Key result
Mitral annuloplasty shows no survival or MACCE difference versus replacement but is linked to larger LVEDD.
Why the study?
Does mitral valve annuloplasty compared to mitral valve replacement improve survival or reduce MACCE in patients with severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation?
Cohort (n=436)
Does mitral valve annuloplasty compared to mitral valve replacement improve survival or reduce MACCE in patients with severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation?
Mitral valve replacement is a suitable alternative to annuloplasty for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation, offering better ventricular remodeling and lower MACCE risk in younger patients with reduced ejection fraction.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Annuloplasty was associated with similar survival/MACCE but larger LVEDD versus replacement; leaves open optimal surgical strategy for ischemic MR.
Although practice guidelines recommend surgery for patients with severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation (CIMR), they do not specify whether to repair or replace the mitral valve. 436 consecutive patients with severe CIMR were eligible for inclusion in the study, of which 316 (72.5%) underwent mitral valve annuloplasty (MVA) whereas 120 (27.5%) received mitral valve replacement (MVR). At 59 months (interquartile range, 37-85 months) follow-up, though the left ventricle end-diastolic diameter was markedly larger (P = 0.019) in the MVA group than in the MVR group, no significant difference was observed in overall survival, freedom from cardiac death, or avoidance of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE). MVA provides better results in freedom from cardiac death in subgroups of age ≥65years and left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) ≥50% (P = 0.014 and P = 0.016, respectively), whereas MVR was associated with a lower risk of MACCE in subgroups of age <65years, EF <50% and left ventricular inferior basal wall motion abnormality (BWMA) (all P < 0.05). In conclusion, MVR is a suitable management of patients with severe CIMR, and it is more favorable to ventricular remodeling. The choice of MVA or MVR should depend on major high-risk clinical factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2018) conducted a cohort in Severe chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation (CIMR) (n=436). Mitral valve annuloplasty (MVA) vs. Mitral valve replacement (MVR) was evaluated on Overall survival, freedom from cardiac death, or avoidance of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE). Mitral valve annuloplasty compared to replacement showed no significant difference in overall survival or MACCE, but resulted in a larger left ventricle end-diastolic diameter.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: