Key result
Mitral valve reconstruction lacks sufficient evidence to confirm clinical differences versus replacement for MR.
Why the study?
Issues on the improvement of the management of patients with connective tissue dysplasia and mitral valve pathology remain unresolved due to lack of large clinical trials with sufficient evidence.
Does mitral valve reconstruction surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to valve replacement in patients with mitral regurgitation and connective tissue dysplasia?
Does mitral valve reconstruction surgery improve clinical outcomes compared to valve replacement in patients with mitral regurgitation and connective tissue dysplasia?
There is a significant lack of large clinical trials comparing mitral valve reconstruction and replacement in patients with connective tissue dysplasia.
Recently, the main cause of mortality and disability in the world are cardiovascular diseases. By the data from autopsies, valve defects have 4-7% prevalence, and most common are mitral valve defects. Valve prolapse is caused by in-born defect of connective tissue development. Reconstruction surgery continue becoming more common in mitral regurgitation (MR) correction and is more preferable than the valve replacement. Regardless the long history of successful management of MR, official data from most world cardiosurgery centers shows than reconstruction operations are done just in 10-20% cases. Issues on the improvement of the management of patients with connective tissue dysplasia are still open. There is enough literature on laboratory and experimental studies showing benefits and disadvantages of one or other methods, but there are no large clinical trials with sufficient evidence, to confirm or stronly deny differences in clinical outcomes depending on the selection of one or other method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bogachev-Prokofiev et al. (2016) conducted a review in Mitral regurgitation in connective tissue dysplasia. Current literature lacks large clinical trials with sufficient evidence to confirm differences in clinical outcomes between reconstruction and replacement for mitral regurgitation.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: