ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Long-term outcomes of mitral valve (MV) repair versus MV replacement for ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) in patients undergoing either prior (PCR) or concomitant coronary revascularization (CCR) by surgery (CABG) or intervention (PCI) are uncertain. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 446 patients receiving MV surgery for IMR between July 2006 and December 2010, 125 patients-87 CCR (69.1%) and 38 PCR (30.9%)-were eligible for inclusion in the study. Survival was higher in CCR versus PCR at long-term follow-up (78.83% vs. 57.9%, p = 0.016). The incidence of MACCE was lower in the CCR compared to PCR at both hospital discharge (34.11% vs. 63.57%, p = 0.003) and at follow-up (34.11% vs. 65.79%, p = 0.0008). Patients receiving CABG or CABG with PCI in PCR had higher mortality risks after MV surgery than CCR patients (X2 = 6.029, p = 0.014 and X2 = 6.466, p = 0.011, respectively). Whereas in the PCR group, MV repair and MV replacement achieved similar survival probability (X2 = 1.551, p = 0.213), MV repair in the CCR group led to improved survival compared to MV replacement (X2 = 3.921, p = 0.048). In MV replacement, LAD-CABG improved survival compared to LAD-PCI (U = 15,000.00, Z = -2.373 p = 0.018), and a substantial impact of arterial IMA-LAD grafting was revealed in the Cox-regression analysis (HR 0.334, CI: 0.113-0.989, p = 0.048) as opposed to venous-LAD grafting (HR 0.588, CI: 0.166-2.078, p = 0.410). CONCLUSION: Early treatment of IMR concomitant to coronary revascularization enhances long-term survival compared to delayed MV surgery after PCR. MV repair is not superior to MV replacement when performed late after coronary revascularization; however, MV repair leads to better survival than MV replacement when performed concomitantly with CABG with arterial LAD revascularization.
ABSTRACT
The present study aimed to investigate the impact of pulmonary hypertension (PH) on short-term survival after LVAD implantation with or without tricuspid annuloplasty valve repair (TVr) performed to treat regurgitation and avoid RV-failure post-LVAD insertion. Data of 24 patients receiving LVAD-implantation are assessed and compared. The primary outcome is in-hospital survival. Of 24 patients studied, 17 (70.8%) survived hospital stay: age (62.2 ± 12.3 vs 66.1 ± 8.5 years), preoperative LV-EF (15.9 ± 5.3% vs 13.6 ± 3.8%) vs. non-survivors, respectively. Survivors received preoperatively Impella (35.3% vs 0%, p = 0.037), had shorter intubation time (3.3 ± 3.5 vs 11.4 ± 11.1 days, p = 0.0053) and ICU stay (12.4 ± 9.8 vs 34.3 ± 34 days, p = 0.01) versus non-survivors. Non-survivors had more severe PH (37.0 ± 9.6 vs 29.8 ± 12.2 mmHg, p = 0.044) than survivors. Linear regression analysis revealed that cardiac operations performed concomitant with LVAD implantation increased mortality in patients with severe PH (p = 0.04), whereas isolated TVr performed concomitant with LVAD implantation did not increase mortality neither in the entire patient cohort (p = 0.569) nor in patients with severe PH (p = 0.433). LVAD with TVr improved survival in patients suffering from severe PH (vs. moderate PH), however this difference did not reach the level of significance due to the small number of patients (p = 0.08). LVAD-implantation alone improved survival of patients suffering from moderate PH (p = 0.045, vs. severe PH). Surgical correction of tricuspid regurgitation concomitant or before LVAD implantation improves early survival in patients suffering from severe PH when compared to LVAD implantation alone. Patients suffering from severe PH tend to benefit more from TVr than those suffering from moderate PH.
