Impact of Mitral Regurgitation Recurrence on Mitral Valve Repair for Secondary Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES

The current guidelines still do not include specific recommendations on the use of subvalvular repair (SV-r) for treatment of ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR). Therefore, the objective of our study was to evaluate the clinical impact of mitral regurgitation (MR) recurrence and ventricular remodeling on long-term outcomes after SV-r combined with restrictive annuloplasty (RA-r).

METHODS

We performed a subanalysis of the papillary muscle approximation trial, studying 96 patients with severe IMR and coronary artery disease undergoing restrictive annuloplasty alongside subvalvular repair (SV-r + RA-r group) or restrictive annuloplasty alone (RA-r group). We analyzed treatment failure differences, the influence of residual MR, left ventricular remodeling, and clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint was treatment failure (composite of death; reoperation; or recurrence of moderate, moderate-to-severe, or severe MR) within 5 years of follow-up after the procedure.

RESULTS

A total of 45 patients showed failure of the treatment within 5 years, of which 16 patients underwent SV-r + RA-r (35.6%) and 29 underwent RA-r (64.4%, = 0.006). Patients with significant residual MR presented with a higher rate of all-cause mortality at 5 years compared with trivial MR (HR 9.09, 95% CI 2.08-33.33, = 0.003). MR progression occurred earlier in the RA-r group, as 20 patients in the RA-r group vs. 6 in SV-r + RA-r group had a significant MR 2 years after surgery ( = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

RA-r remains a surgical mitral repair technique with an increased risk of failure and mortality at 5 years compared with SV-r. The rates of recurrent MR are higher, and recurrence occurs earlier, with RA-r alone compared to SV-r. The addition of the subvalvular repair increases the durability of the repair, thus extending all of the benefits of preventing MR recurrence.