Mitral Valve Repair and Replacement in Endocarditis: A Systematic Review of Literature

Surgery for Active Infective Endocarditis on Mitral Valve: Anatomical, Surgical, and Disease Factors as Long-Term Outcome Modifiers

Background and Objectives: Determinants of long-term outcomes after surgery for native mitral valve endocarditis have not been thoroughly investigated. The aim of this study was to assess anatomical, disease, and surgical risk factors for long-term mortality and need of reintervention, in patients undergoing mitral valve surgery for active endocarditis. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent surgery for active native mitral valve endocarditis at three academic centres, between 2000 and 2022, were analysed. The primary outcome was long-term survival. The secondary outcome was the freedom from mitral reoperation. Survival curves were constructed with Kaplan-Meier methodology. Multivariable Cox regression was used to identify demographic, anatomical, disease, and surgical factors associated with late mortality and reoperation. Results: 335 consecutive patients with active mitral endocarditis were analysed. Two hundred and one patients (70.5%) had infection confined to the valve cusp whereas 89 (25.6%) had invasive disease extended to the annulus and surrounding tissues. Preoperative neurological events occurred at the diagnosis in 52 cases. Streptococci were the most common causative organisms followed by Staphylococcus aureus, Coagulase-negative Staphylococcus, and Enterococcus. Valve repair was performed in 108 patients (32.2%). Survival at 5 and 10 years was 70.1% and 59.2%, respectively. Staphylococcus emerged as an independent predictor of late mortality, along with age, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and previous cardiac surgery. Survival was considerably reduced in patients with S. aureus compared with those without (log rank p < 0.001). The type of surgery (repair vs. replacement) did not emerge as a risk factor for late mortality and reoperation. Seventeen patients underwent mitral reoperation during the follow-up. The 5- and 10-year freedom from reoperation was 94.7% and 91.8%, respectively. Conclusions: Active mitral valve endocarditis remains a life-threatening disease with impaired survival. While lesion characteristics influenced surgical decision-making and intraoperative management, their impact on long-term survival and freedom from reintervention appears to be moderated by other factors such as infecting pathogens and patient comorbidities.

An unusual presentation of subacute Haemophilus parainfluenzae endocarditis in a low-risk woman treated by minimally invasive mitral valve repair: a case report

BACKGROUND

HACEK endocarditis is usually insidious and can often be difficult to diagnose due to the slow-growing nature of the organisms. This report presents our experience in treating a patient with Haemophilus parainfluenzae endocarditis.

CASE PRESENTATION

We describe the case of a previously fit and well 23 year-old woman who presented to her local emergency department with a four-week history of persistent febrile illness. She had associated nausea, vomiting, and lethargy. This was preceded by an episode of mucopurulent rhinorrhoea. She was treated empirically with oral amoxicillin for a putative diagnosis of rhinosinusitis. Initially, her symptoms abated, however, she was readmitted with high fevers and a new pansystolic murmur. Transthoracic echocardiography revealed a large, mobile, echogenic mass, tethered to the posterior mitral valve leaflet (PMVL) and mild mitral regurgitation (MR). On examination, she had multiple non-tender, erythematous macules on the plantar surface of her feet, consistent with Janeway lesions. Two separate blood cultures grew H. parainfluenzae. Infectious diseases recommended a four-week course of intravenous ceftriaxone. Transesophageal echocardiography demonstrated a perforation within the P3 segment of the PMVL. Subsequently, the patient underwent mitral valve repair surgery with an uneventful recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our case highlights the importance of promptly diagnosing HACEK endocarditis. A prolonged course of antibiotic therapy can be lifesaving, and surgery is often necessary to address complications such as perforation within the mitral valve leaflets. In our patient, we were able to perform a sliding P2 leaflet plasty for good quality repair of the mitral valve, through a minimally invasive right anterior thoracotomy.

Mitral Valve Repair vs. Replacement by Different Etiologies - A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

When mitral valve (MV) surgery is indicated, repair is preferred over replacement; however, this preference is not supported by evidence from clinical trials. Furthermore, the benefits of MV repair may not be universal for all etiologies of MV disease.Methods and Results: This study identified a total of 18,428 patients who underwent MV repair (n=4,817) or MV replacement (n=13,611) during 2001-2018 from Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database. These patients were classified into 4 etiologies: infective endocarditis (IE, n=2,678), rheumatic heart disease (RHD, n=4,524), ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR, n=3,893), and degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR, n=7,333). After propensity matching, all-cause mortality during follow-up was lower among patients receiving MV repair than among patients receiving MV replacement in the IE, IMR, and DMR groups (hazard ratio [HR]=0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-0.93; HR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.73-0.92; and HR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.64-0.84, respectively). However, in the RHD group, the MV reoperation rate was higher after MV repair than after MV replacement (subdistribution HR=1.91, 95% CI: 1.02-3.55).

CONCLUSIONS

In comparison with MV replacement, MV repair was associated with a lower late mortality in patients with IE, IMR, and DMR, and a higher risk of reoperation in patients with RHD.

The Surgical Treatment of Infective Endocarditis: A Comprehensive Review

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a severe cardiac complication with high mortality rates, especially when surgical intervention is delayed or absent. This review addresses the expanding role of surgery in managing IE, focusing on the variation in surgical treatment rates, the impact of patient demographics, and the effectiveness of different surgical approaches. Despite varying global data, a notable increase in surgical interventions for IE is evident, with over 50% of patients undergoing surgery in tertiary centres. This review synthesizes information from focused literature searches up to July 2023, covering preoperative to postoperative considerations and surgical strategies for IE. Key preoperative concerns include accurate diagnosis, appropriate antimicrobial treatment, and the timing of surgery, which is particularly crucial for patients with heart failure or at risk of embolism. Surgical approaches vary based on valve involvement, with mitral valve repair showing promising outcomes compared to replacement. Aortic valve surgery, traditionally favouring replacement, now includes repair as a viable option. Emerging techniques such as sutureless valves and aortic homografts are explored, highlighting their potential advantages in specific IE cases. The review also delves into high-risk groups like intravenous drug users and the elderly, emphasizing the need for tailored surgical strategies. With an increasing number of patients presenting with prosthetic valve endocarditis and device-related IE, the review underscores the importance of comprehensive management strategies encompassing surgical and medical interventions. Overall, this review provides a comprehensive overview of current evidence in the surgical management of IE, highlighting the necessity of a multidisciplinary approach and ongoing research to optimize patient outcomes.

A case of culture-negative endocarditis causing flail perforated mitral valve

We describe a case of culture negative endocarditis causing mitral valve perforations and recurrent heart failure admissions.

Isolated mitral valve endocarditis: Patient, disease, and surgical factors that influence outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The objectives of this study were to investigate patient characteristics, valve pathology, bacteriology, and surgical techniques related to outcome of patients who underwent surgery for isolated native (NVE) or prosthetic (PVE) mitral valve endocarditis.

METHODS

From January 2002 to January 2020, 447 isolated mitral endocarditis operations were performed, 326 for NVE and 121 for PVE. Multivariable analysis of time-related outcomes used random forest machine learning.

