Pay Your Dues Members Only Area
Central Surgical Association

49th Annual Meeting

Back to 2022 Abstracts


Contemporary Outcomes of mitral valve repair for degenerative disease in the era of increased penetrance of percutaneous mitral valve technology
Brittany G. Abt1, *Michael E. Bowdish1, Ramsey S. Elsayed1, *Robbin G. Cohen1, Alexander Vorperian2, Michael Brown2, *Vaughn A. Starnes1
1Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States, 2Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California, United States

Objective: Increasing application of percutaneous mitral valve (MV) technology makes it important to understand surgical outcomes of MV repair, particularly in older populations.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 452 consecutive patients undergoing MV repair for degenerative disease between 2010 and 2021. Survival, need for MV reoperation, and mitral regurgitation (MR) progression were compared using time-based methods between those < 60 years old (n=200, Cohort 1) and those ≥ 60 years of age (n=252, Cohort 2).

Results: Median age in years (IQR) was 52 (47-57) in Cohort 1 and 67 (63-73) in Cohort 2 (p<0.0001). Preoperative comorbidities and MV leaflet pathology were similar between groups. A right mini-thoracotomy approach was more common in the younger cohort (n=144, 72% vs n=157, 62%, p=0.03), while the older cohort required more concomitant cardiac procedures (n=20, 10% vs n=44, 17.5%, p=0.02). Among those undergoing an isolated MV repair, STS predicted risk of 30-day mortality was low (<1.0%). Median follow up was 3.6 years (IQR 1.3-6.8) and did not differ between cohorts (p=0.38). Kaplan-Meier survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 100, 99.3, and 99.3% in Cohort 1 and 98.3, 97.2, and 94.6% in Cohort 2 (log-rank p=0.02, Figure 1A). After adjustment for sex, prior sternotomy, diabetes, atrial fibrillation, and location of leaflet repair (anterior, posterior, or bileaflet), age ≥60 years was not associated with increased mortality (HR 6.96, 95% CI 0.85-56.8, p=0.07). MV reoperation was required in 15 (3.3%) patients (3 in Cohort 1; 12 in Cohort 2, p=0.05). Cumulative incidence of need for MV reoperation with death as a competing outcome at 1, 3, and 5 years was 0.9, 1.4, 1.8% in Cohort 1 and 2.7, 4.0, 5.1% in Cohort 2 (Sub-hazard ratio, SHR, 2.95, 95% CI 0.84-10.4, p=0.09, see Figure 1B). Follow-up echocardiogram was available in 412 (91%) of patients at a median of 2.1 (0.4-5.2) years. Thirteen patients progressed to moderate to severe MR or greater (6 in Cohort 1; 7 in Cohort 2, p=0.88). Cumulative incidence of MR progression to moderate to severe or greater with death as a competing outcome at 1, 3, and 5 years was 1.4, 3.6, and 5.1% in Cohort 1 and 2.7, 3.5, and 4.7% in Cohort 2 (SHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.29-2.50, p=0.76). Similar results were found in the subgroup who underwent isolated MV repair (n=388) as age over 60 was not associated with increased mortality (adjusted HR 5.31, 95% CI 0.64-44.0, p=0.12), need for MV reoperation (SHR 4.04, 95% CI 0.89-18.4, p=0.07) or progression of MR (SHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.30-3.15, p=0.97).

Conclusions: Contemporary results with MV repair continue to be excellent, even in low-risk patients over the age of 60. These results must be carefully considered as we experience increasing pressure to enroll operative patients in percutaneous mitral repair trials.

Figure 1A: Kaplan-Meier survival in Cohort 1 vs. Cohort 2 (log-rank p=0.02)

Figure 1B: Cumulative incidence of need for MV reoperation with death as a competing outcome in Cohort 1 vs. Cohort 2 (Sub-hazard ratio, SHR, 2.95, 95% CI 0.84-10.4, p=0.09)


Back to 2022 Abstracts