Does mitral valve intervention have an impact on late survival in ischemic cardiomyopathy? (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2011
The treatment of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and concomitant mitral regurgitation can be challenging and is associated with reduced long-term survival. It is unclear how mitral valve repair versus replacement affects subsequent outcome. Therefore, we conducted this study to understand the predictors of mortality and to delineate the role of mitral valve repair versus replacement in this high-risk population. From 1993 to 2007, 431 patients (mean age, 70 ± 9 years) with ischemic cardiomyopathy (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 45%) and significant ischemic mitral regurgitation (>2) were identified. Patients (44) with concomitant mitral stenosis were excluded from the analysis. A homogeneous group of 387 patients underwent combined coronary artery bypass grafting and mitral valve surgery, mitral valve repair in 302 (78%) and mitral valve replacement in 85 (22%). Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed on the entire cohort, and the predictors of mortality were identified in 2 distinct risk phases. Furthermore, we specifically examined the impact of mitral valve repair versus replacement by comparing 2 propensity-matched subgroups. Follow-up was 100% complete (median, 3.6 years; range, 0-15 years). Overall 1-, 5-, and 10-year survivals were 82.7%, 55.2%, and 24.3%, respectively, for the entire group. The risk factors for an increased mortality within the first year of surgery included previous coronary artery bypass grafting (hazard ratio = 3.39; P < .001), emergency/urgent status (hazard ratio = 2.08; P = .007), age (hazard ratio = 1.5; P = .03), and low left ventricular ejection fraction (hazard ratio = 1.31; P = .026). Thereafter, only age (hazard ratio = 1.58; P < .001), diabetes (hazard ratio = 2.5; P = .001), and preoperative renal insufficiency (hazard ratio = 1.72; P = .025) were predictive. The status of mitral valve repair versus replacement did not influence survival, and this was confirmed by comparable survival in propensity-matched analyses. Survival after combined coronary artery bypass grafting and mitral valve surgery in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (left ventricular ejection fraction ≤ 45%) and mitral regurgitation is compromised and mostly influenced by factors related to the patient's condition at the time of surgery. The specifics of mitral valve repair versus replacement did not seem to affect survival.
2010
Background. Ischemic mitral regurgitation is known to be associated with poor long-term outcome after coronary artery bypass grafting; however, our ability to alter that outcome with intervention on the valve is unclear. The decision to address the valve is most challenging for patients with only moderate mitral regurgitation, particularly with the popularization of off-pump surgery. We therefore reviewed early and late outcomes of patients undergoing revascularization with or without mitral valve surgery.
Structural Heart, 2019
Background: This study examined the impact of mitral valve repair (MVRe) on survival of patients with moderate or severe (≥2+) MR and ischemic cardiomyopathy randomized to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus CABG+surgical ventricular reconstruction (SVR) in the STICH trial. Methods: Among patients with moderate or severe MR and ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing CABG or CABG+SVR, the impact of MVRe on mortality between the two treatment arms was compared. Results: Among 867 patients with assessment of baseline MR severity, 211 had moderate or severe MR. After excluding 7 patients who underwent mitral valve replacement, 50, 44, 62, and 48 patients underwent CABG, CABG+MVRe, CABG+SVR, and CABG+SVR +MVRe, respectively. Four-year mortality rates were lower following CABG+MVRe than CABG alone (16% vs. 55%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.30; 95% CI 0.13-0.71). In contrast, the CABG+SVR+MVRe and CABG+SVR groups had similar 4-year mortality of 39% vs. 39% (adjusted HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.46-1.70). MVRe had a more favorable effect on survival in patients undergoing CABG alone compared to CABG+SVR (p = 0.013). Baseline MR severity was similar between patients that received CABG+MVRe and those that underwent CABG+SVR+MVRe. A larger proportion of patients demonstrated a reduction in MR between 4 and 24 months after CABG+MVRe compared to CABG+SVR+MVRe (50.0% versus 25.0%, p = 0.023). Conclusion: In patients with moderate or severe MR and ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing CABG, MVRe appears to have a favorable effect on survival. The addition of SVR to CABG may attenuate the anticipated benefits of MVRe by limiting the longterm reduction of MR with MVRe.
Circulation, 2012
Background— Whether mitral valve repair during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) improves survival in patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) remains unknown. Methods and Results— Patients with ejection fraction ≤35% and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomized at 99 sites worldwide to medical therapy with or without CABG. The decision to treat the mitral valve during CABG was left to the surgeon. The primary end point was mortality. Of 1212 randomized patients, 435 (36%) had none/trace MR, 554 (46%) had mild MR, 181 (15%) had moderate MR, and 39 (3%) had severe MR. In the medical arm, 70 deaths (32%) occurred in patients with none/trace MR, 114 (44%) in those with mild MR, and 58 (50%) in those with moderate to severe MR. In patients with moderate to severe MR, there were 29 deaths (53%) among 55 patients randomized to CABG who did not receive mitral surgery (hazard ratio versus medical therapy, 1.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.77–1.87) and 21 deaths (...
Journal of Cardiac Surgery, 2003
Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate in a cohort of patients with impaired left ventricular (LV) function and ischemic mitral valve regurgitation (MVR), the effects of onpump/beating heart versus conventional surgery in terms of postoperative mortality and morbidity and LV function improvement. Materials and Methods: Between January 1993 and February 2001, 91 patients with LVEF between 17% and 35% and chronic ischemic MVR (grade III-IV), underwent MV repair in concomitance with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) Sixty-one patients (Group I) underwent cardiac surgery with cardioplegic arrest, and 30 patients (Group II) underwent beating heart combined surgery. Aortic valve insufficiency was considered a contraindication for the on-pump/beating heart procedure. Mean age in Group I was 64.4 ± 7 years and in Group II, 65 ± 6 years (p = 0.69). Results: The in-hospital mortality in Group I was 8 (13%) patients versus 2 (7%) patients in Group II (p > 0.1). The cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) time was significantly higher in Group I (p < 0.001). In Groups I and II, respectively (p > 0.1), 2.5 ± 1 and 2.7 ± 0.8 grafts per patient were employed. Perioperative complications were identified in 37 (60.7%) patients in Group I versus 10 (33%) patients in Group II (p = 0.025). Prolonged inotropic support of greater than 24 hours was needed in 48 (78.7%) patients (Group I) versus 15 (50%) patients (Group II) (p = 0.008). Postoperative IABP and low cardiac output incidence were significantly higher in Group I, p = 0.03 and p = 0.027, respectively. Postoperative bleeding greater than 1000 mL was identified in 24 patients (39.4%) in Group I versus 5 (16.7%) in Group II (p = 0.033). Renal dysfunction incidence was 65.6% (40 patients) in Group I versus 36.7% (11 patients) in Group II (p = 0.013). The echocardiographic examination within six postoperative months revealed a significant improvement of MV regurgitation fraction, LV function, and reduced dimensions in both groups. The postoperative RF was significantly lower in Group II patients 12 ± 6 (%) versus 16 ± 5.6 (%) in Group I (p = 0.001). The 1, 2, and 3 years actuarial survival including all deaths was 91.3%, 84.2%, and 70% in Group I and 93.3%, 87.1%, and 75% in Group II (p = ns). NYHA FC
Annals of Surgery, 2000
To assess the surgical risk of additional mitral valve repairs in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy. Summary Background Data Severe mitral regurgitation in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy increases the death rate and symptomatic status. The 1-year survival rate for medical therapy in this subset of patients is less than 20%. Transplantation is usually not feasible because of donor shortage and death while on the waiting list. Methods To assess additive risk, a retrospective chart review from 1993 to 1998 was performed comparing patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy (ejection fraction [EF] Ͻ25%) and severe mitral regurgitation undergoing mitral valve repair and coronary artery bypass graft operations with patients with an EF of Ͻ25% undergoing coronary artery bypass graft alone. These groups were also compared with 140 patients receiving heart transplants since 1993 (group 3). Results The overall hospital death rate for group 1 was 6.3%. The one death occurred 2 weeks after surgery secondary to sepsis. This was not significantly different from the death rate of 4.1% in group 2. In group 1, there were two deaths at 1 year (87% survival rate), one related to heart failure. One patient was New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV at 1 year; the remainder of patients were NYHA class I-II. These results were not significantly different than the 8% death rate noted with transplantation. There was no change in EF and minimal residual mitral regurgitation in group 1 based on postoperative transesophageal echocardiography, whereas group 2 had an average 11.7% improvement in EF.
