Key result
Mitral valve repair for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation had similar 5-year survival compared to replacement but lower operative mortality.
Why the study?
This study evaluated outcomes of mitral valve surgery for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation.
Does mitral valve repair compared to mitral valve replacement improve survival and reduce complications in patients undergoing CABG for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation?
Cohort (n=358)
No
Does mitral valve repair compared to mitral valve replacement improve survival and reduce complications in patients undergoing CABG for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation?
In patients with severe ischemic mitral regurgitation undergoing CABG, mitral valve repair offers similar 5-year survival to replacement but with lower operative mortality and readmission rates.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Repair may lower operative mortality in ischemic MR; leaves open need for randomized confirmation of survival equivalence.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated outcomes of mitral valve surgery for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR). METHODS: Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) with concomitant mitral valve repair (MVr) or replacement (MVR) for severe IMR at a single center between 2010 and 2017 were included. The primary outcome was 5-year survival. Secondary outcomes included operative mortality and morbidity, hospital readmission, recurrence of at least moderate mitral regurgitation (MR), and mitral valve reoperation. RESULTS: A total of 358 patients underwent concomitant mitral valve surgery with CABG for severe IMR (275 MVr and 83 MVR). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted operative mortality was higher in MVR (16% vs 8%; P = .04). MVR patients had higher rates of postoperative renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and deep sternal wound infection. The unadjusted 5-year survival was similar (MVR 64% vs MVr 64%; P = .41), a finding that persisted after risk-adjustment. The 5-year freedom from mitral valve reoperation was 96% and 97% (P = .47). Freedom from at least moderate MR at 1-year and 3-years was 100% vs 86% (P = .09) and 100% vs 68% (P = .06) for MVR and MVr, respectively. However, only three MVr patients developed severe MR by 3 years. Cumulative hazards for all-cause readmission and heart failure-specific readmission were higher with MVR. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a trend towards higher risk of MR recurrence, patients undergoing MVr have similar rates of survival and mitral valve reoperation, with lower rates of readmission at 5-years. This, combined with lower operative mortality rates, makes MVr a reasonable choice particularly in sicker patients with higher operative risk and more limited life expectancy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dufendach et al. (2019) conducted a cohort in Severe ischemic mitral regurgitation (n=358). Mitral valve repair (MVr) vs. Mitral valve replacement (MVR) was evaluated on 5-year survival (p=.41). Mitral valve repair for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation had similar 5-year survival compared to replacement but lower operative mortality.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: