Background. This was a study to compare the results of mitral valve (MV) repair and MV replacement for the treatment of functional mitral regurgitation (MR) in advanced dilated and ischemic cardiomyopathy (DCM). Methods. One-hundred and thirty-two patients with severe functional MR and systolic dysfunction (mean ejection fraction 0.32 +/- 0.078) underwent mitral surgery in the same time frame. The decision to replace rather than repair the MV was taken when 1 or more echocardiographic predictors of repair failure were identified at the preoperative echocardiogram. Eighty-five patients (64.4%) received MV repair and 47 patients (35.6%) received MV replacement. Preoperative characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. Only ejection fraction was significantly lower in the MV repair group (0.308 +/- 0.077 vs 0.336 +/- 0.076, p = 0.04). Results. Hospital mortality was 2.3% for MV repair and 12.5% for MV replacement (p = 0.03). Actuarial survival at 2.5 years was 92 +/- 3.2% for MV repair and 73 +/- 7.9% for MV replacement (p = 0.02). At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years (median, 1.6 years), in the MV repair group LVEF significantly increased (from 0.308 +/- 0.077 to 0.382 +/- 0.095, p < 0.0001) and LV dimensions significantly decreased (p = 0.0001). On the other hand, in the MV replacement group LVEF did not significantly change (from 0.336 +/- 0.076 to 0.31 +/- 0.11, p = 0.56) and the reduction of LV dimensions was not significant. Mitral valve replacement was identified as the only predictor of hospital (odds ratio, 6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 31; p = 0.03) and overall mortality (hazard ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 8.9; p = 0.02). Conclusions. In patients with advanced dilated and ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe functional MR, MV replacement is associated with higher in-hospital and late mortality compared with MV repair. Therefore, mitral repair should be preferred whenever possible in this clinical setting.
Mitral replacement or repair for functional mitral regurgitation in dilated and ischemic cardiomyopathy: is it really the same?
DE BONIS , MICHELE;ALFIERI , OTTAVIO
2012-01-01
Abstract
Background. This was a study to compare the results of mitral valve (MV) repair and MV replacement for the treatment of functional mitral regurgitation (MR) in advanced dilated and ischemic cardiomyopathy (DCM). Methods. One-hundred and thirty-two patients with severe functional MR and systolic dysfunction (mean ejection fraction 0.32 +/- 0.078) underwent mitral surgery in the same time frame. The decision to replace rather than repair the MV was taken when 1 or more echocardiographic predictors of repair failure were identified at the preoperative echocardiogram. Eighty-five patients (64.4%) received MV repair and 47 patients (35.6%) received MV replacement. Preoperative characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. Only ejection fraction was significantly lower in the MV repair group (0.308 +/- 0.077 vs 0.336 +/- 0.076, p = 0.04). Results. Hospital mortality was 2.3% for MV repair and 12.5% for MV replacement (p = 0.03). Actuarial survival at 2.5 years was 92 +/- 3.2% for MV repair and 73 +/- 7.9% for MV replacement (p = 0.02). At a mean follow-up of 2.3 years (median, 1.6 years), in the MV repair group LVEF significantly increased (from 0.308 +/- 0.077 to 0.382 +/- 0.095, p < 0.0001) and LV dimensions significantly decreased (p = 0.0001). On the other hand, in the MV replacement group LVEF did not significantly change (from 0.336 +/- 0.076 to 0.31 +/- 0.11, p = 0.56) and the reduction of LV dimensions was not significant. Mitral valve replacement was identified as the only predictor of hospital (odds ratio, 6; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 31; p = 0.03) and overall mortality (hazard ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.1 to 8.9; p = 0.02). Conclusions. In patients with advanced dilated and ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe functional MR, MV replacement is associated with higher in-hospital and late mortality compared with MV repair. Therefore, mitral repair should be preferred whenever possible in this clinical setting.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
