Key result
Physio ring shows no 10-year survival benefit over Classic rigid ring in degenerative MR repair.
Why the study?
Physio ring is considered an improved version of the Classic rigid ring and is more widely used in mitral valve repair, but long-term comparative outcomes are unclear.
Does mitral valve repair with the Physio ring improve long-term outcomes compared to the Classic rigid ring in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease?
Cohort (n=306)
No
Does mitral valve repair with the Physio ring improve long-term outcomes compared to the Classic rigid ring in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease?
Absolute Event Rate: 91.5% vs 93.1%
p-value: p=0.177
Long-term outcomes of mitral valve repair for degenerative disease are comparable between the Classic and Physio annuloplasty rings.
Comparable survival supports either ring in practice; leaves open randomized confirmation of durability in degenerative mitral repair.
Objectives. Physio ring (SR) is considered an improved version of the Classic rigid ring (RR). Today, SR is more widely used in mitral valve (MV) repair. We sought to compare the long-term outcomes of repair with RR and SR in degenerative mitral valve disease. Methods. In a computerized registry of our institution, 306 patients had MV repair with either RR (139 patients) or SR (167 patients) ring between 2005 and 2015. Fifteen of them had concomitant tricuspid valve repair. Ninety-two (30.1%) had Barlow’s disease and 214 (69.9%) had fibroelastic deficiency. The patients had similar demographic and echocardiographic characteristics. Results. There were 4 (1.3%) operative mortalities. Mean follow-up time was 107.4 ± 13.2 months. Left ventricular end diastolic and end systolic diameters significantly improved in both groups but not between groups. Survival at 10 years was 84.6% (93.1% in RR and 91.5% in SR; p=0.177) and 10-year freedom from recurrent MR≥2+ was 74.5% (88.2% in RR and 86.3% in SR; p=0.110). Reoperations for repair failure were 8 in RR and 6 in SR. By Cox regression analysis, Barlow’s disease and preoperative MR=4+ were predictors of repair failure. Old age (≥70 years), NYHA functional class IV and pulmonary artery systolic pressure (≥40 mmHg) were predictors of poor survival by univariate analysis. Conclusion. Long-term outcomes of repair for degenerative MV disease with the Classic and Physio rings are comparable. We also reiterate the importance of large size annuloplasty rings for Barlow’s disease to avoid the incidence left ventricular outflow obstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sidiki et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Degenerative mitral valve disease (n=306). Physio ring (SR) vs. Classic rigid ring (RR) was evaluated on 10-year survival (p=0.177). Mitral valve repair with the Physio ring showed comparable 10-year survival to the Classic rigid ring in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease (91.5% vs 93.1%; p=0.177).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: