Mitral valve repair for functional regurgitation: Do not miss the last piece of the puzzle!

Papillary muscle intervention vs mitral ring annuloplasty in ischemic mitral regurgitation

Background and Aims

The main pathophysiological factor of chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) is the outward displacement of the papillary muscles (PMs) leading to leaflet tethering. For this reason, papillary muscle intervention (PMI) in combination with mitral ring annuloplasty (MRA) has recently been introduced into clinical practice to correct this displacement, and to reduce the recurrence of regurgitation.

Methods

A meta‐analysis was conducted comparing the outcomes of PMI and MRA performed in combination vs MRA performed alone, in terms of MR recurrence and left ventricular reverse remodeling (LVRR). A meta‐regression was carried out to investigate the impact of the type of PMI procedure on the outcomes.

Results

MR recurrence in patients undergoing both PMI and MRA was lower than in those who only had MRA (log incidence rate ratio, −0.66; lower‐upper limits, −1.13 to 0.20; I² = 0.0%; p = .44; Egger's test: intercept 0.35 [−0.78 to 1.51]; p = .42).

The group with both PMI and MRA and that with only MRA showed a slightly higher reduction in left ventricular diameters (−5.94%; −8.75% to 3.13%,). However, in both groups, LVRR was <10%. No difference was detected between PM relocation/repositioning and papillary muscle approximation in terms of LVRR (p = .33).

Conclusions

Using PMI and MRA together has a lower MR recurrence than using MRA alone. No significant LVRR was observed between the two groups nor between the PMI techniques employed.