Key result
Restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty had lower 30-day mortality than replacement (5.81% vs 9.61%, P<0.01) and similar mid-term mortality despite worse baseline ejection fraction and NYHA class.
Why the study?
Does restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty improve survival and functional outcomes compared to mitral valve replacement in patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation?
Population
138 patients who underwent operation for coronary artery disease and ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR)
Comparison
Restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty (MVP) (n=86) vs Mitral valve replacement with a mechanical…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
up to 84 months
Authors
Loading...
May support annuloplasty in ischemic mitral regurgitation despite worse baselines; leaves open randomized confirmation of outcomes versus replacement.
Cohort (n=138)
Does restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty improve survival and functional outcomes compared to mitral valve replacement in patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation?
Absolute Event Rate: 5.81% vs 9.61%
p-value: p=<0.01
Restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty may be superior to valve replacement for ischemic mitral regurgitation, yielding lower 30-day mortality despite patients having worse baseline ejection fraction and NYHA class.
Mićović et al. (2008) conducted a cohort in Ischemic mitral regurgitation and coronary artery disease (n=138). Restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty (MVP) vs. Mitral valve replacement (MVR) with a mechanical prosthesis was evaluated on 30-day mortality (p=<0.01). Restrictive mitral valve annuloplasty had lower 30-day mortality than replacement (5.81% vs 9.61%, P<0.01) and similar mid-term mortality despite worse baseline ejection fraction and NYHA class.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: