Key result
Premeasured neochordal replacement yields comparable rates of recurrent moderate-to-severe MR versus leaflet resection.
Why the study?
Neochordal replacement is a preferred technique for mitral valve repair, but comparative outcomes versus traditional leaflet resection are not well described.
Does neochordal replacement using premeasured neochordae improve outcomes compared to leaflet resection in patients undergoing mitral valve repair?
Cohort (n=201)
No
Does neochordal replacement using premeasured neochordae improve outcomes compared to leaflet resection in patients undergoing mitral valve repair?
Hazard Ratio: 0.82 (95% CI 0.25–2.69)
Absolute Event Rate: 15.5% vs 14.5%
p-value: p=.9
Premeasured neochordal replacement provides comparable mid-term outcomes to traditional leaflet resection for mitral valve repair, with similar rates of recurrent mitral regurgitation, reoperation, and mortality.
Premeasured neochordae may simplify mitral repair; single-center retrospective data leaves open comparative effectiveness versus resection.
Objective Neochordal replacement is a preferred technique for mitral valve repair. We describe a method for neochordal replacement utilizing premeasured neochords and compare outcomes to traditional leaflet resection. Methods This is a single institution retrospective review of all patients who underwent mitral valve repair from February 2008 to April 2024. Patients underwent leaflet resection or neochordal replacement using premeasured neochordae constructed with a chain of square knots based on preoperative echocardiography. The primary outcome was recurrence of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and reoperation. Statistical analyses included propensity score matching and multivariate analyses were performed to control for baseline differences. Results Among 201 patients (neochordal replacement: 154; leaflet resection: 47), median follow-up time was 4.29 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference in recurrence of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.25-2.69; P = .9), reoperation (HR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.232-3.576; P = .7), or mortality (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.09-1.88; P = .3). At 5 years, freedom from mitral regurgitation was 84.5% for neochordal replacement and 85.5% for leaflet resection. Multivariate analysis did not identify surgical technique as a significant predictor of recurrence of mitral regurgitation ( P = .86). Conclusions This mitral valve repair technique yields comparable outcomes to leaflet resection and is amenable to minimally invasive approaches.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gao et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in mitral valve regurgitation (n=201). Neochordal replacement using premeasured neochordae vs. Leaflet resection was evaluated on recurrence of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.25-2.69, p=.9). Neochordal replacement using premeasured neochordae yielded comparable rates of recurrent moderate to severe mitral regurgitation compared to leaflet resection (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.25-2.69; P=0.9).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: