Zhang Yong, Wang Dongxu, Liu Yu, Tao Dengshun, Jin Yan, Jiang Hui, Wang Zengwei, Wang Huishan
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Area Command, Shenyang, 110016, China.
Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, General Hospital of Shenyang Military Area Command, Shenyang, 110016, China; Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Xi Jing Hospital, Fourth Military Medical University, Xi'an, 710032, China.
Heart Lung Circ. 2018 Apr;27(4):517-523. doi: 10.1016/j.hlc.2017.04.005. Epub 2017 May 9.
Coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) with mitral valve surgery is undisputed in severe ischaemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) treatment, but the controversy is whether mitral valve replacement (MVR) or mitral valvuloplasty (MVP) should be used.
Data was collected from 130 cases of severe IMR patients who underwent CABG and MVP or MVR from June 2010 to June 2015 to compare the short-term efficacy of CABG with MVP or MVR in the treatment of severe IMR patients. There were 70 cases in the MVP group and 60 in the MVP group. The postoperative major cardiac cerebral vascular events and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (LVEDD) were recorded.
Eleven patients died in hospital, the remaining patients were followed up for 12 months; 18 patients died. The cumulative survival rate and the major cardiac cerebrovascular events were not significantly different. There was no significant change in LVEF, but LVEDD, LVESD and systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) improved significantly, and there was no difference between the groups. In the MVR group, the rate of postoperative moderate or severe mitral regurgitation patients was significantly less than that in the MVP group.
The short-term survival rate, reversal of left ventricular remodelling and major cardiac or cerebrovascular events post-CABG combined with MVP were not significantly different to those with CABG combined with MVR in the treatment of severe IMR, but long-term efficacy remains to be observed.
冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)联合二尖瓣手术在严重缺血性二尖瓣反流(IMR)治疗中是无可争议的,但争议在于应使用二尖瓣置换术(MVR)还是二尖瓣成形术(MVP)。
收集2010年6月至2015年6月期间130例行CABG及MVP或MVR的严重IMR患者的数据,比较CABG联合MVP或MVR治疗严重IMR患者的短期疗效。MVP组70例,MVR组60例。记录术后主要心脑血管事件及左心室射血分数(LVEF)、左心室收缩末期内径(LVESD)和左心室舒张末期内径(LVEDD)。
11例患者住院死亡,其余患者随访12个月;18例患者死亡。累积生存率和主要心脑血管事件无显著差异。LVEF无显著变化,但LVEDD、LVESD和收缩期肺动脉压(sPAP)显著改善,两组间无差异。MVR组术后中度或重度二尖瓣反流患者发生率显著低于MVP组。
在严重IMR治疗中,CABG联合MVP后的短期生存率、左心室重构逆转及主要心脑血管事件与CABG联合MVR相比无显著差异,但长期疗效仍有待观察。