Why the study?
Does chordal replacement compared to resection improve survival and reduce MR recurrence in patients with mitral regurgitation due to posterior leaflet prolapse?
Does chordal replacement compared to resection improve survival and reduce MR recurrence in patients with mitral regurgitation due to posterior leaflet prolapse?
Mitral valve repair for degenerative MR provides excellent results, but the surgical technique (resection vs. chordal replacement) should be individualized based on anatomical findings.
Mitral valve (MV) repair for mitral regurgitation (MR) due to posterior leaflet (PL) prolapse is achieved nowadays with a great success rate and a good survival, similar, in certain subgroups. In this paper, Sakaguchi et al describe their results in two groups of patients with PL prolapse. Some patients underwent resection (resection group) and others chordal replacement with/out limited resection (respect group). Results were similar in terms of survival and MR recurrence. Our goal is to eliminate, as much as possible, MR when a patient with degenerative MR is operated on. Reduction of the mitral orifice and consequently an increase of the transmitral gradient is the rule. MV repair for degenerative MR provides great results, but there is not a single surgical technique. A close evaluation of the anatomical findings will allow us to choose the best strategy for the individual patient. An open mind is the most important characteristic that a surgeon should have to repair a prolapsing PL without residual regurgitation and dangerous gradients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Calafiore et al. (2020) conducted an editorial in Mitral regurgitation due to posterior leaflet prolapse. Chordal replacement with/out limited resection vs. Resection was evaluated on Survival and MR recurrence.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: