Revascularization alone (without mitral valve repair) suffices in patients with advanced ischemic cardiomyopathy and mild-to-moderate mitral regurgitation (original) (raw)
Related papers
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.
Saudi Medical Journal, 2016
Objectives: To investigate whether mitral valve repair (MVR) at the time of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ischemic moderate mitral regurgitation (MR) and coronary artery disease could improve short-and mid-term postoperative outcomes. Methods: Between March 2013 and December 2015, 90 patients with moderate ischemic MR underwent firsttime CABG in Bursa Yuksek Ihtisas Training and Research Hospital, Bursa, Turkey. Out of 90 patients, 44 (48.9%) underwent combined CABG+MVR. The remaining 46 (51.1%) underwent CABG alone. Ventricular functions and effort capacities of patients in both groups were evaluated echocardiographically and clinically in the preoperative period, and in the first postoperative year. Results: Postoperative regurgitant volume changes according to preoperative values were-24.76±19 ml/beat in the combined CABG+MVR group, and-8.70±7.2 ml/beat in the CABG alone group (p=0.001). The change of vena contracta width was-3.40±0.2 mm in the combined CABG+MVR group whereas in the CABG alone-1.45±0.7 mm (p=0.019). The changes of left ventricular end-systolic volume index were-30.77±25.9 ml/m 2 in the combined CABG+MVR group and-15.6±9.4 ml/m 2 in the CABG alone group (p=0.096). Ejection fraction changes in the combined CABG+MVR group was +1.51±5.3% and in the CABG alone group was +1.15±4.3%.No statistically significant difference was found between both groups (p=0.604). Preoperative New York Heart Association class values in the combined CABG+MVR group was 2.18±0.45, and in the CABG alone group was 2.13±0.54. Conclusions: Moderate MR in patients undergoing CABG affects the outcome adversely and it does not reliably improve after CABG alone. Therefore, patients with ischemic moderate MR should undergo simultaneous MVR at the time of CABG.
Journal of Cardiac Surgery, 2018
Background: Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is associated with increased mortality and recurrent congestive heart failure following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. While mitral surgery should be undertaken for severe MR during CABG, the treatment of moderate IMR remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the outcomes of CABG alone and combine with mitral valve repair (MVr) in moderate IMR. Methods: A literature search was conducted by Pubmed, Ovid, and Embase, which included 643 articles. Eleven studies (seven observational studies and four randomized controlled trials) with a total of 1406 patients were included (CABG alone = 864 and CABG plus MVr = 542). Results: There was no difference in operative mortality (odds ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.92-2.71) or long-term survival at 1 or 5 years (hazard ratio 0.98, 95%CI 0.71-1.35, P = 0.49) between the two groups, and little evidence of heterogeneity was found in the studies (I 2 = 0.0, P = 0.562). There was significantly greater improvement in MR grade (weighted mean difference [WMD] −1.15, 95%CI −1.67 to −0.064, P = < 0.001) and left ventricular systolic diameter (WMD −3.02, 95% CI −4.85 to −1.18, P = 0.001) following CABG and MVr compared to CABG alone. No difference in postoperative functional class or ejection fraction was found. Conclusions: Our results show that in the presence of moderate IMR, adding MVr to revascularization reduces MR grade on follow-up echocardiography and promotes ventricular remodeling, with no improvement in long-term survival or functional class.
Texas Heart Institute journal / from the Texas Heart Institute of St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Texas Children's Hospital, 2009
We sought to evaluate retrospectively the outcomes of patients at our hospital who had moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation and who underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) alone or with concomitant mitral valve repair (CABG+MVr).A total of 83 patients had a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and moderate mitral regurgitation: 28 patients underwent CABG+MVr, and 55 underwent CABG alone. Changes in mitral regurgitation, functional class, and left ventricular ejection fraction were compared in both groups.The mean follow-up was 5.1 +/- 3.6 years (range, 0.1-15.1 yr). Reduction of 2 mitral-regurgitation grades was found in 85% of CABG+MVr patients versus 14% of CABG-only patients (P < 0.0001) at 1 year, and in 56% versus 14% at 5 years, respectively (P = 0.1), as well as improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction and functional class. One- and 5-year survival rates were similar in the CABG+MVr and CABG-only groups: 96% +/- 3% versus 96% +/- 4%, and 87% +/- ...
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 (...
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 (&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;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 &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt; .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 &amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt; .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&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;#39;s condition at the time of surgery. The specifics of mitral valve repair versus replacement did not seem to affect survival.
Does mitral valve intervention have an impact on late survival in ischemic cardiomyopathy?
The Israel Medical Association journal : IMAJ, 2006
Ischemic mitral regurgitation is associated with reduced survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. To compare long-term survival among patients undergoing coronary surgery for reduced left ventricular function and severe ischemic MR in whom the valve was repaired, replaced, or no intervention was performed. Eighty patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction and severe MR underwent coronary bypass surgery. The mean age of the patients was 65 years (range 42-82), and 63 (79%) were male. Sixty-three (79%) were in preoperative NYHA functional class III-IV (mean NYHA 3.3), and 26 (32%) were operated on an urgent/emergent basis. Coronary artery bypass surgery was performed in all patients. The mitral valve was repaired in 38 and replaced in 14, and in 28 there was no intervention. The clinical profile was similar in the three groups, although patients undergoing repair were slightly younger. Operative mortality was 15% (8%, 14%, and 25% for the repair, replacement and no interv...
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.
Texas Heart Institute Journal, 2004
In 31 consecutive patients with ischemic left ventricular dysfunction and mitral regurgitation ranging from 2/4 to 3/4 (mean, 2.87 ± 0.34), we performed coronary bypass grafting alone and assessed early and midterm outcomes. Our patients' mean preoperative New York Heart Association functional class was 3.64 ± 0.48, and their mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 0.25 ± 0.05. Preoperative thallium imaging revealed that all patients had at minimum a partially reversible defect in the anterior wall. All patients survived the operation. Hospital length of stay ranged from 5 to 21 days (mean, 8.35 ± 4.07 days), and mean length of follow-up was 21.35 ± 13.24 months. Postoperatively, patients' functional classification improved to a mean of 1.32 ± 0.6; left ventricular ejection fraction improved to a mean of 0.43 ± 0.09; and severity of mitral regurgitation decreased to a mean of 1.35 ± 0.96. Statistical analysis showed that all improvements were significant. Five late cardiac deaths occurred. Preoperative variables showed no correlation with late death. However, postoperative left ventricular ejection fraction and mitral regurgitation did correlate with late death, which suggests that the reversibility of damaged ischemic myocardium plays an important role after revascularization. This study supports the concept that ischemic mitral regurgitation might well improve after myocardial revascularization regardless of its severity; therefore, it should not be corrected at the primary operation, except in patients with organic valvular changes.