Literature DB >> 30482532

Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms.

Edward L Hannan1, Zaza Samadashvili2, Craig R Smith3, Stephen J Lahey4, Jeffrey P Gold5, Desmond Jordan3, Thoralf M Sundt6, Leonard Girardi7, Mohammed H Ashraf8, Joanna Chikwe9.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purposes of this study are to compare outcomes of mitral valve repair (MV-repair) and mitral valve replacement for patients with severe mitral regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms and to examine variations in surgeon choice of procedure and outcomes by surgeon volume.
METHODS: In total, 2259 consecutive patients in 42 New York State hospitals with the characteristics mentioned previously who underwent mitral valve repair (1801, 79.7%) or replacement between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014, were identified from a mandatory statewide clinical registry. Propensity-matching was used to compare mortality and competing risk analyses were used to compare nonfatal outcomes. Median follow-up was 4.0 years. The use of mitral repair and risk-adjusted mortality for surgery were also examined as a function of individual surgeon mitral case volume.
RESULTS: Propensity-matched patients who underwent MV-repair experienced a significantly lower mortality rate at 4 years (3.5% vs 12.1%, P < .001). Greater-volume surgeons were more likely to perform MV-repairs (92% vs 84%, 74%, and 69% in lower volume quartiles, respectively). No significant differences in mortality were observed among volume quartiles.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with chronic severe primary mitral valve regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no CHF symptoms who underwent MV-repair experienced lower mortality and no different reoperation, CHF, or stroke readmission rates than patients who underwent replacement. Greater-volume surgeons were more likely than their lower volume counterparts to choose mitral repair. Repair should be considered as the surgical option for these patients whenever possible.
Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  mitral valve mortality; mitral valve readmissions; mitral valve reoperations; mitral valve repair; mitral valve replacement; propensity matching

Year:  2018        PMID: 30482532     DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.091

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg        ISSN: 0022-5223            Impact factor:   5.209


  4 in total

1.  Rivaroxaban in patients undergoing surgical mitral valve repair.

Authors:  Feridoun Noohi; Parham Sadeghipour; Sirous Kordrostami; Omid Shafe; Majid Maleki; Majid Kyavar; Hooman Bakhshandeh; Yousef Rezaei; Mehrad Rokni; Jamal Moosavi; Ahmad Amin; Ahmad Tashakori Beheshti; Saeid Hosseini
Journal:  J Thromb Thrombolysis       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 2.300

Review 2.  Association between individual surgeon volume and outcome in mitral valve surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Berdel Akmaz; Sander M J van Kuijk; Peyman Sardari Nia
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2021-07       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Usability, performance and safety of a new device for degenerative mitral regurgitation: in vivo chronic evaluation.

Authors:  Jacob Zeitani; Giovanni Alfonso Chiariello; Rona Shofti; Piergiorgio Bruno; Massimo Massetti; Ottavio Alfieri
Journal:  Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg       Date:  2022-06-15

4.  Mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: early and mid-term outcomes.

Authors:  Jun Li; Yun Zhao; Tianyu Zhou; Yongshi Wang; Kai Zhu; Junyu Zhai; Yongxin Sun; Hao Lai; Chunsheng Wang
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 1.637

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.