Anterior versus posterior leaflet mitral valve repair: A propensity-matched analysis

被引:22
|
作者
Brescia, Alexander A. [1 ]
Watt, Tessa M. F. [1 ]
Rosenbloom, Liza M. [1 ]
Murray, Shannon L. [1 ]
Wu, Xiaoting [1 ]
Romano, Matthew A. [1 ]
Bolling, Steven F. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Dept Cardiac Surg, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
来源
关键词
mitral valve; mitral repair; degenerative mitral repair; mitral replacement; anterior leaflet; bileaflet; POLYTETRAFLUOROETHYLENE SUTURES; PROLAPSE; OUTCOMES; REGURGITATION; DURABILITY; DISEASE; SURGERY; REPLACEMENT; SURVIVAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.11.148
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: Mitral valve repair is superior to replacement for degenerative disease, but long-term outcomes of anterior versus posterior leaflet repair remain poorly defined. We propensity matched anterior and posterior repairs to compare long-term outcomes. Methods: Patients undergoing first-time degenerative mitral repair between 1992 and 2018 were identified. Primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were postprocedural residual mitral regurgitation and reoperation. From 1025 patients, 1:1 propensity score matching was performed, yielding 309 anterior (isolated anterior = 85, bileaflet = 224) and 309 isolated posterior repairs. Results: Age was 58 +/- 15 years, ejection fraction was 57% +/- 10%, and matched groups were well balanced. Anterior repairs had longer bypass (122 +/- 53 vs 109 +/- 43 minutes, P = .001) and crossclamp (94 +/- 44 vs 85 +/- 62 minutes, P = .033) times. Mean residual mitral regurgitation grade was 0.44 (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.65) for anterior repair and 0.30 (95% confidence interval, 0.13-0.47) for posterior repair (P = .31). Overall, 92%(569/618) of matched patients had no residual mitral regurgitation, with no differences in mitral regurgitation grade between groups (P = .77). Survival did not differ between anterior (10 years: 72% +/- 7%; 15 years: 63% +/- 7%) and posterior (10 years: 74% +/- 7%; 15 years: 60% +/- 8%) groups (log-rank P = .93). Linearized incidence of reoperation was 0.62% per patient-year, including 0.74% for anterior and 0.48% for posterior repairs. Cumulative incidence of reoperation at 15 years was 7.5% after anterior repair and 4.9% after posterior repair (Gray's test P = .26). Conclusions: No long-term survival or reoperation difference was found between posterior and anterior repair. On the basis of these findings, surgeons at centers of excellence should aim for repair of both anterior and posterior leaflet pathology with the same decision-making threshold over valve replacement for degenerative mitral disease.
引用
收藏
页码:1087 / 1095
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Reoperation rates after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior cervical foraminotomy: a propensity-matched analysis
    Lubelski, Daniel
    Healy, Andrew T.
    Silverstein, Michael P.
    Abdullah, Kalil G.
    Thompson, Nicolas R.
    Riew, K. Daniel
    Steinmetz, Michael P.
    Benzel, Edward C.
    Mroz, Thomas E.
    SPINE JOURNAL, 2015, 15 (06): : 1277 - 1283
  • [32] Propensity-matched Analysis of Outcomes and Hospital Charges for Anterior Versus Posterior Cervical Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
    Tanenbaum, Joseph E.
    Lubelski, Daniel
    Rosenbaum, Benjamin P.
    Benzel, Edward C.
    Mroz, Thomas E.
    CLINICAL SPINE SURGERY, 2017, 30 (09): : E1262 - E1268
  • [33] Reoperative mitral valve surgery via sternotomy or right thoracotomy: A propensity-matched analysis
    Patel, Nirav C.
    Hemli, Jonathan M.
    Seetharam, Karthik
    Graver, L. Michael
    Brinster, Derek R.
    Pirelli, Luigi
    Scheinerman, S. Jacob
    Hartman, Alan R.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2019, 34 (10) : 976 - 982
  • [34] Mitral valve repair using adjustable posterior leaflet neochords
    Sotolongo, Alex
    Bin Mahmood, Syed Usman
    Vaccaro, Ben
    Geirsson, Arnar
    JTCVS TECHNIQUES, 2020, 2 : 50 - 54
  • [35] Repair of Hammock Mitral Valve with Hypoplastic Posterior Leaflet in an Adult
    Stojanovic, Ivan
    Vukovic, Petar
    Boskovic, Srdjan
    Vuk, Ljiljana Lausevic
    Korac, Natasa Stokuca
    JOURNAL OF HEART VALVE DISEASE, 2010, 19 (06): : 803 - 805
  • [36] Technical aspects of robotic posterior mitral valve leaflet repair
    Javadikasgari, Hoda
    Suri, Rakesh M.
    Mihaljevic, Tomislav
    Mick, Stephanie
    Gillinov, A. Marc
    ANNALS OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY, 2016, 5 (06) : 577 - 581
  • [37] Minimally invasive mitral valve surgery after previous sternotomy: A propensity-matched analysis
    Hamandi, Mohanad
    Squiers, John J.
    Lanfear, Allison T.
    Banwait, Jasjit K.
    Meidan, Talia G.
    Smith, Robert L.
    Hutcheson, Kelley
    DiMaio, John Michael
    Mack, Michael J.
    George, Timothy J.
    Ryan, William H.
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2021, 36 (09) : 3177 - 3183
  • [38] Robotic mitral valve repair for degenerative posterior leaflet prolapse
    Javadikasgari, Hoda
    Suri, Rakesh M.
    Tappuni, Bassman
    Lowry, Ashley M.
    Mihaljevic, Tomislav
    Mick, Stephanie
    Gillinov, A. Marc
    ANNALS OF CARDIOTHORACIC SURGERY, 2017, 6 (01) : 27 - 32
  • [39] Triangular resection and folding of posterior leaflet for mitral valve repair
    David, TE
    JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2006, 21 (03) : 277 - 277
  • [40] Double-breasted repair of the posterior mitral valve leaflet
    Raman, JS
    Gupta, R
    Shah, P
    Setty, R
    Tambara, K
    ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2002, 74 (06): : 2206 - 2207