Concomitant aortic and mitral surgery: To replace or repair the mitral valve?

Procedural selection strategy and clinical outcomes in mitral valve surgery with concomitant aortic valve replacement in elderly patients

Introduction

In the context of double-valve surgery for elderly high-risk patients involving both the aortic and mitral valves, a clinically significant problem has been that no clear criteria or surgical strategies have been reported for the selection of mitral valve plasty (MVP) or mitral valve replacement (MVR) for mitral valve disease management during surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) to achieve better clinical outcomes. This study investigated valve durability and survival using our surgical strategy for mitral valve disease with concomitant SAVR in elderly patients.

Methods

Eighty-six patients aged > 65 years (mean 75 years) who underwent a double-valve procedure for mitral valve surgery with concomitant SAVR from 2010 to 2022 were reviewed. Our surgical strategy for mitral valve disease with concomitant SAVR for the elderly patients was as follows: MVP was selected for patients in whom mitral valve disease was expected to be controlled with simple surgical procedures (n = 47), otherwise MVR was selected (n = 39).

Results

The hospital mortality rate was 8% (n = 7). The mean follow-up was 4.9 (0-12.3) years. And the 10-year survival rate was 62%. The 10-year freedom from aortic valve reoperation rate was 95%. No mitral valve reintervention was performed during follow-up. Echocardiographic follow-up demonstrated freedom from at least moderate mitral regurgitation in 86% of cases at 10 years.

Conclusion

In double-valve surgery for elderly high-risk patients, appropriate selection of the mitral valve procedure with concomitant SAVR provided better early and long-term survival and valve durability. This surgical strategy may be beneficial in elderly patients with combined aortic and mitral valve disease.

Long-term outcome of isolated mitral valve repair versus replacement for degenerative mitral regurgitation in propensity-matched patients

Objective

This study was performed to investigate the long-term outcomes in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR) undergoing mitral valve repair (MVr) versus mitral valve replacement (MVR) without concomitant surgeries.

Methods

The study cohort comprised 1493 patients with degenerative MR who were treated with isolated mitral valve surgery between January 2000 and December 2017 in a large multicenter (5 hospitals) registry of the Province of British Columbia, Canada, including 991 with repair and 502 with replacement. A propensity-matched comparison and risk-adjusted model were used to analyze the outcomes.

Results

After propensity matching (415 matched pairs), the 30-day mortalities were 2.4% and 3.6% in the MVr and MVR groups respectively (odds ratio [OR], 1.500; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.674-3.339; P = .32). The MVR group had significantly greater rates of prolonged inotrope usage >24 hours (P = .024), prolonged ventilation (P = .039), and blood transfusion (P = .023). The respective 1-, 5-, 10-, and 15-year survival rates were 95.7%, 88.8%, 71.4%, and 53.3% in the MVr group, and 93.0%, 81.6%, 61.3%, and 46.0% in the MVR group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.355; 95% CI, 1.105-1.661; P = .004). A multivariable analysis revealed that MVR was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality (OR, 2.270; 95% CI, 1.089-4.732; P = .029) and long-term mortality (HR, 1.417; 95% CI, 1.161-1.729; P < .001). The HR of MVR over MVr remained consistently greater than 1.0 across all ages.

Conclusions

MVr is associated with lower postoperative morbidity and better long-term survival compared with MVR in patients undergoing isolated mitral valve surgery for degenerative MR. The benefit of MVr appears age-independent.

Mortality and rehospitalization after mitral valve surgery as a function of age and key comorbidities

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve surgery is associated with substantial perioperative risk and long-term complications. Data on long-term outcomes following surgery remain scarce and are hypothetically modified by age and comorbidities.

METHODS

This Danish nationwide study included patients ≥60 years of age undergoing mitral valve surgery from 2000-2018. Patients were observed from day of surgery until outcome of interest (ie, rehospitalization or death) or maximum 1 year of follow-up. The absolute risks of outcomes were assessed, and associated factors were evaluated. Based on age and comorbidities, patients were stratified in 4 groups: low (<75 years + 0 comorbidities), low intermediate (≥75 years/1 comorbidity), high intermediate (≥75 years + 1 comorbidity/2 comorbidities), and high risk of death (≥75 years + ≥2 comorbidities).

RESULTS

In total, 4,202 patients (62.9% men) were identified. Within 1 year after surgery, 504 (12.0%) died and 2,456 (58.5%) were rehospitalized. Factors associated with death included older age (>75 years), chronic obstructive lung disease, heart failure, prior myocardial infarction, prior stroke, liver disease, and kidney disease. The 1-year risks of death among patients in low, low-intermediate, high-intermediate, and high risk of death were 3.6%, 10.3%, 19.6%, and 27.7%, respectively. Diabetes mellitus and chronic obstructive lung disease were associated with an increased incidence of rehospitalization, and the incidence of rehospitalization was similar among the 4 abovementioned groups (57.8%-62.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mortality and rehospitalization risks after mitral valve surgery varied substantially with age and comorbidities. High-risk patients with >25% 1-year mortality may be easily identified using readily available clinical features.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

In Denmark, registry-based studies that are conducted for the sole purpose of statistics and scientific research do not require ethical approval or informed consent by law. However, the study is approved by the data responsible institute (the Capital Region of Denmark [approval number: P-2019-348]) in accordance with the general data protection regulation.

Prognostic value of right ventricular remodelling in patients undergoing concomitant aortic and mitral valve surgery

AIMS

Long-term risk stratification and surgical timing remain suboptimal in concomitant aortic and mitral (double) valve surgery. This study sought to examine the predictors, changes, and prognostic implications of right ventricular (RV) remodelling in patients undergoing double-valve surgery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 152 patients undergoing double-valve surgery, four RV remodelling patterns were characterized using transthoracic echocardiography: normal RV size and systolic function (Pattern 1); dilated RV (tricuspid annulus diameter >35 mm) with normal systolic function (Pattern 2); normal RV size with systolic dysfunction (percentage RV fractional area change <35%; Pattern 3); and dilated RV with systolic dysfunction (Pattern 4). The primary endpoint was the composite of heart failure hospitalization and all-cause mortality. Patterns 1, 2, 3, and 4 RV remodelling were present in 41, 20, 23, and 16% of patients, respectively. Patients with Stage 4 RV remodelling had worse renal function, higher EuroSCORE II, and impaired left ventricular ejection fraction. During a 3.7-year median follow up, 45 adverse events occurred. Patterns 3 and 4 RV remodelling were associated with significantly higher adverse event rates compared with Pattern 1 (37 and 75% vs. 11%, P < 0.01) and had incremental prognostic value when added to clinical parameters and EuroSCORE II (χ2 increased from 30 to 66, P < 0.01). At 1 year after surgery (n = 100), Patterns 3 and 4 RV remodelling had a higher risk of adverse events compared with Pattern 1.

CONCLUSION

Right ventricular remodelling was strongly related to adverse outcomes and deserves consideration as part of the risk and decision-making algorithms in double-valve surgery.

Outcome of patients with double valve surgery between 2009 and 2018 at University Hospital Basel, Switzerland

Background

In isolated mitral valve regurgitation general consensus on surgery is to favor repair over replacement excluding rheumatic etiology or endocarditis. If concomitant aortic valve replacement is performed however, clinical evidence is more ambiguous and no explicit guidelines exist on the choice of mitral valve treatment. Both, double valve replacement (DVR) and aortic valve replacement in combination with concomitant mitral valve repair (AVR + MVP) have been proven to be feasible procedures. In our single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study, we compared the outcome of these two surgical techniques focusing on mortality and morbidity.

