OBJECTIVES: Mitral valve repair is the preferred method used to address mitral valve regurgitation, whereas transcatheter mitral valve repair is recommended for high-risk patients. We evaluated the risk-predictive value of the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (aa-CCI) in the setting of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. METHODS: The perioperative course and 1-year follow-up of 537 patients who underwent isolated or combined minimally invasive mitral valve surgery were evaluated for 1-year mortality as the primary end point and other adverse events. The predictive values of the EuroSCORE II and STS score were compared to that of the aa-CCI by a comparative analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves. Restricted cubic splines were applied to find optimal aa-CCI cut-off values for the increased likelihood of experiencing the predefined adverse end points. Consequently, the perioperative course and postoperative outcome of the aa-CCI ≥8 patients and the remainder of the sample were analysed. RESULTS: The predictive value of the aa-CCI does not significantly differ from those of the EuroSCORE II or STS score. Patients with an aa-CCI ≥8 were identified as a subgroup with a significant increase of mortality and other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The aa-CCI displays a suitable predictive ability for patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. In particular, multimorbid or frail patients may benefit from the extension of the objectively assessed parameters, in addition to the STS score or EuroSCORE II. Patients with an aa-CCI ≥8 have a very high surgical risk and should receive very careful attention.
OBJECTIVES: Mitral valve repair is the preferred method used to address mitral valve regurgitation, whereas transcatheter mitral valve repair is recommended for high-risk patients. We evaluated the risk-predictive value of the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (aa-CCI) in the setting of minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. METHODS: The perioperative course and 1-year follow-up of 537 patients who underwent isolated or combined minimally invasive mitral valve surgery were evaluated for 1-year mortality as the primary end point and other adverse events. The predictive values of the EuroSCORE II and STS score were compared to that of the aa-CCI by a comparative analysis of receiver operating characteristic curves. Restricted cubic splines were applied to find optimal aa-CCI cut-off values for the increased likelihood of experiencing the predefined adverse end points. Consequently, the perioperative course and postoperative outcome of the aa-CCI ≥8 patients and the remainder of the sample were analysed. RESULTS: The predictive value of the aa-CCI does not significantly differ from those of the EuroSCORE II or STS score. Patients with an aa-CCI ≥8 were identified as a subgroup with a significant increase of mortality and other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: The aa-CCI displays a suitable predictive ability for patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve surgery. In particular, multimorbid or frail patients may benefit from the extension of the objectively assessed parameters, in addition to the STS score or EuroSCORE II. Patients with an aa-CCI ≥8 have a very high surgical risk and should receive very careful attention.