Robotic degenerative mitral repair: Factors associated with intraoperative revision and impact of mild residual regurgitation

Socioeconomic disparities in midterm outcomes after repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation

OBJECTIVE

The influence of socioeconomic disparities on survival after mitral repair is poorly defined. We examined the association between socioeconomic disadvantage and midterm outcomes of repair in Medicare beneficiaries with degenerative mitral regurgitation.

METHODS

US Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data were used to identify 10,322 patients undergoing isolated first-time repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation between 2012 and 2019. Zip code-level socioeconomic disadvantage was dichotomized with the Distressed Communities Index, which incorporates education level, poverty, unemployment, housing security, median income, and business growth; those with Distressed Communities Index score ≥80 were classified as distressed. The primary outcome was survival, censored at 3 years. Secondary outcomes included cumulative incidences of heart failure readmission, mitral reintervention, and stroke.

RESULTS

Of the 10,322 patients undergoing degenerative mitral repair, 9.7% (n = 1003) came from distressed communities. Patients from distressed communities underwent surgery at lower volume centers (11 vs 16 cases/year) and traveled further for surgical care (40 vs 17 miles) (both P values < .001). At 3 years, unadjusted survival (85.4%; 95% CI, 82.9%-87.5% vs 89.7%; 95% CI, 89.0%-90.4%) and cumulative incidence of heart failure readmission (11.5%; 95% CI, 9.6%-13.7% vs 7.4%; 95% CI, 6.9%-8.0%) were worse in patients from distressed communities (all P values < .001), whereas mitral reintervention rates were similar (2.7%; 95% CI, 1.8%-4.0% vs 2.8%; 95% CI, 2.5%-3.2%; P = .75). After adjustment, community distress was independently associated with 3-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.46) and heart failure readmissions (hazard ratio, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.04-1.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Community-level socioeconomic distress is associated with worse outcomes in degenerative mitral repair among Medicare beneficiaries.

Robotic mitral valve repair surgery: where do we go from here?

Surgical mitral valve repair through median sternotomy has long presented the treatment of choice for degenerative mitral valve disease. In recent decades, minimal invasive surgical techniques have been developed and are now gaining widespread popularity. Robotic cardiac surgery presents an emerging field, initially adopted only by selected centres, mostly in the United States. In recent years, the number of centers interested in robotic mitral valve surgery has grown with an increasing adoption in Europe as well. Increasing interest and surgical experience gained are stimulating further developments in the field and the full potential of robotic mitral valve surgery remains to be developed.

Impact of Mitral Regurgitation Etiology on Mitral Surgery After Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair: From the CUTTING-EDGE Registry

BACKGROUND

Although >150,000 mitral TEER procedures have been performed worldwide, the impact of MR etiology on MV surgery after TEER remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to compare outcomes of mitral valve (MV) surgery after failed transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) stratified by mitral regurgitation (MR) etiology.

METHODS

Data from the CUTTING-EDGE registry were retrospectively analyzed. Surgeries were stratified by MR etiology: primary (PMR) and secondary (SMR). MVARC (Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium) outcomes at 30 days and 1 year were evaluated. Median follow-up was 9.1 months (IQR: 1.1-25.8 months) after surgery.

RESULTS

From July 2009 to July 2020, 330 patients underwent MV surgery after TEER, of which 47% had PMR and 53.0% had SMR. Mean age was 73.8 ± 10.1 years, median STS risk at initial TEER was 4.0% (IQR: 2.2%-7.3%). Compared with PMR, SMR had a higher EuroSCORE, more comorbidities, lower LVEF pre-TEER and presurgery (all P < 0.05). SMR patients had more aborted TEER (25.7% vs 16.3%; P = 0.043), more surgery for mitral stenosis after TEER (19.4% vs 9.0%; P = 0.008), and fewer MV repairs (4.0% vs 11.0%; P = 0.019). Thirty-day mortality was numerically higher in SMR (20.4% vs 12.7%; P = 0.072), with an observed-to-expected ratio of 3.6 (95% CI: 1.9-5.3) overall, 2.6 (95% CI: 1.2-4.0) in PMR, and 4.6 (95% CI: 2.6-6.6) in SMR. SMR had significantly higher 1-year mortality (38.3% vs 23.2%; P = 0.019). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the actuarial estimates of cumulative survival were significantly lower in SMR at 1 and 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of MV surgery after TEER is nontrivial, with higher mortality after surgery, especially in SMR patients. These findings provide valuable data for further research to improve these outcomes.