Key result
Mitral valve replacement was associated with a significantly lower risk of heart failure readmission within 5 years compared to mitral valve repair (HR 0.60) in patients with functional mitral regurgitation.
Why the study?
Mitral valve repair is the preferred surgical treatment for functional mitral regurgitation despite limited supporting evidence, and it remains uncertain whether repair or replacement is more effective.
Does mitral valve replacement reduce heart failure readmission and improve survival compared to mitral valve repair in patients with functional mitral regurgitation?
Cohort (n=344)
No
Does mitral valve replacement reduce heart failure readmission and improve survival compared to mitral valve repair in patients with functional mitral regurgitation?
Hazard Ratio: 0.6 (95% CI 0.41–0.88)
p-value: p=0.008
In patients with functional mitral regurgitation, mitral valve replacement was associated with lower heart failure readmission but higher overall mortality compared to mitral valve repair.
MVR's lower HF readmission offset by higher mortality should not change practice; leaves open optimal strategy in functional MR.
Background: Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is an increasing burden as population ages. Mitral valve repair (MVr) is the preferred surgical treatment of FMR despite limited evidence supporting its efficacy. Mitral valve replacement (MVR) is the alternative procedure typically reserved for patients who are at higher risk or refractory to MVr. The present study aims to determine which of the two procedures is more effective in the surgical treatment of FMR. Methods: 344 charts of FMR patients who received either MVr (n = 263) or MVR (n = 81) from 2004-2016 at our institution were reviewed. Treatment efficacy was assessed based on heart failure (HF)-readmission and survival rates within 5 years from discharge. Propensity score approach with inverse probability weighting and Cox regression models were employed to evaluate procedural impact on survival and rehospitalizations, respectively. Follow-up echocardiographic data from the original cohort was assessed for differences in metrics between procedural groups at >6 months (MVr: n = 75; MVR: n = 23) and 1 year (MVr: n = 75; MVR: n = 18) post-op. Results: MVR patients had a lower risk of being readmitted for HF within 5 years compared to the MVr group (HR-adj (95% CI): 0.60 (0.41 - 0.88), p = 0.008). MVR patients also had a higher overall risk of death (HR-adj (95% CI): 1.82 (1.05 - 3.16), p = 0.034) but this was borderline significantly different at 5 years cut-off (p = 0.057). Conclusions: Higher HF readmission in MVr patients than in sicker, higher surgical-risk MVR patients reflects the inadequacy of MVr to treat FMR. Novel approaches to MVR may be necessary to adequately manage FMR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gancayco et al. (2022) conducted a cohort in Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) (n=344). Mitral valve replacement (MVR) vs. Mitral valve repair (MVr) was evaluated on Heart failure (HF) readmission within 5 years (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.88, p=0.008). Mitral valve replacement was associated with a significantly lower risk of heart failure readmission within 5 years compared to mitral valve repair (HR 0.60) in patients with functional mitral regurgitation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: