.0 (26.0, 46.0)#<0.001
LVEF (%)67.0 (62.0, 74.0)68.0 (62.0, 72.0)66.0 (60.0, 70.0)0.010
LV longitudinal strain (%)−13.0 (−15.4, −9.2)NA−12.9 (−15.0, −10.0)0.797
LAD (mm)42.0 (39.8, 46.0)38.0 (35.0, 42.0)*37.0 (34.0, 40.0)<0.001
LAVI(ml/m243.5 (36.1, 55.4)NA33.2 (27.8, 39.6)<0.001
LAEDV (ml)80.0 (64.1, 92.0)57.0 (44.0, 75.0)*59.0 (49.0, 72.0)<0.001
LAESV (ml)39.8 (29.0, 52.0)27.0 (20.0, 37.0)*25.0 (19.7, 31.2)<0.001
LAEF (%)49.1 ± 10.752.2 ± 8.5*55.7 ± 8.0#<0.001
LASr (%)20.0 (16.0, 25.0)NA25.0 (21.0, 31.0)<0.001
LAScd (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−12.0 (−15.00, −9.0)0.012
LASct (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−13.0 (−16.0, −10.0)<0.001
E/e′ (average)13.6 (10.8, 17.3)12.1 (9.2, 14.7)*10.9 (9.1, 13.3)<0.001
Ar-A duration (ms)34.00 (16.00, 48.00)13.50 (−0.50, 29.75)*10.00 (−8.00, 20.00)#<0.001
TR Vmax (m/s)2.5 (2.2, 2.8)2.1 (1.9, 2.4)*2.2 (1.8, 2.4)<0.001
LA stiffness index (%−1)0.65 (0.48, 1.05)NA0.42 (0.30, 0.60)<0.001
ParametersBaseline (n = 105)At discharge (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
Anterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)20.9 (18.0, 25.0)13.0 (12.0, 15.0)*13.0 (11.5, 14.0)<0.001
Anterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)19.9 (15.0, 25.4)14.2 (12.2, 18.0)*15.0 (11.0, 17.2)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)17.1 (15.0, 21.0)13.0 (12.0, 16.8)*13.0 (11.1, 16.0)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)20.0 (16.0, 26.0)16.0 (12.8, 19.5)*15.0 (12.0, 18.0)<0.001
Maximum IVS thickness (mm)23.0 (19.0, 28.0)17.0 (15.0, 20.1)*16.0 (13.8, 20.0)<0.001
LV posterior wall (mm)9.0 (9.0, 11.0)12.0 (9.0, 16.0)*12.9 (10.0, 18.0)<0.001
LVOT diameter (mm)13 (11, 16)16 (14, 18)*17 (16, 19)#<0.001
LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)69 (37, 97)15 (10, 19)*13 (9, 18)<0.001
 <30 mmHg21 (20)97 (92)*99 (94.3)<0.001
 ≥30 mmHg84 (80)8 (8)*6 (5.7)<0.001
MV to IVS (mm)6.14 (4.62, 9.00)15.28 (12.32, 18.00)*17.00 (14.00, 20.70)#<0.001
SAM grade<0.001*
 05 (5)42 (40)48 (45.7)
 19 (9)57 (54)51 (48.6)
 224 (23)5 (5)6 (5.7)
 336 (34)1 (1)0 (0.0)
 431 (30)0 (0)0 (0.0)
MR grade<0.001*#
 00 (0)19 (18)34 (32.4)
 1+17 (16)70 (67)62 (59.0)
 2+23 (22)12 (11)8 (7.7)
 3+36 (34)3 (3)0 (0.0)
 4+29 (28)1 (1)1 (0.9)
MR area/LA area (%)32 (23, 41)11 (7, 16)*8 (6, 13)#<0.001
LVD (mm)44.0 (40.0, 47.0)48.0 (47.0, 51.0)*50.0 (46.0, 52.0)<0.001
LVEDV (ml)83.0 (73.6, 100.0)91.0 (82.0, 103.0)*104.0 (90.0, 116.0)#<0.001
LVESV (ml)27.0 (23.0, 32.4)30.0 (25.0, 36.0)*35.0 (26.0, 46.0)#<0.001
LVEF (%)67.0 (62.0, 74.0)68.0 (62.0, 72.0)66.0 (60.0, 70.0)0.010
LV longitudinal strain (%)−13.0 (−15.4, −9.2)NA−12.9 (−15.0, −10.0)0.797
LAD (mm)42.0 (39.8, 46.0)38.0 (35.0, 42.0)*37.0 (34.0, 40.0)<0.001
LAVI(ml/m243.5 (36.1, 55.4)NA33.2 (27.8, 39.6)<0.001
LAEDV (ml)80.0 (64.1, 92.0)57.0 (44.0, 75.0)*59.0 (49.0, 72.0)<0.001
LAESV (ml)39.8 (29.0, 52.0)27.0 (20.0, 37.0)*25.0 (19.7, 31.2)<0.001
LAEF (%)49.1 ± 10.752.2 ± 8.5*55.7 ± 8.0#<0.001
LASr (%)20.0 (16.0, 25.0)NA25.0 (21.0, 31.0)<0.001
LAScd (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−12.0 (−15.00, −9.0)0.012
LASct (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−13.0 (−16.0, −10.0)<0.001
E/e′ (average)13.6 (10.8, 17.3)12.1 (9.2, 14.7)*10.9 (9.1, 13.3)<0.001
Ar-A duration (ms)34.00 (16.00, 48.00)13.50 (−0.50, 29.75)*10.00 (−8.00, 20.00)#<0.001
TR Vmax (m/s)2.5 (2.2, 2.8)2.1 (1.9, 2.4)*2.2 (1.8, 2.4)<0.001
LA stiffness index (%−1)0.65 (0.48, 1.05)NA0.42 (0.30, 0.60)<0.001
*△