Methods

89 patients underwent DVR (n = 41) or AVR + MVP (n = 48) in our institution between 2009 and 2018. Follow-up data was collected using electronic patient records, by contacting treating physicians and by telephone interviews. We used the Kaplan–Meier method to analyze mortality during follow-up and Cox regression to investigate potential predictors of mortality.

Results

During a median follow-up duration of 4.5 [IQR 2.9 to 6.1] years, there was no significant difference in mortality between both cohorts. Thirty days mortality was 6.3% in the DVR and 7% in the AVR + MVP cohort. Overall mortality amounted to 17% for DVR and 23% for AVR + MVP. DVR was the preferred procedure for valve disease of rheumatic etiology and for endocarditis, while in degenerative valves AVR + MVP was predominant. More biological valves were used in the AVR + MVP cohort (p < 0.001) and more mechanical valves were implanted in the DVR cohort. The rate of rehospitalization, deterioration of left ventricular ejection fraction and postoperative complications were equally distributed among the two cohorts.

Conclusion

Our data analysis showed that both DVR and AVR + MVP are safe and feasible options for double valve surgery. Based on our findings we could not prove superiority of one surgical technique over the other. Choosing the appropriate procedure for the patient should be influenced by valve etiology, patients’ comorbidities and the surgeons’ experience.

Trial registration

This was a retrospectively registered trial, registered on April 1st 2018, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03667274.

Minimally invasive versus conventional sternotomy for Mitral valve repair: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial (UK Mini Mitral)

INTRODUCTION

Numbers of patients undergoing mitral valve repair (MVr) surgery for severe mitral regurgitation have grown and will continue to rise. MVr is routinely performed via median sternotomy; however, there is a move towards less invasive surgical approaches.There is debate within the clinical and National Health Service (NHS) commissioning community about widespread adoption of minimally invasive MVr surgery in the absence of robust research evidence; implementation requires investment in staff and infrastructure.The UK Mini Mitral trial will provide definitive evidence comparing patient, NHS and clinical outcomes in adult patients undergoing MVr surgery. It will establish the best surgical approach for MVr, setting a standard against which emerging percutaneous techniques can be measured. Findings will inform optimisation of cost-effective practice.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

UK Mini Mitral is a multicentre, expertise based randomised controlled trial of minimally invasive thoracoscopically guided right minithoracotomy versus conventional sternotomy for MVr. The trial is taking place in NHS cardiothoracic centres in the UK with established minimally invasive mitral valve surgery programmes. In each centre, consenting and eligible patients are randomised to receive surgery performed by consultant surgeons who meet protocol-defined surgical expertise criteria. Patients are followed for 1 year, and consent to longer term follow-up.Primary outcome is physical functioning 12 weeks following surgery, measured by change in Short Form Health Survey (SF-36v2) physical functioning scale. Early and 1 year echo data will be reported by a core laboratory. Estimates of key clinical and health economic outcomes will be reported up to 5 years.The primary economic outcome is cost effectiveness, measured as incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained over 52 weeks following index surgery.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

A favourable opinion was given by Wales REC 6 (16/WA/0156). Trial findings will be disseminated to patients, clinicians, commissioning groups and through peer reviewed publication.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13930454.

Mitral Regurgitation in Patients With Coexisting Chronic Aortic Regurgitation: An Evidence-Based Narrative Review

Chronic aortic regurgitation (AR) frequently leads to significant downstream changes to the left ventricle and pulmonary vasculature; these structural and physiologic changes result in lower- than expected patient survival. Progressive, uncorrected AR can lead to left ventricle dilation and subsequent mitral valve leaflet tethering, as well as mitral annular dilation, resulting in secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) in up to 45% of patients. Surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) improves secondary MR in most patients, but survival is significantly lower in those patients who do not show improvement in MR after AVR. Thus, there is considerable debate on whether the mitral valve should be intervened upon at the time of the AVR. In this review, the authors address the long-term outlook for patients with chronic AR and concurrent MR. The authors also review the available evidence on concomitant mitral valve surgery in patients undergoing AVR for AR. Lastly, this narrative review examines the recent advances in transcatheter mitral valve repair and replacement, and explores the potential role of transcatheter mitral therapies in patients with secondary MR due to AR.