Revista portuguesa de cardiologia : orgão oficial da Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia = Portuguese journal of cardiology : an official journal of the Portuguese Society of Cardiology, 2013
Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is associated with increased mortality. Even after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), IMR reduces survival. Several studies have shown increased perioperative mortality for mitral valve replacement (MVR) in this situation, but the subject remains controversial. To investigate the impact of MVR on immediate outcomes in patients with moderate-to-severe IMR undergoing concomitant CABG compared with those undergoing CABG only. We performed a retrospective study of 42 patients undergoing CABG+MVR (n=16) or CABG only (n=26) at the Division of Cardiovascular Surgery of PROCAPE, between May 2007 and April 2010. Preoperative clinical characteristics, procedural characteristics, major and minor complications after surgery, preoperative and postoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) by echocardiography, and outcome (survivor or death) were assessed. Mean patient age was 63.4 ± 8.5 years, and 64.8% (n=23) were male. The CABG+MVR group showed...
Circulation, 2012
Background-The role of mitral valve repair (MVR) during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation (MR) is uncertain. We conducted a randomized, controlled trial to determine whether repairing the mitral valve during CABG may improve functional capacity and left ventricular reverse remodeling compared with CABG alone. Methods and Results-Seventy-three patients referred for CABG with moderate ischemic MR and an ejection fraction Ͼ30% were randomized to receive CABG plus MVR (34 patients) or CABG only (39 patients). The study was stopped early after review of interim data. At 1 year, there was a greater improvement in the primary end point of peak oxygen consumption in the CABG plus MVR group compared with the CABG group (3.3 mL/kg/min versus 0.8 mL/kg/min; PϽ0.001). There was also a greater improvement in the secondary end points in the CABG plus MVR group compared with the CABG group: left ventricular end-systolic volume index, MR volume, and plasma B-type natriuretic peptide reduction of 22.2 mL/m 2 , 28.2 mL/beat, and 557.4 pg/mL, respectively versus 4.4 mL/m 2 (Pϭ0.002), 9.2 mL/beat (Pϭ0.001), and 394.7 pg/mL (Pϭ0.003), respectively. Operation duration, blood transfusion, intubation duration, and hospital stay duration were greater in the CABG plus MVR group. Deaths at 30 days and 1 year were similar in both groups: 3% and 9%, respectively in the CABG plus MVR group, versus 3% (Pϭ1.00) and 5% (Pϭ0.66), respectively in the CABG group. Conclusions-Adding mitral annuloplasty to CABG in patients with moderate ischemic MR may improve functional capacity, left ventricular reverse remodeling, MR severity, and B-type natriuretic peptide levels, compared with CABG alone. The impact of these benefits on longer term clinical outcomes remains to be defined.
Surgery for ischemic mitral regurgitation: should the valve be repaired?
The Journal of heart valve disease, 2011
Patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) often have concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR). Repairing the valve at the time of surgery is not universally accepted. The results of CABG with or without mitral valve annuloplasty (MVA) were compared in patients with reduced left ventricular (LV) function and ischemic MR. Among a total of 195 patients, 108 underwent isolated CABG, and 87 underwent CABG with MVA. The study end-points included survival, degree of MR, and NYHA functional class. Patients in the MVA group were younger (mean age 63 +/- 10 versus 68 +/- 9 years; p <0.001), but had a more severe cardiac pathology, with severe LV dysfunction in 45% versus 26% (p = 0.006) and severe MR in 82% versus 14% (p < 0.001). The operative mortality was 9%, and similar in both groups. The follow up was complete, with a mean survival period of 87 +/- 50 months. Although, overall, no improvement was seen in LV function, symptomatic improveme...