P < 0.05 versus baseline,

#

P < 0.05 versus at discharge.

Ar-A duration: the time difference between duration of pulmonary vein flow and mitral inflow during atrial contraction; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; IVS: interventricular septum; LA: left atrial; LAD: left atrial end-systolic dimension; LAEDV: left atrial end-diastolic volume; LAEF: left atrial ejection fraction; LAESV: left atrial end-systolic volume; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; LV: left ventricular; LVD: left ventricular end-diastolic dimension; LVEDV: left ventricular end-diastolic volume; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; LVESV: left ventricular end-systolic volume; LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; MR: mitral regurgitation; MV to IVS: closest distance between coaptation point of mitral valve and ventricular septum was measured at late-systolic; SAM: systolic anterior motion; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity.

Table 3:

Echocardiographic parameters and follow-up outcomes

ParametersBaseline (n = 105)At discharge (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
Anterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)20.9 (18.0, 25.0)13.0 (12.0, 15.0)*13.0 (11.5, 14.0)<0.001
Anterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)19.9 (15.0, 25.4)14.2 (12.2, 18.0)*15.0 (11.0, 17.2)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)17.1 (15.0, 21.0)13.0 (12.0, 16.8)*13.0 (11.1, 16.0)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)20.0 (16.0, 26.0)16.0 (12.8, 19.5)*15.0 (12.0, 18.0)<0.001
Maximum IVS thickness (mm)23.0 (19.0, 28.0)17.0 (15.0, 20.1)*16.0 (13.8, 20.0)<0.001
LV posterior wall (mm)9.0 (9.0, 11.0)12.0 (9.0, 16.0)*12.9 (10.0, 18.0)<0.001
LVOT diameter (mm)13 (11, 16)16 (14, 18)*17 (16, 19)#<0.001
LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)69 (37, 97)15 (10, 19)*13 (9, 18)<0.001
 <30 mmHg21 (20)97 (92)*99 (94.3)<0.001
 ≥30 mmHg84 (80)8 (8)*6 (5.7)<0.001
MV to IVS (mm)6.14 (4.62, 9.00)15.28 (12.32, 18.00)*17.00 (14.00, 20.70)#<0.001
SAM grade<0.001*
 05 (5)42 (40)48 (45.7)
 19 (9)57 (54)51 (48.6)
 224 (23)5 (5)6 (5.7)
 336 (34)1 (1)0 (0.0)
 431 (30)0 (0)0 (0.0)
MR grade<0.001*#
 00 (0)19 (18)34 (32.4)
 1+17 (16)70 (67)62 (59.0)
 2+23 (22)12 (11)8 (7.7)
 3+36 (34)3 (3)0 (0.0)
 4+29 (28)1 (1)1 (0.9)
MR area/LA area (%)32 (23, 41)11 (7, 16)*8 (6, 13)#<0.001
LVD (mm)44.0 (40.0, 47.0)48.0 (47.0, 51.0)*50.0 (46.0, 52.0)<0.001
LVEDV (ml)83.0 (73.6, 100.0)91.0 (82.0, 103.0)*104.0 (90.0, 116.0)#<0.001
LVESV (ml)27.0 (23.0, 32.4)30.0 (25.0, 36.0)*35.0 (26.0, 46.0)#<0.001
LVEF (%)67.0 (62.0, 74.0)68.0 (62.0, 72.0)66.0 (60.0, 70.0)0.010
LV longitudinal strain (%)−13.0 (−15.4, −9.2)NA−12.9 (−15.0, −10.0)0.797
LAD (mm)42.0 (39.8, 46.0)38.0 (35.0, 42.0)*37.0 (34.0, 40.0)<0.001
LAVI(ml/m243.5 (36.1, 55.4)NA33.2 (27.8, 39.6)<0.001
LAEDV (ml)80.0 (64.1, 92.0)57.0 (44.0, 75.0)*59.0 (49.0, 72.0)<0.001
LAESV (ml)39.8 (29.0, 52.0)27.0 (20.0, 37.0)*25.0 (19.7, 31.2)<0.001
LAEF (%)49.1 ± 10.752.2 ± 8.5*55.7 ± 8.0#<0.001
