Edge-to-edge with partial band mitral valve repair compared to replacement and undersized restrictive annuloplasty for ischemic mitral regurgitation.

Objective: Evidence supports replacement over repair for ischemic mitral regurgitation due to improved durability; however, the latter often involves an undersized ring annuloplasty that does not include edge-to-edge approximation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of replacement, edge-to-edge leaflet approximation with mild-undersized annuloplasty and undersized ring annuloplasty for ischemic mitral regurgitation. Methods: This is a single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing mitral surgery for moderate-severe or greater ischemic mitral regurgitation, between 2004 and 2020, with mild-undersized annuloplasty, mitral valve replacement, or undersized restrictive annuloplasty (undersized ring annuloplasty). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included first recurrence of mitral regurgitation, heart failure hospitalization, and composite of valve-related events (bleeding, thromboembolism, endocarditis, and mitral valve reoperation). Results: There were 121, 93, and 78 patients in the mitral valve replacement, mild-undersized annuloplasty, and undersized restrictive annuloplasty groups, respectively, with a median follow-up of 3.1, 5.9, and 3.8 years, respectively. Both mitral valve replacement (hazard ratio, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.029-3.415) and undersized restrictive annuloplasty (hazard ratio, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.480-5.061) were associated with worse survival compared with mild-undersized annuloplasty. At 2 years, the rate of mild-moderate mitral regurgitation was greater in the mild-undersized annuloplasty group compared with the mitral valve replacement group (P = .001) but less than in the undersized restrictive annuloplasty group (P = .001). The rate of recurrent moderate or greater mitral regurgitation at 2 years was similar between mild-undersized annuloplasty and mitral valve replacement groups but significantly higher after undersized restrictive annuloplasty (P < .0001). Mitral valve replacement and undersized restrictive annuloplasty were associated with a significant increase in the incidence of first heart failure hospitalization compared with mild-undersized annuloplasty (P < .001 and P = .001, respectively). Mitral valve replacement was associated with an increased incidence of valve-related events compared with mild-undersized annuloplasty (P = .002). Conclusions: Surgical edge-to-edge approximation in addition to a mild-undersizing annuloplasty offers similar durability compared with replacement, with a lower rate of hospitalization for heart failure, and may confer a survival advantage.

Assessing the robustness of negative vascular surgery randomized controlled trials using their reverse fragility index.

OBJECTIVE: The reverse fragility index (RFI) describes the number of event conversions needed to convert a statistically nonsignificant dichotomous outcome to a significant one. The objective of the present study was to assess the RFI of vascular surgery randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing endovascular vs open surgery for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), carotid artery stenosis (CAS), and peripheral artery disease (PAD). METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were searched for RCTs that had investigated AAAs, CAS, or PAD with statistically nonsignificant binary primary outcomes. The primary outcome for the present study was the median RFI. Calculation of the RFI was performed by creating two-by-two contingency tables and subtracting events from the group with fewer events and adding nonevents to the same group until a two-tailed Fisher exact test had produced a statistically significant result (P ≤ .05). RESULTS: Of 4187 reports, 49 studies reporting 103 different primary end points were included. The overall median RFI was 7 (interquartile range [IQR], 5-13). The specific RFIs for AAA, CAS, and PAD were 10 (IQR, 6-15.5), 6 (IQR, 5-9.5), and 7 (IQR, 5.5-10), respectively. Of the 103 end points, 42 (47%) had had a loss to follow-up greater than the RFI, of which 10 were AAA trials (24%), 23 were CAS trials (55%), and 9 were PAD trials (21%). The Pearson correlation demonstrated a significant positive relationship between a study's RFI and the impact factor of its publishing journal (r = 0.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.20-0.54; P < .01), length of follow-up (r = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.26-0.58; P < .01), and sample size (r = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.09-0.45; P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: A small number of events (median, 7) was required to change the outcome of negative RCTs from statistically nonsignificant to significant, with 47% of the studies having missing data that could have reversed the finding of its primary outcome. Reporting of the RFI relative to the loss to follow-up could be of benefit in future trials and provide confidence regarding the robustness of the P value.

Perioperative and Long-Term Morbidity and Mortality for Elderly Patients Undergoing Thoracic Aortic Surgery.

The impact of age on outcome in elective thoracic aortic surgery is not well characterized. We aim to evaluate age-related differences in short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients undergoing elective thoracic aortic surgery. From 2004 to 2018, 786 patients underwent elective thoracic aortic surgery at a single center and were divided into 2 groups; <75 years old (n = 651) and ≥75 years old (n = 135). Outcomes include in-hospital mortality, morbidity, and long-term survival. Median follow-up was 4.8 years. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of mortality and morbidity; Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for late survival. Similar analysis was performed to the propensity-matched cohort. The elderly cohort had higher in-hospital mortality (8.2% vs 1.7%; P < 0.01), stroke (11.9 vs 2.8%; P< 0.01) and prolonged ventilation (17.3% vs 8.3%; P < 0.01), and intensive care unit stay (5.6 ± 10.9 vs 2.9 ± 6.0 days; P < 0.01). After adjusting for baseline differences and surgical complexity, age ≥75 years remained a significant predictor of hospital mortality (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 3.7 [1.3-10.3]). Eight-year survival was 75.4 ± 7.7% in the older group compared to 93.3 ± 1.9% in the younger group (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 4.2 [1.7-11.0]). Propensity score-matched analysis also confirmed worse early- and long-term outcomes in the elderly group. Elderly patients experience higher in-hospital mortality and morbidity following elective thoracic aortic surgery compared to their younger counterparts and have a higher burden of mortality over long-term follow-up.