Clinical outcomes of mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation in elderly patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study analyzes the safety and outcomes of mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral valve regurgitation in patients 75 years of age or older. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical results of 343 patients aged ≥75 years who underwent mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral valve regurgitation as a primary indication between January 1998 and June 2017. RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) age of the patients was 79.4 (76.9, 82.9) years, and 132 (38.5%) patients were women. Concomitant procedures were performed in 123 patients: tricuspid surgery in 68 (19.8%) and a maze procedure or pulmonary vein isolation in 55 (16.0%). Operative mortality was 1.2%. Operative complications included atrial fibrillation in 37.9%, prolonged ventilation in 7.0%, pacemaker implantation in 3.8, renal failure requiring dialysis in 1.5 and stroke in 3 (0.9%). The median follow-up was 7.4 years (interquartile range, 3.5-14.1 years). The cumulative incidence rates of mitral valve reoperation were 2.2%, 3.2% and 3.2% at 1, 5 and 10 years, respectively. Overall survival at 1, 5 and 10 years were 95%, 83% and 51%, respectively. Older age, smoking and over and underweight were associated with increased risk of mortality, while higher left ventricular ejection fraction and hypertension were associated with reduced risk. CONCLUSIONS: Mitral valve repair in elderly patients can be accomplished with low operative mortality and complications. Mitral valve repair in the elderly remains the preferred treatment for degenerative mitral regurgitation.

Comparative Effectiveness of Mechanical Valves and Homografts in Complex Aortic Endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: The ideal surgical reconstruction of the aortic root in patients with complex endocarditis is controversial. We compared the short- and long-term outcomes between mechanical valves, bioprostheses, and homografts. METHODS: We identified all patients undergoing an operation for active complex aortic endocarditis at our institution between 2003 and 2017. We grouped patients according to those who received a mechanical valve, bioprosthesis, or homograft. We used multiple logistic regression and proportional hazards models. To minimize confounding by indication, we used marginal risk adjustment to simulate that every patient would undergo (contrary to fact) all 3 operations. RESULTS: Of 159 patients with complex active endocarditis, 48 (30.2%) had a valve plus patch reconstruction, and 85 (53.4%) had a root replacement. Of all, 50 (31.5%) had a mechanical valve, 56 (35.2%) had a bioprosthesis, and 53 (33.3%) had a homograft. The groups were similar in age, sex, body mass index, comorbid conditions, organism, abscess location, and mitral involvement (all P > .05). However, patients receiving mechanical reconstructions were more likely to have native valve endocarditis (46% vs 37.5% vs 17%; P = .005) and less likely to undergo root replacement (32% vs 28.6% vs 100%; P < .001). Marginal risk-adjusted operative mortality was lowest for mechanical valves (4.8%) and highest for homografts (16.9%; P = .041). Long-term survival after root replacement was worse with homografts than with mechanical valve conduits (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.9; P = .045). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with complex endocarditis, mechanical valves are associated with similar, if not better, short- and long-term outcomes compared with homografts, even after adjusting for important baseline characteristics and limiting the analysis to root replacements only.