| Literature DB >> 34513078 |
V E Vaykin1, M V Ryazanov2, D D Zhiltsov1, S A Zhurko1, A B Gamzaev3, G V Bolshukhin4, S A Fedorov1, A P Medvedev5.
Abstract
The aim of the study was to assess the effectiveness of modified mitral valve repair in comparison with traditional methods of correcting ischemic mitral regurgitation. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: coronary artery disease; ischemic mitral regurgitation; mitral valve reconstruction
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34513078 PMCID: PMC8353715 DOI: 10.17691/stm2021.13.2.07
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sovrem Tekhnologii Med ISSN: 2076-4243
Figure 1Mechanism of ischemic mitral insufficiency
Figure 2Mitral valve with U-shaped sutures along the base of the posterior leaflet (1) and 1 cm beyond the anterior (2) and posterior (3) commissures
Figure 3Measurement of the distance between the front (1) and back (2) commissures
Figure 4Stitched autopericardial strip (indicated by an arrow) is “planted” on the annulus fibrosus of the mitral valve
Figure 5End result of plasty: all the sutures are tied, the annulus fibrosus of the mitral valve has been reduced, satisfactory leaflet coaptation has been achieved
Initial patient characteristics
| Parameters | Group 1 — CABG + autopericardial strip (n=23) | Group 2 — CABG + ring (n=26) | Group 3 — CABG (n=31) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) (Me [Q1; Q3]) | 60.0 | 59.0 | 64.0 | p1–2=0.452 |
| [55.0; 65.0] | [52.0; 63.0] | [59.0; 69.0] |
| |
|
| ||||
| Ejection fraction (%) | 50.0 | 49.5 | 52.0 | p1–2=0.652 |
| (Me [Q1; Q3]) | [46.0; 55.0] | [45.8; 54.3] | [47.0; 58.0] | p1–3=0.362 |
| p2–3=0.180 | ||||
| End-diastolic volume (ml) | 141.0 | 155.5 | 105.0 | p1–2=0.009 |
| (Me [Q1; Q3]) | [131.0; 154.0] | [140.8; 174.3] | [94.0; 115.0] |
|
|
| ||||
| NYHA II (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 1 | 1 | 4 | p1–3=0.11 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 3.85±3.77 | 12.90±6.02 | p2–3=0.14 |
| NYHA III (р±σр): | p1–2>0.05 | |||
| n | 21 | 21 | 27 | p1–3>0.5 |
| % | 91.30±5.88 | 80.77±7.73 | 87.10±6.02 | p2–3>0.5 |
| NYHA IV (р±σр): | p1–2=0.091 | |||
| n | 1 | 4 | 0 | p1–3=0.073 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 15.38±7.08 | 0.0 |
|
| Mitral regurgitation grade II+ (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 12 | 14 | 31 |
|
| % | 52.17±10.42 | 53.85±9.78 | 100.0±0.0 |
|
| Mitral regurgitation grade III+ (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 11 | 12 | 0 |
|
| % | 47.83±10.42 | 46.15±9.78 | 0.0 |
|
Patient characteristics in the postoperative period (Me [Q1; Q3])
| Parameters | Group 1 — CABG + autopericardial strip | Group 2 — CABG + ring | Group 3 — CABG | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Myocardial revascularization index | 3.0 | 3.0 | 3.0 | p1–2=0.506 |
| [2.0; 4.0] | [2.0; 3.0] | [3.0; 4.0] | p1–3=0.703 | |
| p2–3=0.248 | ||||
| End-diastolic volume (ml) | 135.0 | 138.5 | 100.0 | p1–2=0.078 |
| [115.0; 138.0] | [127.8; 142.5] | [90.0; 112.0] |
| |
|
| ||||
| Ejection fraction (%) | 52.0 | 50.0 | 52.0 | p1–2=0.416 |
| [48.0; 56.0] | [45.5; 55.3] | [49.0; 56.0] | p1–3=0.661 | |
| p2–3=0.172 | ||||
| ITU (bed-day) | 3.0 | 3.0 | 2.0 | p1–2=0.975 |
| [2.0; 5.0] | [2.0; 5.0] | [2.0; 3.0] |
| |
|
| ||||
| Mitral regurgitation grade 0 (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 17 | 17 | 2 |
|
| % | 73.91±9.16 | 65.38±9.33 | 6.45±4.41 |
|
| Mitral regurgitation grade I (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 6 | 9 | 23 |
|
| % | 26.0±9.16 | 34.62±9.33 | 74.19±7.86 |
|
| Mitral regurgitation grade II (р±σр): | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 0 | 0 | 6 |
|
| % | 0.0 | 0.0 | 19.35±7.10 |
|
Lethality and complications in the postoperative period (р±σр)
| Parameters | Group 1 — CABG + autopericardial strip (n=23) | Group 2 — CABG + ring (n=26) | Group 3 — CABG (n=31) | p |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lethality: | p1–2=0.062 | |||
| n | 1 | 0 | 0 | p1–3=0.064 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 0.0 | 0.0 | p2–3>0.5 |
| Multiple organ dysfunction syndrome: | p1–2=0.2 | |||
| n | 3 | 1 | 1 | p1–3=0.086 |
| % | 13.04±7.02 | 3.85±3.77 | 3.23±3.17 | p2–3>0.5 |
| Acute heart failure: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 2 | 4 | 1 | p1–3>0.5 |
| % | 8.70±5.88 | 15.38±7.08 | 3.23±3.17 |
|
| Acute respiratory failure: |
| |||
| n | 3 | 0 | 2 | p1–3>0.5 |
| % | 13.04±7.02 | 0.0 | 6.45±4.41 |
|
| Atrial fibrillation: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 1 | 2 | 2 | p1–3>0.5 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 7.69±5.23 | 6.45±4.41 | p2–3>0.5 |
| Hemorrhage: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 1 | 2 | 0 | p1–3=0.064 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 7.69±5.23 | 0.0 |
|
| Tamponade: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 1 | 2 | 0 | p1–3=0.064 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 7.69±5.23 | 0.0 |
|
| Reosteosynthesis of the sternum: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 1 | 1 | 0 | p1–3=0.064 |
| % | 4.35±4.25 | 3.85±3.77 | 0.0 | p2–3=0.07 |
| Encephalopathy: | p1–2>0.5 | |||
| n | 2 | 3 | 0 |
|
| % | 8.70±5.88 | 11.54±6.27 | 0.0 |
|
| Pleurisy: | p1–2=0.3 | |||
| n | 4 | 8 | 1 |
|
| % | 17.39±7.90 | 30.77±9.05 | 3.23±3.17 |
|