Long-term outcomes comparison of mitral valve repair or replacement for secondary mitral valve regurgitation. An updated systematic review and reconstructed time-to-event study-level meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The ideal surgical intervention for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR), a disease of the left ventricle not the mitral valve itself, is still debated. We performed an updated systematic review and study-level meta-analysis investigating mitral valve repair (MVr) versus mitral valve replacement (MVR) for adult patients with SMR, with or without coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: PubMed, CENTRAL and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing MVr versus MVR. Randomized trial or observational studies were considered eligible. Primary endpoint was long-term mortality for any cause. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression. Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses included meta-regression and separate sub-analysis. A random effects model was used. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (MVr=3,727 and MVR=2,839) were included. One study was a randomized trial, and 19 studies were adjusted. The mean weighted follow-up was 3.7±2.8 years. MVR was associated with significative greater late mortality (HR=1.26; 95 % CI, 1.14-1.39; P<0.0001) at 10-year follow-up. There was a time-varying trend showing an increased risk of mortality in the first 2 years after MVR (HR=1.38; 95 % CI, 1.21-1.56; P<0.0001), after which this difference dissipated (HR=0.94; 95 % CI, 0.81-1.09; P=0.41). Separate sub-analyses showed comparable long-term mortality in patients with concomitant coronary surgery ≥90 %, left ventricle ejection fraction ≤40 %, and sub-valvular apparatus preservation rate of 100 %. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to repair, MVR is associated with higher probability of mortality in the first 2 years following surgery, after which the two procedures showed comparable late mortality rate.

Very Long-term Outcome of Bilateral Internal Thoracic Artery in Diabetic Patients: A Systematic Review and Reconstructed Time-To-Event Meta-analysis.

The benefits of single (SITA) and bilateral internal thoracic arteries (BITA) in diabetics undergoing coronary bypass grafting (CABG) are conflicting. We undertook a study-level meta-analysis to compare early and long-term outcomes of both CABG configurations. PubMed, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing BITA versus SITA for isolated CABG surgery in diabetics. Randomized trials or observational studies were considered eligible for the analysis. Kaplan-Meier curves of long-term survival were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression; incidence rate ratios (IRR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for long-term survival were calculated. Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Odds ratios (OR) were extracted for early mortality, postoperative stroke, deep sternal wound infection (DSWI), and myocardial infarction (MI). A random effects meta-analysis was performed. Sensitivity analyses included leave-one-out-analyses and meta-regression. Thirteen studies (7332 patients) were included. Overall, at 20-year follow-up, BITA was associated with higher survival (HR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.71-0.84; P < 0.0001). Time-varying HR and landmark analysis reported BITA was associated with a higher rate of 10-year survival (HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.68-0.82, P < 0.0001), while from 10 to 20-year follow-up no difference was revealed (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.82-1.19, P = 0.93). There was no increase in early mortality, postoperative MI, stroke, or DSWI between the groups. At meta-regression, the higher the age, the higher the long-term overall survival in patients with BITA. In diabetics, the BITA approach is associated with improved 10-year survival with no increase in early mortality, MI, stroke, or DSWI. In the 10-20-year timeframe, BITA and SITA showed comparable survival.