Repair or Replacement for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Results From Polish National Registry

Abstract

Background: The optimal surgical strategy (repair vs replacement) for patients with secondary mitral (MV) regurgitation is questionable.

Methods: Patients who underwent MV repair or replacement for functional or ischemic mitral regurgitation between 2006 and 2017 were identified in Polish National Registry of Cardiac Surgery Procedures. Patients, who underwent additional procedures other than coronary artery bypass grafting or tricuspid valve surgery, as well as redo or emergency cases, were excluded. The long-term survival was verified based on National Health Fund registry. The survival was compared between MV repair and replacement both in the whole cohort and after propensity score matching. The Cox regression was used to seek for independent predictors of survival.

Results: Of 7633 identified patients, 1793 (23%) underwent MV replacement and 5840 (77%) underwent MV repair. Coronary artery bypass surgery was performed together with MV repair in 3992 (69%) patients and together with MV replacement in 915 (52%) patients (P < .001). Tricuspid valve surgery was added to 1393 (24%) MV repairs and to 561 (32%) MV replacements (P < .001). The crude actuarial 5-year survival was 71% (95% confidence interval [CI], 70%-72%) in the repair group and 66% (95% CI, 63%-68%) in the replacement group (P < .001). MV replacement was an independent predictor of mortality (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.17-1.49) (P < .001) in Cox regression modeling. In the propensity-matched cohort (1105 pairs), the long-term mortality was also significantly higher in the replacement group (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.06-1.45; P = .008).

Conclusions: Repair of secondary mitral regurgitation has an associated survival benefit compared with MV replacement.