Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms

Edward L. Hannan, Zaza Samadashvili, Craig R. Smith, Stephen J. Lahey, Jeffrey P Gold, Desmond Jordan, Thoralf M. Sundt, Leonard Girardi, Mohammed H. Ashraf, Joanna Chikwe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

5 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The purposes of this study are to compare outcomes of mitral valve repair (MV-repair) and mitral valve replacement for patients with severe mitral regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms and to examine variations in surgeon choice of procedure and outcomes by surgeon volume. Methods: In total, 2259 consecutive patients in 42 New York State hospitals with the characteristics mentioned previously who underwent mitral valve repair (1801, 79.7%) or replacement between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014, were identified from a mandatory statewide clinical registry. Propensity-matching was used to compare mortality and competing risk analyses were used to compare nonfatal outcomes. Median follow-up was 4.0 years. The use of mitral repair and risk-adjusted mortality for surgery were also examined as a function of individual surgeon mitral case volume. Results: Propensity-matched patients who underwent MV-repair experienced a significantly lower mortality rate at 4 years (3.5% vs 12.1%, P <.001). Greater-volume surgeons were more likely to perform MV-repairs (92% vs 84%, 74%, and 69% in lower volume quartiles, respectively). No significant differences in mortality were observed among volume quartiles. Conclusions: Patients with chronic severe primary mitral valve regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no CHF symptoms who underwent MV-repair experienced lower mortality and no different reoperation, CHF, or stroke readmission rates than patients who underwent replacement. Greater-volume surgeons were more likely than their lower volume counterparts to choose mitral repair. Repair should be considered as the surgical option for these patients whenever possible.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1432-1439.e2
JournalJournal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Volume157
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2019

Fingerprint

Mitral Valve
Left Ventricular Function
Heart Failure
Mortality
Ventricular Function
Mitral Valve Insufficiency
Patient Readmission
State Hospitals
Reoperation
Registries
Stroke
Surgeons

Keywords

  • mitral valve mortality
  • mitral valve readmissions
  • mitral valve reoperations
  • mitral valve repair
  • mitral valve replacement
  • propensity matching

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms. / Hannan, Edward L.; Samadashvili, Zaza; Smith, Craig R.; Lahey, Stephen J.; Gold, Jeffrey P; Jordan, Desmond; Sundt, Thoralf M.; Girardi, Leonard; Ashraf, Mohammed H.; Chikwe, Joanna.

In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Vol. 157, No. 4, 04.2019, p. 1432-1439.e2.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hannan, EL, Samadashvili, Z, Smith, CR, Lahey, SJ, Gold, JP, Jordan, D, Sundt, TM, Girardi, L, Ashraf, MH & Chikwe, J 2019, 'Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms', Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, vol. 157, no. 4, pp. 1432-1439.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.091
Hannan, Edward L. ; Samadashvili, Zaza ; Smith, Craig R. ; Lahey, Stephen J. ; Gold, Jeffrey P ; Jordan, Desmond ; Sundt, Thoralf M. ; Girardi, Leonard ; Ashraf, Mohammed H. ; Chikwe, Joanna. / Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms. In: Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery. 2019 ; Vol. 157, No. 4. pp. 1432-1439.e2.
@article{0fac5f22aaf34c599876af32e05f593c,
title = "Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms",
abstract = "Objective: The purposes of this study are to compare outcomes of mitral valve repair (MV-repair) and mitral valve replacement for patients with severe mitral regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms and to examine variations in surgeon choice of procedure and outcomes by surgeon volume. Methods: In total, 2259 consecutive patients in 42 New York State hospitals with the characteristics mentioned previously who underwent mitral valve repair (1801, 79.7{\%}) or replacement between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014, were identified from a mandatory statewide clinical registry. Propensity-matching was used to compare mortality and competing risk analyses were used to compare nonfatal outcomes. Median follow-up was 4.0 years. The use of mitral repair and risk-adjusted mortality for surgery were also examined as a function of individual surgeon mitral case volume. Results: Propensity-matched patients who underwent MV-repair experienced a significantly lower mortality rate at 4 years (3.5{\%} vs 12.1{\%}, P <.001). Greater-volume surgeons were more likely to perform MV-repairs (92{\%} vs 84{\%}, 74{\%}, and 69{\%} in lower volume quartiles, respectively). No significant differences in mortality were observed among volume quartiles. Conclusions: Patients with chronic severe primary mitral valve regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no CHF symptoms who underwent MV-repair experienced lower mortality and no different reoperation, CHF, or stroke readmission rates than patients who underwent replacement. Greater-volume surgeons were more likely than their lower volume counterparts to choose mitral repair. Repair should be considered as the surgical option for these patients whenever possible.",
keywords = "mitral valve mortality, mitral valve readmissions, mitral valve reoperations, mitral valve repair, mitral valve replacement, propensity matching",
author = "Hannan, {Edward L.} and Zaza Samadashvili and Smith, {Craig R.} and Lahey, {Stephen J.} and Gold, {Jeffrey P} and Desmond Jordan and Sundt, {Thoralf M.} and Leonard Girardi and Ashraf, {Mohammed H.} and Joanna Chikwe",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.091",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "157",
pages = "1432--1439.e2",
journal = "Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery",
issn = "0022-5223",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Mitral valve repair versus replacement for patients with preserved left ventricular function without heart failure symptoms