Platelet-leukocyte aggregate is associated with adverse events after surgical intervention for rheumatic heart disease

Platelet-leukocyte aggregate (PLA) is implicated in the etiology of both vascular lesions and cardiovascular events. This prospective cohort study aimed to examine the prognostic value of PLA for major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and perioperative adverse events (AEs) in patients with rheumatic heart disease undergoing surgical intervention by Cox proportional hazard regression and logistic regression. A total of 244 patients were included, of whom 7 were lost to follow-up. Among the analyzed 237 subjects who completed 3-year follow-up, 30 experienced MACCE and 38 experienced perioperative AEs. Preoperative PLA was higher in subjects who developed MACCE (13.32%) than in those who did not (8.69%, p = 0.040). In multivariate regression, elevated PLA was associated with increased MACCE (hazard ratio 1.51 for each quartile, 95% CI 1.07-2.13; p = 0.020), and perioperative AEs (odds ratio 1.61, 95% CI 1.14-2.26; p = 0.007). The optimal PLA cut-off for predicting MACCE was 6.8%. Subjects with PLA > 6.8% had a higher prevalence of MACCE (17.1% vs. 5.5%, p = 0.009) and perioperative AEs (19.9% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.018). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed shorter MACCE-free survival in patients with PLA > 6.8% (p = 0.007, log rank). Elevated preoperative PLA is associated with increased MACCE and perioperative AEs in patients with rheumatic valve disease undergoing surgical intervention.

Long-term results after concomitant mitral and aortic valve surgery: repair or replacement?

OBJECTIVES

The reported superiority of mitral valve (MV) repair for isolated MV regurgitation has not been confirmed in mitroaortic valve surgery. Our goals were to evaluate the feasibility of repair in patients undergoing mitral and aortic valve surgery and to identify factors predisposing to MV replacement, to compare long-term outcomes (survival and MV reoperation) of repair and replacement and to perform a subgroup analysis in patients with rheumatic MV disease.

METHODS

From January 1992 through December 2016, 1122 consecutive patients were submitted to concomitant aortic and MV surgery in 2 different centres (Coimbra and Santiago). Of these, 837 patients underwent MV repair (74.6%) and 285 patients had MV replacement (25.4%). Rheumatic aetiology was predominant (666 patients; 59.4%). Cumulative follow-up was 9522.6 patient-years (25th-75th percentile 2.6-13.2 years) and was complete for 95.6% of patients. Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed in 232 patients for comparing each treatment option (MV repair and MV replacement).

RESULTS

Previous MV intervention, rheumatic aetiology, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, higher degrees of tricuspid and mitral regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension were independently correlated with MV replacement. The 30-day mortality rate was higher in patients with MV replacement (4.2% vs 1.8%, P = 0.021) and was confirmed in the propensity score matching (4.7% vs 1.7%, P = 0.06). Late survival was lower in the MV replacement group (53.3 ± 4.5% vs 61.7 ± 2.0% at 12 years; P = 0.026) and was confirmed in the propensity score matching (54.6 ± 4.9% vs 63.2 ± 3.8%, P = 0.062) and rheumatic subgroup (57.9 ± 4.8% vs 68.0 ± 2.5%, P = 0.018). Freedom from MV reoperation at 12 years was higher in the MV repair group (94.7 ± 1.1% vs 89.0 ± 3.1%, P = 0.004) but similar in patients with rheumatic MV disease.

CONCLUSIONS

MV repair can be performed in most patients undergoing aortic valve replacement. It should be the procedure of choice whenever feasible, because it is associated with lower early and late mortality rates and with freedom from reoperation in non-rheumatic patients.