Objective To compare the mid- and long-term clinical results of mitral valve plasty (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) in the treatment of functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). MethodsPatients with FMR who underwent surgical treatment in the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command from 2012 to 2021 were collected. The patients who underwent MVP were divided into a MVP group, and those who underwent MVR into a MVR group. The clinical data and mid-term follow-up efficacy of two groups were compared. Results Finally 236 patients were included. There were 100 patients in the MVP group, including 53 males and 47 females, with an average age of (61.80±8.03) years. There were 136 patients in the MVR group, including 72 males and 64 females, with an average age of (61.29±8.97) years. There was no statistical difference in baseline data between the two groups (P＞0.05). There was no statistical difference between the two groups in the extracorporeal circulation time, aortic occlusion time, postoperative hospital and ICU stay, intraoperative blood loss, or hospitalization death (P＞0.05), but the time of mechanical ventilation in the MVP group was significantly shorter than that in the MVR group (P=0.022). The total follow-up rate was 100.0%, the longest follow-up was 10 years, and the average follow-up time was (3.60±2.55) years. There were statistical differences in the left atrial diameter, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, left ventricular end-systolic diameter and cardiac function between the two groups compared with those before surgery (P<0.05). The postoperative left ventricular ejection fraction in the MVP group was statistically higher than that before surgery (P=0.002), but there was no statistical difference in the MVR group before and after surgery (P=0.658). The left atrial diameter in the MVP group was reduced compared with the MVR group (P=0.026). The recurrence rate of mitral regurgitation in the MVP group was higher than that in the MVR group, and the difference was statistically significant (10.0% vs. 1.5%, P=0.003). There were 14 deaths in the MVP group and 19 in the MVR group. The cumulative survival rate (P=0.605) and cardiovascular events-free survival rate (P=0.875) were not statistically significant between the two groups by Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Conclusion The safety, and mid- and long-term clinical efficacy of MVP in the treatment of FMR patients are better than MVR, and the left atrial and left ventricular diameters are statistically reduced, and cardiac function is statistically improved. However, the surgeon needs to be well aware of the indications for the MVP procedure to reduce the rate of mitral regurgitation recurrence.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the impact of different surgical strategies for moderate functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) at the time of aortic valve replacement (AVR) on patients' prognosis.MethodsA total of 118 AVR patients, including 84 males and 34 females, aged 58.1±12.4 years, who were complicated with moderate FMR were retrospectively recruited. Patients were divided into three groups according to the treatment strategy of mitral valve: a group A (no intervention, n=11), a group B (mitral valve repair, n=51) and a group C (mitral valve replacement, n=56). The primary endpoint was the early and mid-term survival of the patients, and the secondary endpoint was the improvement of FMR.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 29.5 months. Five patients died perioperatively, all of whom were from the group C. Early postoperative FMR improvement rates in the group A and group B were 90.9% and 94.1% (P=0.694). The mid-term mortality in the three groups were 0.0%, 5.9% and 3.9%, respectively (P=0.264), while the incidences of major cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were 0.0%, 9.8% and 17.7%, respectively (P=0.230). Improvements of FMR in the group A and group B were 100.0% and 94.3% at the mid-term follow-up (P>0.05).ConclusionFor patients receiving AVR with moderate FMR, conservative treatment or concurrent repair of mitral valve may be more reasonable, while mitral valve replacement may increase the incidence of early and mid-term adverse events.
ObjectiveTo investigate the risk or protective factors for systemic embolism (SE) in patients undergoing bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement (MVR).
Methods Between October 2002 and March 2013, a total of 146 patients underwent bioprosthetic MVR. There were 78 females and 68 males with mean age of 66.23±5.17 years. The primary reason of mitral valve disease was mitral valve degeneration or mitral valve leaflet prolapse in 40 patients, rheumatic heart valve disease in 101 patients, ischemic heart disease in 3 patients, infectious endocarditis in 1 patient, and mechanical peri-valvular leak in 1 patient. All patients were given anticoagulation therapy with warfarin for 3 months. Thereafter, antithrombotic medication was prescribed according to the surgeon's preference. The patients were followed up by telephone or mail for postoperative condition and SE events.
ResultsSixteen (10.96%) patients developed SE events, including cerebral infarction in 13 cases, transient ischemic attack (TIA) in 2 cases and spleen infarction in 1 case. A total of 16 patients died during follow-up. The 1-year, 3-year, 5-year and 10-year cumulative survival rate after surgery was 95.2%, 93.6%, 92.5% and 88.3% respectively. Patients with SE events had lower rate of left atrial appendage obliteration than those without SE events (25.0% vs. 78.6%, P=0.015). Multivariate analysis showed that left atrial appendage obliteration was an independent protective factor for SE in patients undergoing bioprosthetic MVR (P=0.041).
ConclusionLeft atrial appendage obliteration is a major protective factor for systemic embolism in patients undergoing bioprosthetic MVR no matter what antithrombotic medication is taken.
Objective To evaluate the clinical efficacy of valve-in-valve transcatheter mitral valve replacement for the management of degenerated bioprosthetic mitral valves. Methods This study retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who underwent transcatheter mitral valve replacement due to degenerated bioprosthetic mitral valves at the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from 2020 to 2023. The analysis included baseline characteristics, surgical details, perioperative complications, and hemodynamic changes during the early postoperative period and subsequent follow-up. Results A total of 31 patients were included in the study, comprising 7 males and 24 females, with an average age of (66.57±9.32) years. The average duration since the initial surgical placement of the bioprosthetic valves was (9.92±3.71) years. The procedures included 7 patients utilizing the transfemoral venous-atrial septal approach and 24 patients employing the transapical approach. All patients exhibited significant improvement in cardiac function postoperatively, with a reduction in the number of patients classified as New York Heart Association (NYHA) grade Ⅲ or Ⅳ and those with moderate to severe tricuspid valve regurgitation. Echocardiographic assessments revealed a decrease in peak flow velocity across the mitral valve and a reduction in the average transvalvular pressure gradient, while left ventricular ejection fraction remained unchanged. One patient experienced a recurrent stroke and died on the fifth postoperative day; however, the remaining patients were discharged without complications, including cardiac death, all-cause mortality, or outflow tract obstruction. During a median follow-up period of 12 months, no adverse events were reported, and hemodynamic stability was maintained. Conclusion Valve-in-valve transcatheter mitral valve replacement is a safe and effective option for patients with degenerated bioprosthetic mitral valves, demonstrating favorable hemodynamic outcomes and satisfactory short-term clinical results.
ObjectiveTo compare the clinical outcomes of mitral valvuloplasty (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) for infective endocarditis, and to investigate the effect of MVP under different surgical risks. MethodsA retrospective study was done on the patients with mitral infective endocarditis, who underwent surgical treatment in our department from January 2018 to March 2022. According to the procedures, the patients were divided into a MVP group and a MVR group. Propensity score matching method was applied with a ratio of 1:1 to eliminate the biases. The early and midterm outcomes were compared between the two groups after matching. According to the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation Ⅱ(EuroSCORE-Ⅱ), the effect of MVP was compared between high and low risk patients. ResultsA total of 195 patients were collected. There were 141 patients in the MVP group (120 males, 85.1%) and 54 patients in the MVR group (41 males, 75.9%). The mean follow-up time was (34.0±16.1) months. Patients in the MVP group were younger [(42.7±14.6) years vs. (56.8±13.0) years, P<0.001] and had better preoperative conditions. The patients in the MVP group had a shorter ICU stay [3.0 (2.0, 5.0) d vs. 4.0 (3.0, 8.0) d, P=0.004], and lower incidences of low cardiac output syndrome (0.7% vs. 9.3%, P=0.007), in-hospital mortality (0.0% vs. 3.7%, P=0.023), and follow-up mortality (4.3% vs. 15.4%, P=0.007). However, after 1:1 propensity score matching, there were no statistical differences in the baseline data or postoperative and follow-up adverse events between the two groups (P>0.05). Also, there was no statistical difference in the mortality of high-risk patients between MVP and MVR group (P>0.05). There was no statistical difference in the reoperation or recurrent severe mitral regurgitation between high and low-risk patients in the MVP group (P>0.05). Conclusion MVP is feasible for treating mitral lesions caused by infective endocarditis with good early and midterm outcomes. For patients with severer preoperative conditions, if the leaflet damage is not severe, MVP may be a viable option, but validation with larger sample sizes is needed.
ObjectiveTo summarize and analyze the clinical outcomes of one-stage transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) combined with transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) in patients with concomitant severe aortic and mitral valve disease. Methods We retrospectively collected the clinical data of patients who underwent one-stage TAVR and TMVR at Beijing Anzhen Hospital between January 2019 and May 2025. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, and perioperative echocardiographic results were recorded. Survivors were followed regularly, and the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events was assessed. ResultsA total of 12 high-risk patients with concomitant severe aortic and mitral valve disease were included, comprising 7 males with a mean age of (73.3±5.4) years. Aortic valve pathology included mixed lesions (n=1), aortic regurgitation (n=8), and aortic stenosis (n=3). Among them, 7 patients had previously undergone surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. Mitral valve pathology consisted of bioprosthetic valve degeneration leading to isolated regurgitation (n=8) or mixed lesions (n=4); 11 patients had a prior surgical bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement. All patients successfully underwent one-stage TAVR combined with TMVR, with 10 procedures performed via the transapical approach, 1 via the transfemoral approach, and 1 via a combined transfemoral-transapical approach. Valve deployment was successful in all cases, with an overall device success rate of 91.7%. The median intensive care unit stay was 1.5 (IQR 1.3, 3.4) d. Early postoperative complications included 2 perioperative deaths and 2 cases of gastrointestinal bleeding, with no other major cardiovascular events observed. During follow-up, there were no deaths, permanent pacemaker implantations, and no occurrences of moderate-to-severe valve stenosis, paravalvular leak, or left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Conclusion This study demonstrates that one-stage TAVR combined with TMVR is safe and effective in selected high-risk patients with concomitant severe aortic and mitral valve disease, and represents a feasible therapeutic option.
ObjectiveTo monitor surgical quality and analyze learning curve of minimally invasive mitral valve replacement (MVR)through right minithoracotomy with cumulative sum analysis (CUSUM analysis).
MethodsClinical data of 60 consecutive patients who underwent minimally invasive MVR through right minithoracotomy in the Fourth Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University from June 2011 to April 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 32 male and 28 female patients with their age of 28-53 (34.67±7.11)years and their heart function ranging from NYHA class Ⅱ to Ⅳ. There were 31 patients with mitral stenosis (MS), 19 patients with mitral regurgitation (MR), and 10 patients with MS and MR. According to the surgical sequence, all the patients were divided into 3 groups (group A, B and C)with 20 patients in each group. Surgical outcomes were compared among the 3 groups, and surgical quality was analyzed with descriptive statistics and CUSUM curves.
ResultsAortic cross-clamp time, cardiopulmonary bypass time and operation time of group C were significantly shorter than those of group A and group B (aortic cross-clamp time of group C vs. group A:50.35±2.30 minutes vs. 66.15±8.38 minutes; operation time of group C vs. group B:167.50±4.63 minutes vs. 178.60±4.49 minutes, P < 0.05). In-hospital mortality was 3.3% (2/60). CUSUM analysis showed a significant learning curve effect, although surgical quality remained in control during the study period. Surgical failure rate was lower than 80% after about 45 operations, indicating that failure rate was 10% lower than expectation.
ConclusionMinimally invasive MVR is safe and reliable, and CUSUM analysis is a simple statistical method to monitor surgical quality.
Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the most common type of valvular heart disease. Mitral valve repair/replacement can improve the prognosis of patients with severe MR, but a large proportion of patients cannot tolerate surgical procedures due to comorbidities and surgical risks. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is a kind of treatment for mitral valve disease in which an artificial valve is delivered to the mitral valve annulus through a catheter and released into place, with the advantages of no thorax opening, less trauma and high safety. Early clinical studies of TMVR have shown good results, but still face many challenges. Strict indications are effective measures to reduce surgical risks and postoperative complications. This article explores the relevant indications of TMVR by analyzing several studies at home and abroad.
This article reports a case of transjugular transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) for persistent severe tricuspid regurgitation after transcatheter mitral valve replacement. The patient was an 80 year old female who underwent transcatheter mitral valve replacement at the Department of Cardiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, two months before admission. After the surgery, her condition worsened due to unimproved tricuspid regurgitation and right heart failure. After admission, the patient underwent transjugular TTVR under general anesthesia. With the assistance of cardiac ultrasound and X-ray fluoroscopy, an artificial valve was successfully implanted, and tricuspid regurgitation was relieved. The patient’s surgery went smoothly, and the condition improved significantly 25 days after surgery. The patient was discharged 34 days after surgery.
This article reports a case of a 70-year-old female patient who developed bioprosthetic mitral valve deterioration 4 months after her initial valve replacement surgery, manifesting as severe regurgitation and New York Heart Association Class Ⅲ. Due to the high risk of a redo open-heart surgery, she underwent a transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve procedure. Intraoperatively, a J-Valve prosthesis was successfully implanted under echocardiographic and fluoroscopic guidance. Immediate transesophageal echocardiography confirmed an optimal valve position, complete resolution of regurgitation, and no significant paravalvular leak or left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. The patient's postoperative course was uneventful. She was extubated 16 hours post-procedure with significant improvement in cardiac function. Follow-up echocardiography showed normal prosthetic valve function.
