BACKGROUND: Effects of partial left ventriculectomy (PLV) remain ill-defined because mitral regurgitation (MR) repair by isolated annuloplasty alone has been reported to improve patients with dilated left ventricle and severe MR. METHODS: Among patients undergoing PLV, 120 had paired pre- and postoperative (<1 week) Doppler echocardiograms. Effects of preoperative MR were studied by comparing 45 patients with no preoperative MR (MR-) and 75 patients with significant MR (MR+; MR = 1.51 when MR is enumerated as none = 0, mild = 1, moderate = 2). RESULTS: MR- patients as compared with the MR+ group were older (53.8 vs. 49.2 years, P = 0.047), had less frequent dilated cardiomyopathy (33.3% vs 49.3%,P <0.01), similar ventricular dimension (72.3 mm vs 73.0 mm), septal thickness (9.5 mm vs 9.6 mm), posterior wall, fractional shortening (15.9% vs 16.8%) and ventricular mass (330 g vs 345 g), resulting in comparably reduced functional capacity (NYHA 3.40 vs 3.67). Although the MR- group required significantly less frequent mitral procedure (64.4% vs 84.0%, P < 0.01) and shorter cardiac arrest time, they had similar postoperative MR (0.22 vs 0.39), highly significant parallel reduction in ventricular dimension (P < 0.001 in either group), and improved %FS (P <0.001 in either group), resulting in similar hospital survival (87.1% vs 86.4%) and 90-day survival (71.1% vs 78.7%) with significantly comparable improvement in functional class (P = 0.011 in both groups). Histological severity of interstitial fibrosis (P = 0.80), weight (P = 0.93), and thickness (P = 0.76) of excised myocardium was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with no preoperative MR were found to benefit from PLV as did patients with significant MR. Beneficial effects of PLV appeared to derive mainly from volume reduction rather than abolished MR in this study.
BACKGROUND: Effects of partial left ventriculectomy (PLV) remain ill-defined because mitral regurgitation (MR) repair by isolated annuloplasty alone has been reported to improve patients with dilated left ventricle and severe MR. METHODS: Among patients undergoing PLV, 120 had paired pre- and postoperative (<1 week) Doppler echocardiograms. Effects of preoperative MR were studied by comparing 45 patients with no preoperative MR (MR-) and 75 patients with significant MR (MR+; MR = 1.51 when MR is enumerated as none = 0, mild = 1, moderate = 2). RESULTS: MR- patients as compared with the MR+ group were older (53.8 vs. 49.2 years, P = 0.047), had less frequent dilated cardiomyopathy (33.3% vs 49.3%,P <0.01), similar ventricular dimension (72.3 mm vs 73.0 mm), septal thickness (9.5 mm vs 9.6 mm), posterior wall, fractional shortening (15.9% vs 16.8%) and ventricular mass (330 g vs 345 g), resulting in comparably reduced functional capacity (NYHA 3.40 vs 3.67). Although the MR- group required significantly less frequent mitral procedure (64.4% vs 84.0%, P < 0.01) and shorter cardiac arrest time, they had similar postoperative MR (0.22 vs 0.39), highly significant parallel reduction in ventricular dimension (P < 0.001 in either group), and improved %FS (P <0.001 in either group), resulting in similar hospital survival (87.1% vs 86.4%) and 90-day survival (71.1% vs 78.7%) with significantly comparable improvement in functional class (P = 0.011 in both groups). Histological severity of interstitial fibrosis (P = 0.80), weight (P = 0.93), and thickness (P = 0.76) of excised myocardium was comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION:Patients with no preoperative MR were found to benefit from PLV as did patients with significant MR. Beneficial effects of PLV appeared to derive mainly from volume reduction rather than abolished MR in this study.