LASr (%)20.0 (16.0, 25.0)NA25.0 (21.0, 31.0)<0.001
LAScd (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−12.0 (−15.00, −9.0)0.012
LASct (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−13.0 (−16.0, −10.0)<0.001
E/e′ (average)13.6 (10.8, 17.3)12.1 (9.2, 14.7)*10.9 (9.1, 13.3)<0.001
Ar-A duration (ms)34.00 (16.00, 48.00)13.50 (−0.50, 29.75)*10.00 (−8.00, 20.00)#<0.001
TR Vmax (m/s)2.5 (2.2, 2.8)2.1 (1.9, 2.4)*2.2 (1.8, 2.4)<0.001
LA stiffness index (%−1)0.65 (0.48, 1.05)NA0.42 (0.30, 0.60)<0.001
ParametersBaseline (n = 105)At discharge (n = 105)3 months after myectomy (n = 105)P-value
Anterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)20.9 (18.0, 25.0)13.0 (12.0, 15.0)*13.0 (11.5, 14.0)<0.001
Anterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)19.9 (15.0, 25.4)14.2 (12.2, 18.0)*15.0 (11.0, 17.2)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (base) (mm)17.1 (15.0, 21.0)13.0 (12.0, 16.8)*13.0 (11.1, 16.0)<0.001
Posterior IVS thickness (mid) (mm)20.0 (16.0, 26.0)16.0 (12.8, 19.5)*15.0 (12.0, 18.0)<0.001
Maximum IVS thickness (mm)23.0 (19.0, 28.0)17.0 (15.0, 20.1)*16.0 (13.8, 20.0)<0.001
LV posterior wall (mm)9.0 (9.0, 11.0)12.0 (9.0, 16.0)*12.9 (10.0, 18.0)<0.001
LVOT diameter (mm)13 (11, 16)16 (14, 18)*17 (16, 19)#<0.001
LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)69 (37, 97)15 (10, 19)*13 (9, 18)<0.001
 <30 mmHg21 (20)97 (92)*99 (94.3)<0.001
 ≥30 mmHg84 (80)8 (8)*6 (5.7)<0.001
MV to IVS (mm)6.14 (4.62, 9.00)15.28 (12.32, 18.00)*17.00 (14.00, 20.70)#<0.001
SAM grade<0.001*
 05 (5)42 (40)48 (45.7)
 19 (9)57 (54)51 (48.6)
 224 (23)5 (5)6 (5.7)
 336 (34)1 (1)0 (0.0)
 431 (30)0 (0)0 (0.0)
MR grade<0.001*#
 00 (0)19 (18)34 (32.4)
 1+17 (16)70 (67)62 (59.0)
 2+23 (22)12 (11)8 (7.7)
 3+36 (34)3 (3)0 (0.0)
 4+29 (28)1 (1)1 (0.9)
MR area/LA area (%)32 (23, 41)11 (7, 16)*8 (6, 13)#<0.001
LVD (mm)44.0 (40.0, 47.0)48.0 (47.0, 51.0)*50.0 (46.0, 52.0)<0.001
LVEDV (ml)83.0 (73.6, 100.0)91.0 (82.0, 103.0)*104.0 (90.0, 116.0)#<0.001
LVESV (ml)27.0 (23.0, 32.4)30.0 (25.0, 36.0)*35.0 (26.0, 46.0)#<0.001
LVEF (%)67.0 (62.0, 74.0)68.0 (62.0, 72.0)66.0 (60.0, 70.0)0.010
LV longitudinal strain (%)−13.0 (−15.4, −9.2)NA−12.9 (−15.0, −10.0)0.797
LAD (mm)42.0 (39.8, 46.0)38.0 (35.0, 42.0)*37.0 (34.0, 40.0)<0.001
LAVI(ml/m243.5 (36.1, 55.4)NA33.2 (27.8, 39.6)<0.001
LAEDV (ml)80.0 (64.1, 92.0)57.0 (44.0, 75.0)*59.0 (49.0, 72.0)<0.001
LAESV (ml)39.8 (29.0, 52.0)27.0 (20.0, 37.0)*25.0 (19.7, 31.2)<0.001
LAEF (%)49.1 ± 10.752.2 ± 8.5*55.7 ± 8.0#<0.001
LASr (%)20.0 (16.0, 25.0)NA25.0 (21.0, 31.0)<0.001
LAScd (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−12.0 (−15.00, −9.0)0.012
LASct (%)−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)NA−13.0 (−16.0, −10.0)<0.001
E/e′ (average)13.6 (10.8, 17.3)12.1 (9.2, 14.7)*10.9 (9.1, 13.3)<0.001
Ar-A duration (ms)34.00 (16.00, 48.00)13.50 (−0.50, 29.75)*10.00 (−8.00, 20.00)#<0.001
TR Vmax (m/s)2.5 (2.2, 2.8)2.1 (1.9, 2.4)*2.2 (1.8, 2.4)<0.001
LA stiffness index (%−1)0.65 (0.48, 1.05)NA0.42 (0.30, 0.60)<0.001
*△

P < 0.05 versus baseline,

#

P < 0.05 versus at discharge.

Ar-A duration: the time difference between duration of pulmonary vein flow and mitral inflow during atrial contraction; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; IVS: interventricular septum; LA: left atrial; LAD: left atrial end-systolic dimension; LAEDV: left atrial end-diastolic volume; LAEF: left atrial ejection fraction; LAESV: left atrial end-systolic volume; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; LV: left ventricular; LVD: left ventricular end-diastolic dimension; LVEDV: left ventricular end-diastolic volume; LVEF: left ventricular ejection fraction; LVESV: left ventricular end-systolic volume; LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; MR: mitral regurgitation; MV to IVS: closest distance between coaptation point of mitral valve and ventricular septum was measured at late-systolic; SAM: systolic anterior motion; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity.

At 3 months after myectomy, LAVI decreased in 80 of 105 (76%) patients, with a median change of 20%, and the criteria for LA reverse remodelling were met in 50 of 105 (48%) patients. Moreover, there was significant improvement of LV diastolic function, including decreased early mitral inflow velocity and the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity (E/e′) [13.6 (10.8, 17.3) vs 10.9 (9.1, 13.3), P < 0.001], the time difference between duration of pulmonary vein flow and mitral inflow during atrial contraction (Ar-A) [34.00 (16.00, 48.00) ms vs 10.00 (−8.00, 20.00) ms, P < 0.001], tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity [2.5 (2.2, 2.8) m/s vs 2.2 (1.8, 2.4) m/s, P < 0.001] and LA stiffness index [0.65 (0.48, 1.05)%−1 vs 0.42 (0.30, 0.60)%−1, P < 0.001] (Fig. 3). There was also significant improvement of LA strains, including LA reservoir strain (LASr) [20.0 (16.0, 25.0)% vs 25.0 (21.0, 31.0)%, P < 0.001], LA conduit strain (LAScd) [−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)% vs −12.0 (−15.00, −9.0)%, P < 0.001] and LA contraction strain (LASct) [−10.0 (−13.0, −7.0)% vs −13.0 (−16.0, −10.0)%, P < 0.001], while LV global longitudinal strain (GLS) [−13.0 (−15.4, −9.2)% vs −12.9 (−15.0, −10.0)%, P > 0.05] showed no statistical significance at 3 months after TA-BSM (Table 3).

Echocardiographic parameters and follow-up outcomes. (A) LVOT diameter; (B) LA maximum volume index; (C) LASr; (D) LASI; (E): E/e′; (F): Ar-A duration. LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; LA: left atrial; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LASI: left atrial stiffness index; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; Ar-A duration: the time difference between duration of pulmonary vein flow and mitral inflow during atrial contraction.
Figure 3:

Echocardiographic parameters and follow-up outcomes. (A) LVOT diameter; (B) LA maximum volume index; (C) LASr; (D) LASI; (E): E/e′; (F): Ar-A duration. LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; LA: left atrial; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LASI: left atrial stiffness index; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; Ar-A duration: the time difference between duration of pulmonary vein flow and mitral inflow during atrial contraction.

Relationship of changes to biomarkers and echocardiographic parameters of LA and LV function

Table 4 shows significant associations between reduction in serum NT-proBNP level and echocardiographic parameters of LVOT peak gradient, LA end-systolic dimension (LAD), LAVI, E/A, E/e′, LAESV, LASr, LAScd and LA stiffness index (P < 0.05). Moreover, echocardiographic parameters of LVOT peak gradient, LAVI, E, E/A, E/e′, LAESV and LA stiffness index were significant associated with reduction in serum hs-cTnI level (P < 0.05).

Table 4:

Linear regression of log2 changes in biomarkers on echocardiographic changes

Interceptb coefficients95% CIP-value
Log2 change in NT-proBNP, ng/l
  LVOT peak gradient, mmHg0.3140.0130.007–0.020<0.001
  LAD (mm)0.1350.0940.047–0.014<0.001
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.2270.0570.040–0.074<0.001
  E (cm/s)−0.2980.008−0.001–0.0180.083
  E/A−0.2570.7210.159–1.2820.012
  E/e′ (average)−0.1820.0680.013–0.1230.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)−0.2580.328−0.091–0.7460.123
MR area/LA area (%)−0.1040.013−0.005–0.0310.144
  LAESV (ml)0.0200.0460.017–0.0740.002
  LASr (%)0.175−0.119−0.165–0.073<0.001
  LAScd (%)−0.2430.0910.041–0.140<0.001
  LASct (%)−0.2960.030−0.021–0.0820.250
  LA stiffness index−0.1040.7900.355–1.226<0.001
Log2 change in hs-cTnI (ng/l)
  LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)0.7480.0090.003–0.0150.004
  LAD (mm)0.4310.027−0.017–0.0700.233
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.7870.0470.032–0.062<0.001
  E (cm/s)0.4250.0130.005–0.0210.002
  E/A0.3980.6320.138–1.1250.013
  E/e′ (average)0.4650.0600.011–0.1090.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)0.3440.154−0.217–0.5250.412
 MR area/LA area (%)0.265−0.001−0.016–0.0150.920
  LAESV (ml)0.7170.0480.024–0.073<0.001
  LASr (%)0.447−0.035−0.079–0.0100.127
  LAScd (%)0.3170.021−0.024–0.0670.353
  LASct (%)0.3290.015−0.030–0.0610.510
  LA stiffness index (%−1)0.5790.8220.448–1.195<0.001
Interceptb coefficients95% CIP-value
Log2 change in NT-proBNP, ng/l
  LVOT peak gradient, mmHg0.3140.0130.007–0.020<0.001
  LAD (mm)0.1350.0940.047–0.014<0.001
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.2270.0570.040–0.074<0.001
  E (cm/s)−0.2980.008−0.001–0.0180.083
  E/A−0.2570.7210.159–1.2820.012
  E/e′ (average)−0.1820.0680.013–0.1230.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)−0.2580.328−0.091–0.7460.123
MR area/LA area (%)−0.1040.013−0.005–0.0310.144
  LAESV (ml)0.0200.0460.017–0.0740.002
  LASr (%)0.175−0.119−0.165–0.073<0.001
  LAScd (%)−0.2430.0910.041–0.140<0.001
  LASct (%)−0.2960.030−0.021–0.0820.250
  LA stiffness index−0.1040.7900.355–1.226<0.001
Log2 change in hs-cTnI (ng/l)
  LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)0.7480.0090.003–0.0150.004
  LAD (mm)0.4310.027−0.017–0.0700.233
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.7870.0470.032–0.062<0.001
  E (cm/s)0.4250.0130.005–0.0210.002
  E/A0.3980.6320.138–1.1250.013
  E/e′ (average)0.4650.0600.011–0.1090.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)0.3440.154−0.217–0.5250.412
 MR area/LA area (%)0.265−0.001−0.016–0.0150.920
  LAESV (ml)0.7170.0480.024–0.073<0.001
  LASr (%)0.447−0.035−0.079–0.0100.127
  LAScd (%)0.3170.021−0.024–0.0670.353
  LASct (%)0.3290.015−0.030–0.0610.510
  LA stiffness index (%−1)0.5790.8220.448–1.195<0.001

E/A: early mitral inflow velocity/late mitral inflow velocity; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; E: early mitral inflow velocity; LA: left atrial; LAD: left atrial end-systolic dimension; LAESV: left atrial end-systolic volume; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; MR: mitral regurgitation; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity.

Table 4:

Linear regression of log2 changes in biomarkers on echocardiographic changes

Interceptb coefficients95% CIP-value
Log2 change in NT-proBNP, ng/l
  LVOT peak gradient, mmHg0.3140.0130.007–0.020<0.001
  LAD (mm)0.1350.0940.047–0.014<0.001
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.2270.0570.040–0.074<0.001
  E (cm/s)−0.2980.008−0.001–0.0180.083
  E/A−0.2570.7210.159–1.2820.012
  E/e′ (average)−0.1820.0680.013–0.1230.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)−0.2580.328−0.091–0.7460.123
MR area/LA area (%)−0.1040.013−0.005–0.0310.144
  LAESV (ml)0.0200.0460.017–0.0740.002
  LASr (%)0.175−0.119−0.165–0.073<0.001
  LAScd (%)−0.2430.0910.041–0.140<0.001
  LASct (%)−0.2960.030−0.021–0.0820.250
  LA stiffness index−0.1040.7900.355–1.226<0.001
Log2 change in hs-cTnI (ng/l)
  LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)0.7480.0090.003–0.0150.004
  LAD (mm)0.4310.027−0.017–0.0700.233
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.7870.0470.032–0.062<0.001
  E (cm/s)0.4250.0130.005–0.0210.002
  E/A0.3980.6320.138–1.1250.013
  E/e′ (average)0.4650.0600.011–0.1090.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)0.3440.154−0.217–0.5250.412
 MR area/LA area (%)0.265−0.001−0.016–0.0150.920
  LAESV (ml)0.7170.0480.024–0.073<0.001
  LASr (%)0.447−0.035−0.079–0.0100.127
  LAScd (%)0.3170.021−0.024–0.0670.353
  LASct (%)0.3290.015−0.030–0.0610.510
  LA stiffness index (%−1)0.5790.8220.448–1.195<0.001
Interceptb coefficients95% CIP-value
Log2 change in NT-proBNP, ng/l
  LVOT peak gradient, mmHg0.3140.0130.007–0.020<0.001
  LAD (mm)0.1350.0940.047–0.014<0.001
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.2270.0570.040–0.074<0.001
  E (cm/s)−0.2980.008−0.001–0.0180.083
  E/A−0.2570.7210.159–1.2820.012
  E/e′ (average)−0.1820.0680.013–0.1230.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)−0.2580.328−0.091–0.7460.123
MR area/LA area (%)−0.1040.013−0.005–0.0310.144
  LAESV (ml)0.0200.0460.017–0.0740.002
  LASr (%)0.175−0.119−0.165–0.073<0.001
  LAScd (%)−0.2430.0910.041–0.140<0.001
  LASct (%)−0.2960.030−0.021–0.0820.250
  LA stiffness index−0.1040.7900.355–1.226<0.001
Log2 change in hs-cTnI (ng/l)
  LVOT peak gradient (mmHg)0.7480.0090.003–0.0150.004
  LAD (mm)0.4310.027−0.017–0.0700.233
  LAVI (ml/m2)0.7870.0470.032–0.062<0.001
  E (cm/s)0.4250.0130.005–0.0210.002
  E/A0.3980.6320.138–1.1250.013
  E/e′ (average)0.4650.0600.011–0.1090.016
  TR Vmax (m/s)0.3440.154−0.217–0.5250.412
 MR area/LA area (%)0.265−0.001−0.016–0.0150.920
  LAESV (ml)0.7170.0480.024–0.073<0.001
  LASr (%)0.447−0.035−0.079–0.0100.127
  LAScd (%)0.3170.021−0.024–0.0670.353
  LASct (%)0.3290.015−0.030–0.0610.510
  LA stiffness index (%−1)0.5790.8220.448–1.195<0.001

E/A: early mitral inflow velocity/late mitral inflow velocity; E/e′: early mitral inflow velocity/the average of septal and lateral mitral annular early diastolic velocity; E: early mitral inflow velocity; LA: left atrial; LAD: left atrial end-systolic dimension; LAESV: left atrial end-systolic volume; LAScd: left atrial conduit strain; LASct: left atrial contraction strain; LASr: left atrial reservoir strain; LAVI: left atrial maximum volume index; LVOT: left ventricular outflow tract; MR: mitral regurgitation; NT-proBNP: N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide; TR Vmax: tricuspid regurgitation maximum velocity.

DISCUSSION

Based on the initial feasibility report of TA-BSM, this study showed early LA reverse remodelling in HOCM patients post TA-BSM. Key findings include: (i) TA-BSM effectively relieved LVOT obstruction and mitral regurgitation, significantly improving LA size and function. LAVI reduced by 76%, with a median change of 20%, and 48% of patients achieved LA reverse remodelling criteria; (ii) Diastolic function markers improved early post-procedure, while LV global longitudinal strain showed no significant change at 3-month follow-up; (iii) Indicators of LA reverse remodelling correlated with reduced serum NT-proBNP and hs-cTnI levels, suggesting improved LV relaxation and clinical status.

Compared to conventional septal myectomy, TA-BSM offers real-time echocardiography navigation for precise LV geometry assessment. This allows accurate septal resection planning and immediate reassessment of haemodynamic changes, marking an advance over traditional surgery. TA-BSM is minimally invasive without cardiopulmonary bypass, enhancing acceptability among HOCM patients [13]. In our initial study, median mechanical ventilation duration post-TA-BSM was 3.8 h [7].

It was widely accepted that HOCM entails LA enlargement and diastolic dysfunction, elevating risks for severe cardiac events. Nguyen et al. [14] reported early and enduring LA volume decline post traditional myectomy. Similarly, we found significant LA volume reduction in TA-BSM patients. The early decrease in LA volume was mainly attributed to relief of obstruction and improvement of mitral regurgitation [15]. Besides reduced LA volume, significant improvements in LASr, LAScd and LASct were observed over 3 months. These findings support the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) consensus on heart failure imaging, emphasizing LASr for assessing LV filling pressure [16]. In this study, we provided comprehensive parametric measures confirming the early left atrial reverse remodelling after septal myectomy.

In recent decades, therapies like medical treatment, surgical myectomy and alcohol septal ablation have proven effective for HOCM symptoms and survival rates [17]. A novel small molecule, Mavacamten, improves diastolic function and promotes LA reverse remodelling in HCM patients [18]. Notably, its mechanism differs from surgical approaches—it inhibits cardiac myosin to reduce cross-bridge formation, lower LV stiffness, improve compliance and decrease filling pressure [18]. In this study, along with a notable reduction in ventricular wall thickness and mitral regurgitation after septal myectomy, there were consistent improvements in LV diastolic function and LA volume and function. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that the early LA reverse remodelling after TA-BSM surgery is partly due to the improvement of LV diastolic function.

Three months post TA-BSM surgery, a notable reduction in LA stiffness index was observed in this study. This index reflects LA resistance to pressure and volume changes and independently affects E/e′, LA size and LV diastolic function in HCM patients [19]. It’s also predictive of cardiovascular events in diverse cardiovascular conditions [19]. The decrease signifies enhanced LA and LV diastolic function. As LA undergoes reverse remodelling, it improves blood pumping efficiency, enhancing exercise tolerance and alleviating symptoms like dyspnoea, chest pain and fatigue.

Serum biochemical markers correlated significantly with echocardiography parameters in the study, supporting TA-BSM surgery’s effectiveness in reducing LV filling pressure, improving LA size, and enhancing function. The decrease in Hs-cTnI and NT-proBNP levels observed indicates an improvement in LA reverse remodelling indices, indicating early recovery of LV diastolic function, cardiac function and clinical status.

Increased LA stiffness index and diastolic pressure correlate with poor prognosis in cardiovascular diseases [19, 20]. TA-BSM surgery potentially enhances cardiac performance and reduces complications linked to elevated LA pressures by decreasing stiffness and improving diastolic function. LA reverse remodelling is crucial in cardiovascular care, enhancing mechanical performance and overall health outlook. Lowering LA pressure mitigates risks like atrial fibrillation, stroke and heart failure. Surgical interventions that achieve substantial reverse remodelling predict better long-term outcomes [21]. Significant improvement post TA-BSM surgery indicates a favourable response and potential for improved cardiovascular health in the long run.

The absence of a control group limits definitive conclusions about whether off-pump myectomy’s reported benefits are solely due to the surgical technique or other factors. Off-pump surgery on a beating heart may reduce tissue damage and speed up recovery, potentially improving outcomes. Maintaining continuous blood flow to the heart could prevent ischaemic damage linked to cardiopulmonary bypass. Avoiding bypass might also lower inflammation risks, aiding recovery. However, without a control group, these points remain speculative, underscoring the need for rigorous randomized trials to systematically assess these potential benefits.

Study limitations

The study’s single-arm design without a control group restricts interpretation of non-inferiority to conventional surgical septal myectomy, potentially influenced by uncontrolled factors. Future randomized controlled trials comparing off-pump to on-pump myectomy are crucial. The small sample size underscores the need for larger studies. Early-stage TA-BSM limits findings to initial follow-up; extended, large-scale trials are essential to validate long-term efficacy and safety, especially concerning LA reverse remodelling and overall outcomes.

CONCLUSION

This pioneering study examines early LA reverse remodelling in HOCM patients after TA-BSM, highlighting improvements in LVOT and mitral regurgitation alongside significant enhancements in LA size and function during short-term follow-up. Biomarkers of myocardial wall stress showed reductions, suggesting early improvements in LV relaxation and clinical status post-surgery.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors thank the study participants, as well as Yilei Ma, MD, PhD and Yipeng Gao, MD for assistance with the statistical analysis for this manuscript.

FUNDING

This work was supported by Cardiovascular Ultrasound Innovation Team of Yunnan Province [202305AS350021 to Y.L.].

Conflict of interest: none declared.

DATA AVAILABILITY

The data underlying this article will be shared by the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author contributions

Shirui Lu: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Software; Writing—original draft. Jun Zhang: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Ying Zhu: Conceptualization; Data curation. Wei Zhou: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Xueqing Cheng: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Hui Wang: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Yue Chen: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Xiang Wei: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis. Yani Liu: Conceptualization; Data curation; Formal analysis; Funding acquisition; Supervision; Writing—review & editing.

Reviewer information

Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery thanks Nikolay O. Travin, Mateo Marin-Cuartas and the other anonymous reviewers for their contribution to the peer review process of this article.

REFERENCES

1

Antunes
M
,
Scudeler
TL.
 
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc
 
2020
;
27
:
100503
.

2

Essayagh
B
,
Resseguier
N
,
Michel
N
,
Casalta
AC
,
Renard
S
,
Donghi
V
et al
Left atrial dysfunction as marker of poor outcome in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
Arch Cardiovasc Dis
 
2021
;
114
:
96
104
.

3

Inciardi
RM
,
Bonelli
A
,
Biering-Sorensen
T
,
Cameli
M
,
Pagnesi
M
,
Lombardi
CM
et al
Left atrial disease and left atrial reverse remodelling across different stages of heart failure development and progression: a new target for prevention and treatment
.
Eur J Heart Fail
 
2022
;
24
:
959
75
.

4

Nuzzi
V
,
Raafs
A
,
Manca
P
,
Henkens
MTHM
,
Gregorio
C
,
Boscutti
A
et al
Left atrial reverse remodeling in dilated cardiomyopathy
.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
 
2023
;
36
:
154
62
.

5

Nishimura
RA
,
Seggewiss
H
,
Schaff
HV.
 
Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy: surgical myectomy and septal ablation
.
Circ Res
 
2017
;
121
:
771
83
.

6

Quintana
E
,
Schaff
HV
,
Stradiņš
P
,
Mestres
CA.
 
Beating heart transapical septal myectomy-a less invasive septal reduction option for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg
 
2024
;
65
:
ezae003
.

7

Fang
J
,
Liu
Y
,
Zhu
Y
,
Li
R
,
Wang
R
,
Wang
DW
et al
First-in-human transapical beating-heart septal myectomy in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy
.
J Am Coll Cardiol
 
2023
;
82
:
575
86
.

8

Mitchell
C
,
Rahko
PS
,
Blauwet
LA
,
Canaday
B
,
Finstuen
JA
,
Foster
MC
et al
Guidelines for performing a comprehensive transthoracic echocardiographic examination in adults: recommendations from the american society of echocardiography
.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
 
2019
;
32
:
1
64
.

9

Verheyen
N
,
Batzner
A
,
Zach
D
,
Zirlik
A
,
Gerull
B
,
Frantz
S
et al
Spatial relationship between mitral valve and ventricular septum assessed by resting echocardiography to diagnose left ventricular outflow tract obstruction in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging
 
2023
;
24
:
710
8
.

10

Moorjani
N
,
Rana
BS
,
Wells
FC
, Systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve. In:
Moorjani
N
,
Rana
BS
,
Wells
FC
(eds).
Operative Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Surgery
.
London
:
Springer London
,
2018
,
221
-
32
.

11

Zoghbi
WA
,
Adams
D
,
Bonow
RO
,
Enriquez-Sarano
M
,
Foster
E
,
Grayburn
PA
et al
Recommendations for noninvasive evaluation of native valvular regurgitation: a report from the american society of echocardiography developed in collaboration with the society for cardiovascular magnetic resonance
.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
 
2017
;
30
:
303
71
.

12

Nagueh
SF
,
Phelan
D
,
Abraham
T
,
Armour
A
,
Desai
MY
,
Dragulescu
A
et al
Recommendations for multimodality cardiovascular imaging of patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography, in collaboration with the American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, the Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and the Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography
.
J Am Soc Echocardiogr
 
2022
;
35
:
533
69
.

13

Li
J
,
Wei
X.
 
Transapical beating-heart septal myectomy for hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with latent obstruction
.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg
 
2023
;
65
:
ezad425
.

14

Nguyen
A
,
Schaff
HV
,
Nishimura
RA
,
Dearani
JA
,
Geske
JB
,
Lahr
BD
et al
Determinants of reverse remodeling of the left atrium after transaortic myectomy
.
Ann Thorac Surg
 
2018
;
106
:
447
53
.

15

Ha
KE
,
Choi
KU
,
Lee
HJ
,
Gwak
SY
,
Kim
K
,
Cho
I
et al
Effects of septal myectomy on left atrial and left ventricular function in obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
ESC Heart Fail
 
2023
;
10
:
2939
47
.

16

Smiseth
OA
,
Morris
DA
,
Cardim
N
,
Cikes
M
,
Delgado
V
,
Donal
E
et al;
Reviewers: This document was reviewed by members of the 2018–2020 EACVI Scientific Documents Committee
.
Multimodality imaging in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction: an expert consensus document of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging
.
Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging
 
2022
;
23
:
e34
e61
.

17

Cui
H
,
Schaff
HV
,
Wang
S
,
Lahr
BD
,
Rowin
EJ
,
Rastegar
H
et al
Survival following alcohol septal ablation or septal myectomy for patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
J Am Coll Cardiol
 
2022
;
79
:
1647
55
.

18

Hegde
SM
,
Lester
SJ
,
Solomon
SD
,
Michels
M
,
Elliott
PM
,
Nagueh
SF
et al
Effect of mavacamten on echocardiographic features in symptomatic patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
.
J Am Coll Cardiol
 
2021
;
78
:
2518
32
.

19

Kim
D
,
Seo
JH
,
Choi
KH
,
Lee
SH
,
Choi
JO
,
Jeon
ES
et al
Prognostic implications of left atrial stiffness index in heart failure patients with preserved ejection fraction
.
JACC Cardiovasc Imaging
 
2023
;
16
:
435
45
.

20

Zhao
Y
,
Sun
Q
,
Han
J
,
Lu
Y
,
Zhang
Y
,
Song
W
et al
Left atrial stiffness index as a marker of early target organ damage in hypertension
.
Hypertens Res
 
2021
;
44
:
299
309
.

21

Maille
B
,
Das
M
,
Hussein
A
,
Shaw
M
,
Chaturvedi
V
,
Williams
E
et al
Reverse electrical and structural remodeling of the left atrium occurs early after pulmonary vein isolation for persistent atrial fibrillation
.
J Interv Card Electrophysiol
 
2020
;
58
:
9
19
.

ABBREVIATIONS

    ABBREVIATIONS
     
  • HOCM

    Hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy

  •  
  • LA

    Left atrial

  •  
  • LAVI

    Left atrial maximum volume index

  •  
  • LV

    Left ventricular

  •  
  • LVOT

    Left ventricular outflow tract

  •  
  • TA-BSM

    Transapical beating-heart septal myectomy

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.