Re-repair for mitral insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Mitral valve repair provides superior outcomes to replacement for primary MR. Whether this is true following previous repair is unknown. We present the results of a strategy of re-repair for failed mitral valve repair. We examine patients who were brought to the operating room for an intended mitral valve re-repair. METHODS: We reviewed the last one decade of our institutional mitral valve databases at The University of Pennsylvania and Plano Heart Hospital and identified patients undergoing repeat mitral valve repair, in whom the index operation was mitral valve repair. We analyzed their operative details, clinical and echocardiographic outcomes. RESULTS: Between 2008 and 2021, 71 patients (aged 61.5 ±10.7 years, 20% female) underwent mitral valve reoperation at an mean of 6.24 ±7.62 years following index mitral repair. 20% of patients presented with NYHA class III/IV symptoms. At index operation, 34 (47.9%) had repair through a right mini-thoracotomy. 15 patients (21.1%) required the reoperation within one year. There were 0 early and 8 late deaths. One patient who underwent mitral replacement instead of repair, required reoperation for paravalvular leak during the follow-up period. Three patients required mitral valve replacement at an average of 2.28 ±2.03 years following initial mitral valve re-repair. CONCLUSIONS: Mitral re-repair can be performed with acceptable results at a valve reference center. Durability and functional advantages of this approach remain to be proven.

Redo mitral valve surgery following prior mitral valve repair.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment strategy following a failed mitral valve repair remains unclear. This study evaluated early and long-term outcomes of redo mitral valve repair (MVr) and replacement (MVR) after prior mitral valve repair. METHODS: Patients undergoing redo mitral valve surgery after prior mitral valve repair at a single institution between 2002 and 2014 were reviewed. Primary outcomes included operative mortality (30-day or in-hospital mortality) and long-term freedom from mitral valve reoperation and death. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications. RESULTS: 305 patients underwent redo MVr (n = 48) or MVR (n = 257) after prior mitral valve repair. Concomitant procedures included tricuspid valve repair or replacement (23%), aortic valve replacement (6%), and coronary artery bypass grafting (4%), with no differences between cohorts. 18% were performed via right mini-thoracotomy (24% MVr vs 18% MVR, P = 0.31). Unadjusted and risk-adjusted operative mortality were lower with MVr (0% vs 8%, P = 0.04). Rates of postoperative complications were similar except for blood product transfusion (35% MVr vs 59% MVR, P = 0.003) and prolonged mechanical ventilation (8% MVr vs 29% MVR, P = 0.003). Long-term freedom from mortality was comparable: 96% MVr versus 86% MVR at 1 year and 78% MVr versus 68% MVR at 5 years (P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: When technically feasible, mitral valve re-repair can be safely performed with outcomes comparable to MVR.