Key result
Beating heart mitral valve replacement with total preservation of the subvalvular apparatus may improve short- and mid-term outcomes for secondary mitral regurgitation with poor left ventricular function.
Why the study?
Poor outcomes of secondary MR with impaired LV function after conventional surgery prompted alternative approaches, leading authors to assess the evidence for beating heart MVR without aortic clamping versus conventional cardioplegic arrest.
Does beating heart mitral valve replacement without aortic cross-clamping improve outcomes in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation and poor left ventricular function compared to conventional cardioplegic arrest?
Does beating heart mitral valve replacement without aortic cross-clamping improve outcomes in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation and poor left ventricular function compared to conventional cardioplegic arrest?
Beating heart mitral valve replacement without aortic cross-clamping may offer better myocardial protection and improved outcomes for high-risk patients with secondary mitral regurgitation and severe left ventricular dysfunction.
May support evaluation in high-risk secondary MR; leaves open need for RCTs before practice change.
The poor early and mid-term prognosis of secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) with impaired left ventricular function after restrictive annuloplasty with cardioplegic arrest has opened the way for transcatheter repair. The indication for surgery is only incontestable when concomitant coronary revascularization is required. Beating heart mitral valve surgery without aortic clamping has been promoted as an alternative to the technique of cardioplegic arrest. Its potential advantage is the elimination of ischemic reperfusion injury and its impact on myocardial function. On the other hand a randomized study confirmed that for ischemic MR, mitral valve replacement (MVR) reduces the rate of MR recurrence and re-hospitalization compared to restrictive annuloplasty. We performed a review of the literature to assess the strength of the evidence supporting the efficacy of beating heart MVR without aortic clamping compared to the conventional technique for secondary MR with poor left ventricular function. In a randomized study of patients with chronic severe mitral regurgitation and left ventricular dysfunction, beating heart MVR was associated with better LV function, reduction of cardiac enzymes early postoperatively, reduced duration of mechanical ventilation, and ICU than MVR using warm blood cardioplegic arrest. This together with the absence of related perioperative mortality and the major complications suggests that this technique is safe and beneficial to LV function. This finding has been verified by a multitude of other observational studies which have shown that the benefit of this technique is more palpable in cases of redo mitral surgery or in cases of MR with poor left ventricular function.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdelkader Boukhmis (2023) conducted a review in Secondary mitral regurgitation with poor left ventricular function. Beating heart mitral valve replacement without aortic cross-clamping vs. Conventional mitral valve replacement with cardioplegic arrest was evaluated. Beating heart mitral valve replacement with total preservation of the subvalvular apparatus may improve short- and mid-term outcomes for secondary mitral regurgitation with poor left ventricular function.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: