Outcomes of Different Mitral Valve Approaches Combined with Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Degenerative Valve Disease
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.59958/hsf.7405Keywords:
heart valve disease, morbidity, mortalityAbstract
Introduction: The objective of this cohort study was to analyze the long-term relative survival of degenerative valve disease (DVD) patients who underwent mitral valve repair (MVP) or replacement and aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods: A total of 146 patients underwent double valve replacement (DVR) or MVP+AVR at four institutions between 2016 and 2022. Kaplan–Meier method was applied to analyze survival rate. The potential predictors of mortality were investigated by Cox regression. Results: Of 146 patients, 62 underwent MVP+AVR, and 84 underwent DVR. The thirty-day mortality rate was 4.76% in the DVR cohort and 1.61% in the MVP+AVR cohort. At baseline, there were differences in age (63.39 ± 8.01 vs. 58.46 ± 9.92, p = 0.012), proportions of male patients (51.61% vs. 72.62, p = 0.014), smoking history (45.16% vs. 28.57%, p = 0.039). More biological valves were applied in the MVP+AVR cohort (77.42% vs. 47.62%, p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in mortality between the cohorts (1339.5 [Interquartile range (IQR), 1021.25–1876.75] vs. 1026.00 [IQR, 679.50–1674.00], p = 0.252). The overall mortality rate was 16.67% for DVR and 6.45% for MVP+AVR. Mechanical valve replacement (hazard ratio (HR) = 3.7, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.0–12.0, p = 0.029) was increased the risk of postoperative mortality. Conclusion: Although the superiority of MVP+AVR was not verified with statistical significance in our cohort, we believe that MVP+AVR should be the preferred strategy for treating most DVD patient because it is associated with higher survival rates during follow-up.
References
Soler-Soler J, Galve E. Worldwide perspective of valve disease. Heart (British Cardiac Society). 2000; 83: 721–725.
Coffey S, Roberts-Thomson R, Brown A, Carapetis J, Chen M, Enriquez-Sarano M, et al. Global epidemiology of valvular heart disease. Nature Reviews. Cardiology. 2021; 18: 853–864.
Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, De Bonis M, Hamm C, Holm PJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. European Heart Journal. 2017; 38: 2739–2791.
Vahanian A, Beyersdorf F, Praz F, Milojevic M, Baldus S, Bauersachs J, et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. European Heart Journal. 2022; 43: 561–632.
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, 3rd, Guyton RA, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2014; 63: e57–e185.
Kirchhof P, Benussi S, Kotecha D, Ahlsson A, Atar D, Casadei B, et al. 2016 ESC Guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation developed in collaboration with EACTS. European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. 2016; 50: e1–e88.
Akins CW, Miller DC, Turina MI, Kouchoukos NT, Blackstone EH, Grunkemeier GL, et al. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2008; 85: 1490–1495.
Ghali WA, Quan H, Brant R, van Melle G, Norris CM, Faris PD, et al. Comparison of 2 methods for calculating adjusted survival curves from proportional hazards models. JAMA. 2001; 286: 1494–1497.
Fiedler AG, Bhambhani V, Laikhter E, Picard MH, Wasfy MM, Tolis G, et al. Aortic valve replacement associated with survival in severe regurgitation and low ejection fraction. Heart (British Cardiac Society). 2018; 104: 835–840.
Hamamoto M, Bando K, Kobayashi J, Satoh T, Sasako Y, Niwaya K, et al. Durability and outcome of aortic valve replacement with mitral valve repair versus double valve replacement. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 2003; 75: 28–33; discussion 33–34.
Leavitt BJ, Baribeau YR, DiScipio AW, Ross CS, Quinn RD, Olmstead EM, et al. Outcomes of patients undergoing concomitant aortic and mitral valve surgery in northern new England. Circulation. 2009; 120: S155–S162.
Coutinho GF, Martínez Cereijo JM, Correia PM, Lopes CS, López LR, Muñoz DD, et al. Long-term results after concomitant mitral and aortic valve surgery: repair or replacement? European Journal of Cardio-thoracic Surgery: Official Journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery. 2018; 54: 1085–1092.
Gillinov AM, Blackstone EH, Cosgrove DM, 3rd, White J, Kerr P, Marullo A, et al. Mitral valve repair with aortic valve replacement is superior to double valve replacement. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2003; 125: 1372–1387.
Kilic A, Grimm JC, Magruder JT, Sciortino CM, Whitman GJR, Baumgartner WA, et al. Trends, clinical outcomes, and cost implications of mitral valve repair versus replacement, concomitant with aortic valve replacement. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2015; 149: 1614–1619.
Egger ML, Gahl B, Koechlin L, Schömig L, Matt P, Reuthebuch O, et al. Outcome of patients with double valve surgery between 2009 and 2018 at University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery. 2022; 17: 152.
Unger P, Lancellotti P, Amzulescu M, David-Cojocariu A, de Cannière D. Pathophysiology and management of combined aortic and mitral regurgitation. Archives of Cardiovascular Diseases. 2019; 112: 430–440.
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Erwin JP, 3rd, Fleisher LA, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2017; 135: e1159–e1195.
Smith A, Argáez C. Experiences and Perspectives of Treatments for Heart Valve Disease: A Rapid Qualitative Review [Internet]. Ottawa (ON): Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. 2020.