RESULTS

Staphylococcus aureus was the most common causative organism. Of 326 patients with NVE, 88 (27%) underwent standard mitral valve repair, 43 (13%) extended repair, and 195 (60%) valve replacement. Compared with NVE with standard repair, patients who underwent all other operations were older, had more comorbidities, worse cardiac function, and more invasive disease. Hospital mortality was 3.8% (n = 17); 0 (0%) after standard valve repair, 3 (7.0%) after extended repair, 8 (4.1%) after NVE replacement, and 6 (5.0%) after PVE re-replacement. Survival at 1, 5, and 10 years was 91%, 75%, and 62% after any repair and 86%, 62%, and 44% after replacement, respectively. The most important risk factor for mortality was renal failure. Risk-adjusted outcomes, including survival, were similar in all groups. Unadjusted extended repair outcomes, particularly early, were similar or worse than replacement in terms of reinfection, reintervention, regurgitation, gradient, and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

A patient- and pathology-tailored approach to surgery for isolated mitral valve endocarditis has low mortality and excellent results. Apparent superiority of standard valve repair is related to patient characteristics and pathology. Renal failure is the most powerful risk factor. In case of extensive destruction, extended repair shows no benefit over replacement.

A Nationwide Study on Mitral Valve Repair vs Replacement for Active Endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Real-world evidence supporting the reproducibility and superiority of valve repair over replacement in active mitral valve infective endocarditis is lacking.

METHODS

Data from a prospective nationwide database, including all cardiac surgical procedures in The Netherlands, were used. Adult patients undergoing primary mitral valve intervention who had a diagnosis of active infective endocarditis and who underwent surgery between 2013 and 2020 were included. Survival analysis was performed for the whole follow-up period as well as after applying the landmark of 90 days.

RESULTS

Of 715 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 294 (41.1%) underwent valve repair. Mitral valve repair rates decreased slightly over the course of the study. The early mortality rate was 13.0%, and a trend of steadily declining early mortality rates over the course of the study, despite a steady increase in patient complexity, was observed. On risk-adjusted analysis, mitral valve replacement demonstrated inferior results when compared with valve repair (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.216; 95% CI, 1.425-3.448; P < .001), even after a landmark analysis was performed (adjusted hazard ratio 2.489; 95% CI, 1.124-5.516; P = .025). These results were confirmed by a propensity score-adjusted analysis (adjusted hazard ratio 2.251; 95% CI, 1.029-4.21; P = .042).

CONCLUSIONS

Contemporary trends in mitral valve surgery for active infective endocarditis suggest growing patient complexity but slightly declining early mortality rates. A trend of decreasing mitral valve repair rates was seen. The results of this study suggest improved late outcomes of valve repair compared with valve replacement.

A Literature Review on the Use of Aortic Allografts in Modern Cardiac Surgery for the Treatment of Infective Endocarditis: Is There Clear Evidence or Is It Merely a Perception?

Infective valve endocarditis is caused by different pathogens and 60% of those involve the aortic valve with valve failure. Although S. aureus is recognized as the most frequently isolated causative bacterium associated with IE in high-income countries, Gram-positive cocci nevertheless play a crucial role in promoting infection in relation to their adhesive matrix molecules. The presence of pili on the surface of Gram-positive bacteria such as in different strains of Enterococcus faecalis and Streptococcus spp., grants these causative pathogens a great offensive capacity due to the formation of biofilms and resistance to antibiotics. The indications and timing of surgery in endocarditis are debated as well as the choice of the ideal valve substitute to replace the diseased valve(s) when repair is not possible. We reviewed the literature and elaborated a systematic approach to endocarditis management based on clinical, microbiological, and anatomopathological variables known to affect postoperative outcomes with the aim to stratify the patients and orient decision making. From this review emerges significant findings on the risk of infection in the allograft used in patients with endocarditis and no endocarditis etiology suggesting that the use of allografts has proved safety and effectiveness in patients with both pathologies.

Surgical Challenges in Infective Endocarditis: State of the Art

Infective endocarditis (IE) is still a life-threatening disease with frequent lethal outcomes despite the profound changes in its clinical, microbiological, imaging, and therapeutic profiles. Nowadays, the scenario for IE has changed since rheumatic fever has declined, but on the other hand, multiple aspects, such as elderly populations, cardiovascular device implantation procedures, and better use of multiple imaging modalities and multidisciplinary care, have increased, leading to escalations in diagnosis. Since the ESC and AHA Guidelines have been released, specific aspects of diagnostic and therapeutic management have been clarified to provide better and faster diagnosis and prognosis. Surgical treatment is required in approximately half of patients with IE in order to avoid progressive heart failure, irreversible structural damage in the case of uncontrolled infection, and the prevention of embolism. The timing of surgery has been one of the main aspects discussed, identifying cases in which surgery needs to be performed on an emergency (within 24 h) or urgent (within 7 days) basis, irrespective of the duration of antibiotic treatment, or cases where surgery can be postponed to allow a brief period of antibiotic treatment under careful clinical and echocardiographic observation. Mainly, guidelines put emphasis on the importance of an endocarditis team in the handling of systemic complications and how they affect the timing of surgery and perioperative management. Neurological complications, acute renal failure, splenic or musculoskeletal manifestations, or infections determined by multiresistant microorganisms or fungi can affect long-term prognosis and survival. Not to be outdone, anatomical and surgical factors, such as the presence of native or prosthetic valve endocarditis, a repair strategy when feasible, anatomical extension and disruption in the case of an annular abscess (mitral valve annulus, aortic mitral curtain, aortic root, and annulus), and the choice of prosthesis and conduits, can be equally crucial. It can be hard for surgeons to maneuver between correct pre-operative planning and facing unexpected obstacles during intraoperative management. The aim of this review is to provide an overview and analysis of a broad spectrum of specific surgical scenarios and how their challenging management can be essential to ensure better outcomes and prognoses.

Twenty-Year Experience with Surgery for Native and Prosthetic Mitral Valve Endocarditis

Background and Objectives: To evaluate the early and long-term results of surgical treatment of isolated mitral native and prosthetic valve infective endocarditis. Materials and Methods: All patients undergoing mitral valve repair or replacement for infective endocarditis at our institution between January 2001 and December 2021 were included in the study. The preoperative and postoperative characteristics and mortality of patients were retrospectively reviewed. Results: A total of 130 patients, 85 males and 45 females, with a median age of 61 ± 14 years, underwent surgery for isolated mitral valve endocarditis during the study period. There were 111 (85%) native and 19 (15%) prosthetic valve endocarditis cases. Fifty-one (39%) patients died during the follow-up, and the overall mean patient survival time was 11.8 ± 0.9 years. The mean survival time was better in patients with mitral native valve endocarditis compared to patients with prosthetic valve endocarditis (12.3 ± 0.9 years vs. 8 ± 1.4 years; p = 0.1), but the difference was not statistically significant. Patients who underwent mitral valve repair had a better survival rate compared to patients who had mitral valve replacement (14.8 ± 1.6 vs. 11.3 ± 1 years; p = 0.06); however, the difference was not statistically significant. Patients who underwent mitral valve replacement with a mechanical prosthesis had a significantly better survival rate compared to patients who received a biological prosthesis (15.6 ± 1.6 vs. 8.2 ± 0.8 years; p < 0.001). Patients aged ≤60 years had significantly better survival compared to patients aged >60 years (17.1 ± 1.1 vs. 8.2 ± 0.9; p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that the patient's age >60 years at the time of surgery was an independent risk factor for mortality, while mitral valve repair was a protective factor. Eight (7%) patients required reintervention. Freedom from reintervention was significantly higher in patients with mitral native valve endocarditis compared to patients with prosthetic valve endocarditis (19.3 ± 0.5 vs. 11.5 ± 1.7 years; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Surgery for mitral valve endocarditis is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. The patient's age at the time of surgery represents an independent risk factor for mortality. Mitral valve repair should be the preferred choice whenever possible in suitable patients affected by infective endocarditis.

Limited Versus Radical Resection in Mitral Valve Infective Endocarditis Surgery

Background: Mitral valve repair is preferred in patients undergoing surgical treatment for infective endocarditis (IE) of the native mitral valve, however, radical resection of infected tissue and patch-plasty might potentially lead to low or non-durable repair. We aimed to compare a limited-resection and non-patch technique with the classic radical-resection technique. Methods: Eligible candidates were patients with definitive IE of the native mitral valve undergoing surgery between January 2013 and December 2018. Patients were classified according to the surgical strategy into two groups: limited- versus radical-resection strategy. Propensity score matching was used. Endpoints were repair rate, all-cause mortality (30-day and 2-year), re-endocarditis and reoperation at q-year follow-up. Results: After propensity score matching, 90 patients were included. Follow-up was 100% complete. Mitral valve repair rate was 84% in the limited-resection versus 18% in the radical-resection strategy, p < 0.001. The 30-day and 2-year mortality were 20% versus 13% (p = 0.396) and 33% versus 27% (p = 0.490) in the limited-resection versus radical-resection strategy, respectively. The incidence of re-endocarditis during the 2-year follow-up was 4% in the limited-resection strategy versus 9% in the radical-resection strategy, p = 0.677. Three patients in the limited-resection strategy underwent reoperation of the mitral valve, while there were none in the radical-resection strategy (p = 0.242). Conclusions: Although mortality in patients with IE of the native mitral valve remains high, the limited-resection and non-patch surgical strategy is associated with a significantly higher repair rates with comparable 30-day and mid-term mortality, risk of re-endocarditis and re-operation compared to the radical-resection strategy.

Clinical outcomes following surgical mitral valve plasty or replacement in patients with infectious endocarditis: A meta-analysis

Background

For degenerative mitral disease, more and more evidences support that mitral valve plasty (MVP) has much better clincial outcomes than mitral valve replacement (MVR). However, the advantages of MVP in patients suffering from infectious endocarditis (IE) are unclear. To evaluate the appropriateness of MVP in IE patients, we conducted this meta-analysis. Based on the difference between active and healed phase, we not only compared the result of patients with IE, but also identified the subgroup with active IE.

Methods

We systematically searched the clinical trials comparing clinical outcomes of MVP and MVR in patients suffering from IE. Relevant articles were searched from January 1, 2000 to March 18, 2021 in Pubmed and Cochrane Library. Studies were excluded if they were with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) score less than 6 or lacking of direct comparisons between MVP and MVR.

Results

23 studies were involved and 25,615 patients were included. Pooled analysis showed fewer adverse events and early or long-term death in the MVP group. However, more reoperations existed in this patient group. And the reinfection rate was close between two groups. Similar results were observed after identifying active IE subgroup, but there is no difference in the freedom from reoperation due to all-events.

Conclusions

Although limitimations exited in this study, patients suffering from IE can benefit from both MVP and MVR. For surgeons with consummate skills, MVP can be the preferred choice for suitable IE patients.

Operative Timing and Feasibility of Mitral Valve Repair in Active Infective Endocarditis

PURPOSE

We studied the association between operative timing and the feasibility of mitral valve (MV) repair in active infective endocarditis (IE).

METHODS

Forty-nine active IE patients who underwent MV operation were classified according to operative timing: within 48 hours (Term I: n = 7), between 3 and 14 days (Term II: n = 22), and ≥15 days (Term III: n = 20). Patient profiles, operative outcomes, and feasibility of MV repair were evaluated. Complexity score and severity score were used to define the feasibility of MV repair depending on the extent of infected lesion and technical difficulties.

RESULTS

There were no differences in basic profile in the three groups. Rate of major complications was higher in Term I (86%) than II (41%, p = 0.031) and III (25%, p = 0.005). In-hospital mortality was also higher in Term I (43%) than II (9%, p = 0.039) and III (5%, p = 0.015). The three groups did not differ by feasibility of MV repair calculated by the two-score system or by frequency of MV repair (I: 57%, II: 59%, and III: 55%).

CONCLUSIONS

Morbidity and mortality were high in urgent cases. Feasibility of MV repair is associated with the extent of infected lesion and technical difficulties, and not with operative timing.

Long-Term Results of Patch Repair in Destructive Valve Endocarditis

OBJECTIVES

Treatment of destructive endocarditis with abscess formation is a surgical challenge and associated with significant morbidity and mortality. A root replacement is often performed in case of an annular abscess. This retrospective study was designed to assess the long-term outcome of extensive debridement and patch reconstruction as an alternative approach.

METHODS

Between November 2007 and November 2016, a selected group of 79 patients (29.6% of all surgical endocarditis cases) with native valve endocarditis (NVE, 53.2%) or prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE, 46.8%) valve endocarditis underwent surgical therapy with extensive annular debridement and patch reconstruction. Their postoperative course, freedom from recurrent endocarditis, and survival at 1, 5, and 7 years were evaluated.

RESULTS

About two-thirds of patients were in a stable condition, one-third of patients were in a critical state. The median logistic EuroSCORE I was 17%. Infected tissue was removed, and defect closure was performed, either with autologous pericardium for small defects, or with bovine pericardium for larger defects. Overall, in-hospital mortality was 11.3% (NVE: 9.7%, PVE: 13.2%; p = 0.412). In single valve endocarditis survival at 1, 5, and 7 years was 81, 72, 72%, respectively for NVE, and 80, 57, 57%, respectively for PVE (p = 0.589), whereas in multiple valve endocarditis survival at 1, 5, and 7 years was 82, 82, 82% for NVE, and 61, 61, and 31%, respectively for PVE (p = 0.132). Confirmed late reinfection was very low.

CONCLUSION

Surgical treatment of destructive endocarditis with abscess formation using patch repair techniques offers acceptable early and long-term results. The relapse rate was low. PVE and involvement of multiple valves were associated with worse outcomes.

Mitral valve repair for endocarditis

Many authors have reported their results of mitral valve (MV) repair (MVr) in acute and healed endocarditis. However, the results published by different authors highlight the fact that the reparability rate for this indication remains low. Over the last three decades, our group has adopted an early and repair-oriented approach to infective endocarditis with the objective to improve the repair rate and the long-term results.‬ ‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ In this paper, we describe our institutional experience on mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis.‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬‬ Data for this paper were extracted from our institutional database on heart valve disease. From 1991 to 2015, 160 consecutive patients in our institution underwent MV surgery for active IE on native MV. The median follow-up was 122 months. This study was approved by the institutional ethics review board, and written informed consent was waived for this study given its retrospective design. Hospital mortality was 11.6% (n = 18). Early MV reoperation before hospital discharge was required in five (3.1%) patients. At 5, 10, and 15 years, overall survival in the MVr for endocarditis in the group was 79% ± 4%, 65% ± 5%, 57% ± 6%, respectively. Freedom from reoperation at 5, 10, and 15 years was 95% ± 2%, 88% ± 4%, and 81% ± 6%, respectively. Mitral infective endocarditis is an insidious pathology and his surgical approach can be challenging. An early and repair-oriented surgical approach can allow to improve reparability rates with good long-term durability and a low recurrence rate of endocarditis.

Leclercia adecarboxylata infective endocarditis in a man with mitral stenosis: A case report and review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare disease with a high mortality rate. Leclercia adecarboxylata (L. adecarboxylata) is a movable Gram-negative bacillus of enterobacteriaceae, and it can rarely be a pathogen which often affects immunodeficient patients. There are about three cases of immunocompetent patients with monomicrobial L. adecarboxylata infection. There are only three reported cases of IE caused by L. adecarboxylata in the world. The mitral valve is often affected in IE, and the prognosis for IE with mitral valve lesions is often poor.

CASE SUMMARY

A 51-year-old man was found to have moderate to severe mitral stenosis on echocardiography. He came to our Cardiothoracic Surgery Department for surgical management. A diastolic murmur was heard on auscultation of the heart in the mitral region. On the second day of hospitalisation, he presented with slurred speech, reduced muscle strength in the left limb, and acute cerebral infarction on cranial computed tomography. Surgical treatment was decided to postpone. On the ninth day of admission, the patient developed a sudden high fever and shock and was transferred to the Cardiac Intensive Care Unit, where echocardiogram revealed an anterior mitral valve leaflet vegetation. After empirical anti-infective treatment with vancomycin (1g q12h), an emergency valve replacement was performed. Bacterial culture identified L. adecarboxylata. Anti-infective treatment with piperacillin-tazobactam (4.5g q8h) was added for 4 wk. Follow-up echocardiography showed normal bioprosthetic valve function after mitral valve replacement.

CONCLUSION

We report the first case of L. adecarboxylata IE in China, and clinicians should pay attention to this pathogen.

Should more patients be offered repair for mitral valve endocarditis? a single-centre 15-year experience

Objective

To describe the long-term outcomes of mitral valve repair (MVr) versus mitral valve replacement (MVR) in patients with native valve infective endocarditis (IE) at a centre with high-repair rates.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective single-centre cohort study. From 2005 to 2021, 183 patients with active or healed native valve IE were included. The primary outcome was long-term mortality. Patient status was last confirmed 31 March 2021. Secondary outcomes were post-operative MR, MV reoperation, length of post-operative intensive care stay and total hospital stay.

Results

85 patients (46.4%) underwent MVr and 98 (53.6%) underwent MVR. Follow-up was 98.9% complete. Mean follow-up time was 5.3 years with 17% of patients reaching a follow-up time of over 10 years. There were 47 deaths (25.7%) within the follow-up period. MVR patients were more likely to have higher logistic EuroSCORE, active IE and were less likely to have elective surgery. In multivariate Cox proportional hazards analysis, there was no significant difference in long-term mortality between MVr and MVR groups (hazard ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval [0.59–2.00]). In Kaplan–Meier analysis, MVR patients had a higher all-cause mortality although there was no significant difference at the endpoint. Propensity score matching analysis showed a significantly higher mortality in the replacement group instead (p = 0.002), Subgroup analysis revealed there remained no significant difference in mortality even in patients with active IE (P-interaction = 0.859) or non-elective surgery (P-interaction = 0.122). MV reoperation (odds ratio 1.00 [0.24–4.12]), post-operative intensive care stay (p = 0.9650) and total hospital stay (p = 0.9144) were comparable.

Conclusions

Our data demonstrates repair was at least non-inferior to replacement in IE, supporting more aggressive use of repair. There is no reason the general principle of why repair is superior to replacement should not hold in IE, with enough operator expertise. Other experienced units should be encouraged to increase repair rates as feasible in line with current guidelines.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13019-022-01997-2.

Valve replacement or repair in native mitral valve infective endocarditis-Which is better? A meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Native mitral valve infective endocarditis (IE) plagues patients and surgeons alike because of its high mortality and recurrence rates as well as poor prognosis. Mitral valve repair (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) are two main surgical methods. However, the question of which benefits patients more remains controversial. Thus, we conducted a meta-analysis to systematically review the two approaches, focusing on the early survival rate and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

A meta-analysis and systematic review were conducted using studies sourced from the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane literature databases to compare MVP and MVR, with data extracted for baseline characteristics, mortality, survival, recurrent endocarditis, and valve reoperation. Risk ratio (RR) or hazard ratio (HR) values were calculated, and publication bias was tested.

RESULTS

A total of 17 relevant publications with a total population of 3759 patients, with 1180 patients having undergone MVP and 2579 patients having undergone MVR, respectively, were analyzed. Patients who underwent MVP may benefit from a lower risk of early mortality (RR, 0.51; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-0.66; p < .00001), a higher long-term survival rate (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.58-0.81; p < .001; I2  = 0%), and a lower risk of recurrence (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.40-1.09; p = .10; I2  = 0%). However, a similar risk of reoperation was observed for both groups (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.36-2.91; p = .96; I2  = 43%).

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis suggests that MVP may lead to better outcomes compared to MVR. Among patients with mitral valve IE, MVP can reduce in-hospital mortality, improve long-term survival, and has a lower risk of recurrent endocarditis. As a result, MVP may be suitable as a primary treatment choice and should be considered whenever possible in most IE patients.

Outcomes of surgically treated infective endocarditis in a Western Australian population

Background

Infective endocarditis is a disease that carries high morbidity and mortality. The primary endpoint of this study is to assess factors associated with in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing valvular surgery for infective endocarditis. The secondary endpoint of this study is to assess the incidence of post-operative stroke, renal failure, complete heart block and recurrence.

Methods

Between the years of 2015 to 2019, a total of 89 patients underwent surgery for infective endocarditis at Fiona Stanley Hospital, Western Australia. Data was collected from the Australia and New Zealand Cardiac Surgery Database from 2015 to 2019 as well as patients electronic medical record. A number of preoperative and perioperative factors were assessed in relation to patient mortality and morbidity. Univariate and multivariate logistical regression analysis was done to assess for the association between factors and in-hospital morbidity and mortality.

Results

A total of 89 patients underwent surgery for infective endocarditis from 2015 to 2019, affecting a total of 101 valves. The mean age of patients was 53.7 ± 16.5. A total of 79 patients had a positive blood culture pre-operatively, with Staphylococcus Aureus being the most frequently cultured organism (39%). Fourteen patients (16%) were deemed emergent and underwent surgery within 24 h of review. A total of five patients died within their hospital stay postoperatively. Variables significantly associated with mortality on univariate analysis were intravenous drug use, emergent surgery, perioperative dialysis, perioperative inotropes, cardiopulmonary bypass time and cross clamp time. Only CBP time was significantly associated with mortality on multivariate analysis. A total of 19 patients (21%) required hemodialysis after surgery, 10 patients sustained a postoperative stroke (11%), 11 patients developed a complete heart block post operatively (12%) and endocarditis recurred in 10 patients (11%).

Conclusion

Prolonged cardiopulmonary bypass times were significantly associated with mortality. This study is novel to report a lower mortality rate than previously quoted in the literature. We also report our findings of organisms, preoperative embolic phenomena and surgery in a Western Australian population. We recommend that all patients with endocarditis are discussed in multidisciplinary forum.

Surgical treatment of infective endocarditis at comprehensive versus primary valve centers

BACKGROUND

A recent expert consensus statement proposed designation of comprehensive and primary valve centers, with a recommendation that comprehensive centers house surgical skill and resources to treat patients with infective endocarditis (IE). We sought to compare outcomes of patients who underwent valve surgery for IE at comprehensive versus primary valve centers within a large health care system.

METHODS

We reviewed 513 consecutive patients who underwent IE surgery at 8 hospitals (2 comprehensive and 6 primary valve centers) from 2014 to 2020. Outcomes from comprehensive and primary valve centers were compared after propensity score matching on the basis of patient characteristics, valve involvement, valve type, and IE treatment status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for operative mortality.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching generated comparable groups with similar mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Gaca IE risk scores among comprehensive and primary valve center cohorts. Comprehensive valve centers were more likely to perform the Bentall procedure (60.4% vs 21.7%; P < .01) when aortic root abscess was present and mitral valve repair (50.4% vs 26.3%; P < .01) in cases of mitral valve involvement. Operative mortality was significantly lower at comprehensive valve centers (6.2% vs 13.0%; P = .04), and multivariate logistic regression suggested that surgery at comprehensive valve centers was protective against operative mortality (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.88; P = .02). Similar findings were present in a sensitivity analysis limited to patients with active IE only.

CONCLUSIONS

An increased risk for operative mortality was associated with surgery performed at primary valve centers compared with comprehensive valve centers. Referral or transfer of patients with IE and surgical indications to comprehensive valve centers should be considered.

Role of Mitral Valve Repair for Mitral Infective Endocarditis

The 2 primary objectives of surgery in mitral valve infective endocarditis (IE) are total removal of the infected tissue and reconstruction of cardiac morphology, including repair or replacement of the affected valve. Single-institution series have suggested the feasibility and effectiveness of mitral valve repair (MVrep) over replacement in mitral IE in terms of in-hospital mortality and long-term event-free survival. This article reviews the history, details of the relevant repair techniques, and clinical results of MVrep for mitral IE.

Patient and Surgeon Predictors of Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Repair for Infective Endocarditis

Mitral repair (MVr) is superior to replacement for degenerative disease; however, its benefit is less established for endocarditis. We report outcomes of repair or replacement for mitral/tricuspid endocarditis and identify predictors of MVr. Patients undergoing first-time surgery for mitral (n = 260) or tricuspid (n = 71) endocarditis between 1992 to 2018 were identified. Patients with aortic endocarditis were excluded. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality and secondary outcome was MVr. Patients were stratified into active and treated endocarditis separately for mitral and tricuspid groups. Predictors of MVr were assessed through multivariable logistic regression and adjusted likelihood of MVr through marginal effects estimates. A mitral specialist was defined by performing ≥25 annual degenerative MVr. Among 331 patients, 70% (181/260) of those with mitral valve endocarditis and 52% (37/71) of those with tricuspid endocarditis underwent repair. The MVr group compared with replacement had a higher proportion of elective acuity and less diabetes, hypertension, active endocarditis, cardiogenic shock, and dialysis. Estimated 5-year survival did not differ between repair versus replacement for active mitral (68 ± 14% vs 60 ± 14%, P = 0.34) or tricuspid endocarditis (60 ± 17% vs 61 ± 19%, P = 0.67), but was superior after repair for treated mitral endocarditis (86 ± 7% vs 51 ± 24%, P = 0.014). Independent predictors of mortality included dialysis for active and treated mitral endocarditis, and mitral replacement (vs MVr) for treated mitral endocarditis. The likelihood of MVr was 82 ± 5% for mitral specialists and 47 ± 9% for non-specialists (P < 0.001). MVr for endocarditis should be pursued, if feasible. Importantly, achieving MVr was driven not only by patient factors, but also surgeon experience.

Endocarditis with spondylodiscitis: clinical characteristics and prognosis

Background

The association of infective endocarditis (IE) with spondylodiscitis (SD) was first reported in 1965, but few data are available about this issue. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of SD in patients with IE, and to determine the clinical features and the prognostic impact of this association.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed 363 consecutive patients admitted to our Department with non-device-related IE. Radiologically confirmed SD was revealed in 29 patients (8%). Long-term follow-up (average: 3 years) was obtained by structured telephone interviews; in 95 cases (13 of whom had been affected by SD), follow-up echocardiographic evaluation was also available.

Results

At univariable analysis, the combination of IE with SD was associated with male gender (p = 0.017), diabetes (p = 0.028), drug abuse (p = 0.009), Streptococcus Viridans (p = 0.009) and Enterococcus (p = 0.015) infections. At multivariable analysis, all these factors independently correlated with presence of SD in patients with IE. Mortality was similar in patients with and without SD. IE relapses at 3 years were associated with the presence of SD (p = 0.003), Staphylococcus aureus infection (p < 0.001), and drug abuse (p < 0.001) but, at multivariable analysis, only drug abuse was an independent predictor of IE relapses (p < 0.001; HR 6.8, 95% CI 1.6–29). At echocardiographic follow-up, SD was not associated with worsening left ventricular systolic function or valvular dysfunction.

Conclusions

The association of IE with SD is not rare. Hence, patients with IE should be screened for metastatic infection of the vertebral column, especially if they have risk factors for it. However, SD does not appear to worsen the prognosis of patients with IE, either in-hospital or long-term.

Mitral valve diseases: Pathophysiology and interventions

Valvular heart disease is common and increasingly prevalent among the elderly. The end result of valvular pathologies is cardiac failure and can lead to sudden death; thus, diagnosis and interventions are very important in the early stages of these diseases. The usual treatment methods of mitral regurgitation include percutaneous mitral valve repair, mitral valve replacement and minimally invasive surgery, whereas the treatment methods of mitral stenosis include percutaneous transluminal mitral commissurotomy and mitral commissurotomy as well as open surgical repair. Nonetheless, ongoing clinical trials are a clear indicator that the management of valve diseases is ever evolving. The focus of this paper is on the various pathologies of the mitral valve, their etiology and clinical management, offering a comprehensive view of mitral valve diseases.

Feasibility and outcome of mitral valve repair in patients with infective endocarditis

Background

Valve repair is the treatment of choice for native mitral valve regurgitation. The feasibility of repair when the defect is caused by acute infective endocarditis (IE) is debated. This study aims to compare the outcome of repair and replacement procedures, to report the rate of repair in a single surgical center, and to review the literature on this topic.

Results

We retrospectively analyzed 108 patients with native mitral IE, potentially eligible for surgical repair. Of these 108, 90 (83%) underwent surgery, and 18 were treated conservatively. Among the 90 surgical patients, 57 (63%) underwent valve replacement and 33 valve repair (37%). The mean follow-up duration was 3 years. The two primary endpoints were mortality and freedom from recurrent endocarditis. Secondary endpoints were the post-operative incidence of major adverse events (hospitalization for any cause, pacemaker implantation, new onset of atrial fibrillation, sternal dehiscence), left ventricular systolic function (LVSF), and valvular function at 1-year echocardiographic follow-up. All-cause mortality was lower for valve repair, although not significantly (p = 0.86), as well as nonfatal adverse events (p = 0.92) and relapse rate (p = 0.20) at 3 years. We did not find differences between the two groups at echocardiographic follow-up, neither for left ventricular systolic function (p = 0.22), nor for valvular continence (p = 0.28).

Conclusions

In our experience, the mid-term outcome of repair in IE is comparable to valve replacement and should be considered whenever possible, as in degenerative valve disease. The review of the literature supports this strategy.

Infective endocarditis and neurologic events: indications and timing for surgical interventions

A therapeutic dilemma arises when infective endocarditis (IE) is complicated by a neurologic event. Postponement of surgery up to 4 weeks is recommended by the guidelines, however, this negatively impacts outcomes in many patients with an urgent indication for surgery due to uncontrolled infection, disease progression, or haemodynamic deterioration. The current literature is ambiguous regarding the safety of cardiopulmonary bypass in patients with recent neurologic injury. Nevertheless, most publications demonstrate a lower risk for secondary haemorrhagic conversion of uncomplicated ischaemic lesions than the risk for recurrent embolism under antibiotic treatment. Here, we discuss the current literature regarding neurologic stroke complicating IE with an indication for surgery.

Outcomes of emergency or urgent mitral valve repair in patients with papillary muscle rupture and active infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Emergency or urgent surgery is often required in patients with papillary muscle rupture and active mitral valve infective endocarditis. The aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of patients with active endocarditis who underwent emergency or urgent mitral valve repair.

METHODS

From 2005 to 2014, 154 ischemic mitral regurgitation patients and 41 infective endocarditis patients underwent mitral valve repair in our institution; 23 had emergency operations due to papillary muscle rupture, and 18 with active infective endocarditis underwent urgent surgery.

RESULTS

Cardiopulmonary bypass time (141.4 ± 43.3 versus 145.3 ± 46.5 min) and crossclamp time (77.7 ± 34.1 versus 79.2 ± 33.0 min) were similar in the papillary muscle rupture and elective ischemic mitral regurgitation subgroups, and major postoperative complications were comparable. Hospital mortality was 17.4% in the papillary muscle rupture subgroup and 8.4% in the elective ischemic mitral regurgitation subgroup. Cardiopulmonary bypass time (103.6 ± 37.0 versus 75.5 ± 20.8 min) and crossclamp time (61.7 ± 21.2 versus 45.3 ± 18.0 min) were significantly longer in infective endocarditis patients. There were no major complications or hospital deaths. Eight years postoperatively, overall survival was 94.4% and 86.5% in the papillary muscle rupture and elective ischemic mitral regurgitation subgroups, respectively (p = 0.730). Overall survival was 100% in both infective endocarditis subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The feasibility and effectiveness of emergency or urgent mitral valve repair in patients with papillary muscle rupture and active infective endocarditis are satisfactory. Early and mid-term outcomes are comparable to those of elective operations.

Mitral valve repair for infective endocarditis: Kobe experience

Objectives

We retrospectively analyzed our experience of mitral valve repair for native mitral valve endocarditis in a single institution.

Methods

From January 1991 to October 2011, 171 consecutive patients underwent surgery for infective endocarditis. Of these, 147 (86%) had mitral valve repair. At the time of surgery, 98 patients had healed (group A) and 49 had active infective endocarditis (group B). Repair procedures included resection of all infected tissue and thick restricted post-infection tissue, leaflet and annulus reconstruction with treated autologous pericardium, chordal reconstruction with polytetrafluoroethylene sutures, and ring annuloplasty if necessary. Fifty-two (35%) patients required concomitant procedures. The study endpoints were overall survival, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from valve-related events. The median follow-up was 78 months.

Results

There was one hospital death (hospital mortality 0.7%). Survival at 10 years was 88.5% ± 3.5% with no significant difference between the two groups (p = 0.052). Early reoperation was required in 4 patients in group B due to persistent infection or procedure failure. Freedom from reoperation at 5 years was 99% ± 1.0% in group A and 89.6 ± 4.0% in group B (p = 0.024). Event-free survival at 10 years was 79.3% ± 4.8% (group A: 83.4% ± 5.9%, group B: 72.6% ± 6.9%, p = 0.010).

Conclusions

Mitral valve repair was highly successful using autologous pericardium, chordal reconstruction, and ring annuloplasty if required. Long-term results were acceptable in terms survival, freedom from reoperation, and event-free survival. Mitral valve repair is recommended for mitral infective endocarditis in most patients.

Outcomes of surgical treatment for active infective endocarditis of mitral valve compared using complexity scoring

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate our surgical treatment outcomes of active infective endocarditis (IE) of mitral valve in relation to the patients' complexity scores.

METHODS

We reviewed 51 patients who underwent surgical treatment for active IE on the mitral valve, in our hospital between September 2002 and November 2016. We adapted a complexity scoring scale to describe the range of parts suffering vegetation and damage, assigning the following weighting: weight 1 for each posterior segment; weight 2 for each anterior segment, commissural segment, left atrium, or left ventricle; weight 3 if the annulus was involved or if pathology extended to a prior mitral operation site. A total of 51 patients were identified and categorized by complexity score into two groups: 1-2: Simple (n = 19); ≥ 3: Complex (n = 32).

RESULTS

MV repair was achieved in 18 patients (95%) in the Simple group and 26 patients (81%) in the Complex group. In the Complex there were 2 in-hospital deaths (6%). There were none in the Simple. The 5-year survival rates were 100% in the Simple and 79.6% in the Complex (P < 0.05). The 5-year rates of freedom from mitral regurgitation were 77.8% in the Simple and 91.5% in the Complex (P = 0.63). The 5-year rates of freedom from recurrence of IE were 93.3% in the Simple and 92.2% in the Complex (P = 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

We found consistent outcomes in terms of recurrent mitral regurgitation and recurrence of IE, regardless of lesion complexity.

Optimizing outcomes in infective endocarditis: A comprehensive literature review

BACKGROUND

Despite being rare, infective endocarditis (IE) is a life-threatening disease with poor prognosis. New diagnostic and therapeutic strategies are emerging; however, predisposing factors and microbiology of the disease are also changing with time. Because of this, there has been a lack of reduction in the disease's incidence and new challenges for clinicians have arisen such as an increasingly aging population and growing antimicrobial resistance.

AIMS

In this paper, we aim to provide an overview of the changing trends in IE, current diagnosis, and management strategies, as well as the emerging role of the infective endocarditis teams in the care of patients with this disease.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A comprehensive electronic search was done utilizing PubMed, Ovid, SCOPUS, Embase and google scholar. The search terms included 'Endocarditis', 'IE', 'Infection', 'Vegetation', 'Duke criteria', 'native valve infection', 'prosthetic valve', 'valve infection', 'endocarditis outcome' and 'endocarditis bacteriology'. The references of the identified articles were then searched for any potential articles that can be included. The inclusion criteria were any article that discussed the evidence behind incidence and management of IE including the role of endocarditis team. The exclusion criteria were case reports, expert opinion, and editorials.

RESULTS

All the relevant findings are summarized in specified tables and within appropriate sections.

DISCUSSION

It is vital to determine the current trends in the epidemiology and microbiology of the condition so that the diagnostic threshold can be adapted, to identify new at-risk groups and achieve an accelerated evaluation strategy that allows for earlier diagnosis and treatment.

CONCLUSION

Management of IE can benefit from the input of different specialties, such as cardiology, cardiothoracic surgery, infectious disease, and microbiology. Therefore, adopting a multidisciplinary approach towards treatment is crucial to reduce morbidity and mortality from preventable complications of this pathology.

Recurrent infective endocarditis versus first-time infective endocarditis after heart valve surgery

OBJECTIVE

Infective endocarditis (IE) may require heart valve surgery. It is well known that heart valve surgery itself and previous IE predispose to IE. However, data are sparse on whether the risk of IE is different among patients undergoing valve surgery due to IE and other causes (i.e. recurrent vs. first-time IE).

METHODS

Using Danish nationwide registries, patients undergoing left-sided heart valve surgery in the course of an IE hospitalization (1996-2017) were identified and matched with controls undergoing left-sided heart valve surgery due to another cause than IE in a 1:1 ratio. Patients were stratified according to type of surgical valve intervention and affected valve. The comparative risk of recurrent vs. first-time IE was assessed by cumulative incidence curves and multivariable Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 971 patients with a first-time admission for IE requiring heart valve surgery matched with 971 controls undergoing heart valve surgery due to other causes than IE. The risk of recurrent IE was significantly higher than the risk of first-time IE following heart valve surgery (5.5% and 3.0% by 10 years, hazard ratio (HR) 1.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.70). The risk of IE recurrence was not significantly different comparing valve replacement and valve repair (5.5% and 5.3%, respectively, HR 1.60, 95% CI 0.71-3.60). Yet, the risk of IE recurrence was significantly higher among patients with biological versus mechanical prostheses (6.3% and 4.6%, respectively, HR 2.00, 95% CI 1.02-3.70).

CONCLUSIONS

Following heart valve surgery, the risk of recurrent IE was significantly higher than the risk of first-time IE.

Long-term outcomes of mitral valve endocarditis: improved survival through collaborative management

BACKGROUND

Infective endocarditis (IE) of the mitral valve is an illness associated with significant morbidity and mortality. We describe the long-term outcomes of mitral valve endocarditis at a single centre.

METHODS

All patients who presented with IE to the study institution between 2000 and 2015 were included. Data were obtained by retrospective review of the medical records.

RESULTS

There were 163 patients who presented with mitral valve IE. Mean age was 58 ± 16.8 years. A history of intravenous drug use was present in 18% (30/163) of patients. The most common infective agents were Staphylococcus aureus in 42% (69/163) (7% (5/69) were methicillin resistant), Streptococcus viridans species in 15% (25/163) and Enterococcus faecalis in 10% (17/163). Surgery was performed in 29% (47/163) of patients. Hospital mortality was 23% (38/163). Survival was 71% (95% confidence interval (CI) 63.1-77.6%) at 1 year, 56% (95% CI 46.0-64.9%) at 5 years and 44% (95% CI 36.4-59.7%) at 10 years follow-up. There was no survival difference between medical and surgical management (P = 0.55). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, need for renal replacement therapy (P = 0.003) and increasing age (P = 0.014) were found to be risk factors while infectious diseases consult during index admission (P = 0.007) was found to be protective.

CONCLUSION

Mitral valve endocarditis is associated with survival of <50% at 10 years follow-up. Surgical and medical management were associated with similar outcomes. Increasing age and need for renal replacement therapy were associated with mortality, and infectious diseases consultation was associated with improved survival.

Contemporary trends and outcomes of mitral valve surgery for infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Contemporary data on mitral valve (MV) surgery in patients with infective endocarditis (IE) are limited.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify patients with IE who underwent MV surgery between 2003 and 2016. We assessed (a) temporal trends in the incidence of MV surgery for IE, (b) morbidity, mortality, and cost of MV repair vs replacement, and (c) predictors of in-hospital mortality.

RESULTS

The proportion of MV operations involving patients with IE increased from 5.4% in 2003 to 7.3%, and the proportion of MV repair among those undergoing surgery for IE increased from 15.2% to 25.0% (P_trend  < .001). In-hospital mortality was higher in the replacement group (11.3% vs 8.1%; P < .001), and this excess mortality persisted after propensity score matching (11.2% vs 8.1%; P < .001), and in sensitivity analyses excluding concomitant surgery (unadjusted 11.3% vs 4.8%; adjusted 8.5% vs 4.5%; P < .001), and stratifying patients by the time of operation (within 7 days, 11.3% vs 6.8%; P < .001 and >7 days, 11.9% vs 9.1%; P = .012). In the propensity-matched cohorts, shock and need for tracheostomy were more frequent in the replacement group, but rates of stroke, pacemaker implantation, new dialysis, and blood transfusion were similar. Mitral valve repair was, however, associated with shorter hospitalizations, more home discharges, and less cost. In a multivariate regression analysis, age above 70 and chronic dialysis were the strongest predictors of in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Mitral valve repair in IE patients is associated with lower in-hospital mortality, resource utilization, and cost compared with MV replacement.

Redo mitral valve surgery following prior mitral valve repair

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment strategy following a failed mitral valve repair remains unclear. This study evaluated early and long-term outcomes of redo mitral valve repair (MVr) and replacement (MVR) after prior mitral valve repair.

METHODS

Patients undergoing redo mitral valve surgery after prior mitral valve repair at a single institution between 2002 and 2014 were reviewed. Primary outcomes included operative mortality (30-day or in-hospital mortality) and long-term freedom from mitral valve reoperation and death. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications.

RESULTS

305 patients underwent redo MVr (n = 48) or MVR (n = 257) after prior mitral valve repair. Concomitant procedures included tricuspid valve repair or replacement (23%), aortic valve replacement (6%), and coronary artery bypass grafting (4%), with no differences between cohorts. 18% were performed via right mini-thoracotomy (24% MVr vs 18% MVR, P = 0.31). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted operative mortality were lower with MVr (0% vs 8%, P = 0.04). Rates of postoperative complications were similar except for blood product transfusion (35% MVr vs 59% MVR, P = 0.003) and prolonged mechanical ventilation (8% MVr vs 29% MVR, P = 0.003). Long-term freedom from mortality was comparable: 96% MVr versus 86% MVR at 1 year and 78% MVr versus 68% MVR at 5 years (P = 0.29).

CONCLUSIONS

When technically feasible, mitral valve re-repair can be safely performed with outcomes comparable to MVR.

Assessment and management of a 1.77-cm2 mitral leaflet perforation as a subclinical cause of mitral regurgitation

Anterior mitral valve perforations are commonly due to underlying infective endocarditis, which can lead to significant mitral valve insufficiency. In these cases, clinicians should have a high index of suspicion for infective endocarditis. After appropriate imaging, immediate surgical intervention is unequivocally the choice of management here for optimal patient outcomes.

Anterior Mitral Valve Aneurysm Is an Uncommon Complication of Aortic Valve Infective Endocarditis: A Case Report

Patient: Male, 62

Final Diagnosis: Mitral valve aneurysm complicating aortic valve endocarditis

Symptoms: Fever

Medication: —

Clinical Procedure: Combined aortic valve and mitral valve replacement

Specialty: Cardiology

"Splint" Mitral Valve Repair for Destructive Endocarditis in Children

Medical management of infective endocarditis in the pediatric population has an associated in-hospital mortality rate of up to 25%. In the past, infective endocarditis of the mitral valve was surgically managed with a valve replacement. Now, there is a shift toward repair. However, for complex lesions in pediatric patients, many institutions are still hesitant to perform a mitral valve repair. We describe the cases of three children with destructive mitral valve endocarditis and risk factors for higher perioperative mortality and morbidity who were successfully treated with a complex mitral valve repair with "splint" patch plasty of the posteromedial commissure.

Nationwide cohort study of mitral valve repair versus replacement for infective endocarditis

OBJECTIVES

The feasibility and long-term outcomes of mitral valve (MV) repair in patients with infective endocarditis (IE) remain unclear.

METHODS

Using Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database, we identified 1999 patients who underwent MV surgery for IE during 2000 to 2013. The patients were more likely to have undergone valve replacement (1575 patients; 78.8%) than valve repair (424 patients; 21.2%). After 1:1 propensity score matching, 352 patients in each group were included for analysis. Perioperative outcomes and late composite end points, comprising all-cause mortality, MV reoperation, any stroke, major bleeding, and readmission for heart failure, were compared.

RESULTS

Patients who received MV repair had fewer perioperative complications, lower in-hospital mortality rates (6.3% vs 10.8%; P = .031), and lower risks of late mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.80), and composite end point (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.52-0.87) during a mean follow-up of 4.8 years. Subgroup analysis revealed a trend in which the beneficial effect of MV repair was not apparent when surgeries were performed in hospitals within the lowest volume quartile (P for interaction = .091). In patients who underwent surgery during active IE, MV repair was also related to a lower rate of late mortality (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.48-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Mitral repair for IE has better perioperative and late outcomes than mitral replacement. Mitral repair performed by an experienced team is recommended for IE patients instead of MV replacement whenever possible, even with an active infection status.

Early and late results of surgical treatment for isolated active native mitral valve infective endocarditis

OBJECTIVES

Native mitral valve infective endocarditis (IE) is a complicated disease with high mortality and morbidity rates. Mitral valve repair (MVRep) is feasible when limited valve destruction is present. However, recurrent valve dysfunction and reintervention are common.

METHODS

Between January 2000 and March 2016, 83 patients underwent surgery for isolated active native mitral valve IE. We applied an early surgery, MVRep-oriented approach with progressive utilization of patch techniques to secure a durable repair; MVRep was attempted in 67% of patients. Fifty-one (61%) patients underwent MVRep (including full-ring annuloplasty in 94%) and 32 (39%) patients underwent mitral valve replacement.

RESULTS

Early mortality was 13%. No cases of early recurrent IE occurred. Predischarge echocardiography demonstrated good MVRep function in all, except 1 patient with residual (Grade 2+) regurgitation. The mean duration of follow-up was 3.7 years (interquartile range 1.5-8.4). For hospital survivors, 8-year overall survival rates were 92.4% (95% confidence interval 84.0-100%) and 74.2% (95% confidence interval 53.8-94.6%) for the MVRep and mitral valve replacement groups, respectively. Propensity score-adjusted Cox regression analysis revealed no significant difference in survival between the 2 groups (hazard ratio 0.359, 95% confidence interval 0.107-1.200; P = 0.096). Four reinterventions occurred, 2 in each group. Echocardiographic follow-up demonstrated excellent MVRep durability; no cases of mitral regurgitation and 1 case of mitral valve stenosis were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Native mitral valve IE is linked to high mortality and morbidity rates. A durable MVRep is feasible in most patients and provides excellent mid-term durability. Mitral valve replacement is a reasonable alternative when a durable repair is not likely.

Surgical interventions of isolated active mitral valve endocarditis: Predisposing factors and impact of neurological insults on final outcome

The feasibility and durability of mitral valve (MV) repair in active infective endocarditis (IE) has been reported, but proper management of perioperative neurological complications and surgical timing remains uncertain and may crucially affect the outcome.In this single-center retrospective observational study, patients who underwent isolated MV surgery for active native IE in our institution between August 2005 and August 2015 were reviewed and analyzed. Patients who were operated on for healed IE or who required combined procedures were excluded from this study.A total of 71 patients were enrolled in the study with a repair rate of 53.5% (n = 38). Isolated posterior leaflet lesion was found in 15 patients (21%) and was related to higher reparability (86.7%, P = .004). The overall in-hospital mortality was 10 (14.1%): 3 (7.9%) in the repair group and 7 (21.2%) in replacement group (P = .17). Prognosis was not related to age, preoperative renal function, cerebral emboli, or duration of antibiotics. The only significant predictor was postoperative intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) [odds ratio 14.628 (1.649-129.78), P = .04]. At a mean follow-up period of 43.1 months, neither recurrent endocarditis nor late cardiac death was observed in both groups.Surgical timing and procedural options of MV surgery in active native IE did not make any difference, but occurrence of ICH after surgery jeopardized the final outcome. Routine preoperative brain imaging to detect silent ICH or mycotic aneurysm and aggressive treatment of these lesions may prevent catastrophe and optimize the results.

Bioprosthetic Versus Mechanical Valve Replacement for Infective Endocarditis: Focus on Recurrence Rates

BACKGROUND

Consensus guidelines for prosthesis selection in infective endocarditis recommend bioprosthetic or mechanical valve replacement based on life expectancy and comorbidity. However, contemporary outcome data are limited to institution series.

METHODS

The outcomes of 3,447 patients identified from mandatory discharge databases in California and New York who had either primary isolated mitral (n = 1,603) or aortic (n = 1,844) valve replacement for active endocarditis between 1998 and 2010 were compared according to whether they received bioprosthetic (n = 1,673, 48.5%) or mechanical (n = 1,774, 51.5%) valves. Drug abusers were analyzed as a separate cohort. The primary outcome was endocarditis recurrence. Median follow-up time was 6.8 years (range, 0 to 12). Last follow-up for survival was December 31, 2015.

RESULTS

Patients receiving bioprosthetic valves were older (60.4 ± 14.9 versus 53.4 ± 14.3 years, p < 0.001), with more comorbidity. There was no significant difference in 12-year survival with bioprosthetic versus mechanical valves after mitral (adjusted hazard ratio 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98 to 1.34, p = 0.10) or aortic (adjusted hazard ratio 1.10, 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.29, p = 0.26) valve replacement. Bioprosthetic and mechanical valves were associated with similar recurrence rates at 12 years: 10.4% (95% CI: 8.0% to 13.1%) versus 8.8% (95% CI: 6.9% to 10.9%), adjusted Cox p = 0.79 after mitral replacement; and 9.4% (95% CI: 7.5% to 11.6%) versus 10.0% (95% CI: 8.0% to 12.4%), adjusted Cox p = 0.81 after aortic valve replacement.

CONCLUSIONS

Bioprosthetic and mechanical valves are associated with similar survival and freedom from endocarditis recurrence. These data support guideline recommendations that patient factors guide prosthesis choice in infective endocarditis.