AU - Hannan, Edward L.

AU - Samadashvili, Zaza

AU - Smith, Craig R.

AU - Lahey, Stephen J.

AU - Gold, Jeffrey P

AU - Jordan, Desmond

AU - Sundt, Thoralf M.

AU - Girardi, Leonard

AU - Ashraf, Mohammed H.

AU - Chikwe, Joanna

PY - 2019/4

Y1 - 2019/4

N2 - Objective: The purposes of this study are to compare outcomes of mitral valve repair (MV-repair) and mitral valve replacement for patients with severe mitral regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms and to examine variations in surgeon choice of procedure and outcomes by surgeon volume. Methods: In total, 2259 consecutive patients in 42 New York State hospitals with the characteristics mentioned previously who underwent mitral valve repair (1801, 79.7%) or replacement between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014, were identified from a mandatory statewide clinical registry. Propensity-matching was used to compare mortality and competing risk analyses were used to compare nonfatal outcomes. Median follow-up was 4.0 years. The use of mitral repair and risk-adjusted mortality for surgery were also examined as a function of individual surgeon mitral case volume. Results: Propensity-matched patients who underwent MV-repair experienced a significantly lower mortality rate at 4 years (3.5% vs 12.1%, P <.001). Greater-volume surgeons were more likely to perform MV-repairs (92% vs 84%, 74%, and 69% in lower volume quartiles, respectively). No significant differences in mortality were observed among volume quartiles. Conclusions: Patients with chronic severe primary mitral valve regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no CHF symptoms who underwent MV-repair experienced lower mortality and no different reoperation, CHF, or stroke readmission rates than patients who underwent replacement. Greater-volume surgeons were more likely than their lower volume counterparts to choose mitral repair. Repair should be considered as the surgical option for these patients whenever possible.

AB - Objective: The purposes of this study are to compare outcomes of mitral valve repair (MV-repair) and mitral valve replacement for patients with severe mitral regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no congestive heart failure (CHF) symptoms and to examine variations in surgeon choice of procedure and outcomes by surgeon volume. Methods: In total, 2259 consecutive patients in 42 New York State hospitals with the characteristics mentioned previously who underwent mitral valve repair (1801, 79.7%) or replacement between January 1, 2008, and December 31, 2014, were identified from a mandatory statewide clinical registry. Propensity-matching was used to compare mortality and competing risk analyses were used to compare nonfatal outcomes. Median follow-up was 4.0 years. The use of mitral repair and risk-adjusted mortality for surgery were also examined as a function of individual surgeon mitral case volume. Results: Propensity-matched patients who underwent MV-repair experienced a significantly lower mortality rate at 4 years (3.5% vs 12.1%, P <.001). Greater-volume surgeons were more likely to perform MV-repairs (92% vs 84%, 74%, and 69% in lower volume quartiles, respectively). No significant differences in mortality were observed among volume quartiles. Conclusions: Patients with chronic severe primary mitral valve regurgitation with preserved ventricular function and no CHF symptoms who underwent MV-repair experienced lower mortality and no different reoperation, CHF, or stroke readmission rates than patients who underwent replacement. Greater-volume surgeons were more likely than their lower volume counterparts to choose mitral repair. Repair should be considered as the surgical option for these patients whenever possible.

KW - mitral valve mortality

KW - mitral valve readmissions

KW - mitral valve reoperations

KW - mitral valve repair

KW - mitral valve replacement

KW - propensity matching

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85054017916&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85054017916&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.091

DO - 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2018.08.091

M3 - Article

C2 - 30482532

AN - SCOPUS:85054017916

VL - 157

SP - 1432-1439.e2

JO - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

SN - 0022-5223

IS - 4

ER -