Clinical Outcomes after Mitral Valve Repair with the Physio II Annuloplasty Ring.

BACKGROUND: Mitral valve (MV) repair with annuloplasty is the standard of care in patients with primary degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR). Newer generations of annuloplasty rings have been developed with the goals of closer reproduction of native annular geometry and easier implantation. This study investigates the short-term and 5-year clinical outcomes of MV repair with the Carpentier-Edwards (CE) Physio II annuloplasty ring. METHODS: This is an observational study including a total of 486 patients who underwent MV repair for DMR using the CE Physio II annuloplasty ring between 2011 and 2016. RESULTS: Mean age was 54.8 ± 12.1 years, 364 patients (74.9%) were males, and 84 patients (17.3%) presented with atrial fibrillation. Mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 62.3 ± 7.3%. Mean logistic EuroSCORE was 2.7 ± 2.4%. New York Heart Association functional class III-IV symptoms were present in 134 (27.6%) patients preoperatively. Isolated MV repair was performed via a right-sided mini-thoracotomy in 479 patients (98.6%). Concomitant procedures included ablation for atrial fibrillation in 83 patients (17.1%) and closure of atrial septum defect in 88 patients (18.1%). Median size of implanted annuloplasty rings was 34 mm (interquartile range: 34-38 mm). Mean cardiopulmonary bypass time was 116 ± 34 minutes and mean cross-clamp time was 74 ± 25 minutes. Thirty-day mortality was 0.4%. The Kaplan-Meier 4-year survival was 98.5%. Freedom from MV reoperation was 96.2 and 94.0% at 1 and 4 years. CONCLUSION: MV repair with the CE Physio II annuloplasty ring is associated with excellent midterm clinical outcome.

Postoperative outcome after reoperative isolated tricuspid valve surgery-is there a predictor for survival?

OBJECTIVES: Reoperative tricuspid valve (TV) surgery is considered high risk even in the absence of additional concomitant cardiac procedures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate preoperative clinical parameters as predictors for survival after isolated reoperative TV surgery. METHODS: From January 2005 to January 2019, 85 patients (mean age: 66.7 ± 10.3 years, 34 male) with severe isolated TV regurgitation and prior cardiac surgery were referred to our centre for elective or urgent TV repair/replacement; patients with endocarditis were excluded. We retrospectively analysed preoperative hepatorenal function [reflected by widely used clinical and laboratory parameters and the Model of End-stage-Liver Disease excluding International Normalized Ratio (MELD-XI) score] as a predictor for postoperative survival. RESULTS: At hospital admission, the patients' average preoperative New York Heart Association class was 2.9 ± 0.6, left ventricular ejection fraction 52.5 ± 10.6%, mean pulmonary artery pressure 24.7 ± 8.0 mmHg, creatinine 115.4 ± 66.6 µmol/l, bilirubin 20.0 ± 19.6 µmol/l and the mean MELD-XI score was 13.3 ± 4.0 µmol/l. The mean follow-up was 5.4 ± 4.2 years. Thirty-day mortality was 5%, 5-year survival was 60.6 ± 5.4% and 10-year survival was 42.9 ± 6.5%. The multivariable Cox regression analysis evaluated the MELD-XI score [hazard ratio (HR 1.144, confidence interval 95% 1.0-1.3, P = 0.005] and diabetes mellitus (HR 2.27, confidence interval 95% 1.0-5.0, P = 0.04) as significant predictors for excess mortality while age and mean pulmonary artery pressure did not reliably predict clinical outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatorenal dysfunction was one main factor accounting for limited postoperative survival in our patient cohort. The MELD-XI score is easy to calculate and seems to reliably predict the perioperative risk in patients with prior cardiac surgery and indication for TV surgery.

Biomechanical engineering comparison of four leaflet repair techniques for mitral regurgitation using a novel 3-dimensional-printed left heart simulator.

OBJECTIVE: Mitral valve repair is the gold standard treatment for degenerative mitral regurgitation; however, a multitude of repair techniques exist with little quantitative data comparing these approaches. Using a novel ex vivo model, we sought to evaluate biomechanical differences between repair techniques. METHODS: Using porcine mitral valves mounted within a custom 3-dimensional-printed left heart simulator, we induced mitral regurgitation using an isolated P2 prolapse model by cutting primary chordae. Next, we repaired the valves in series using the edge-to-edge technique, neochordoplasty, nonresectional remodeling, and classic leaflet resection. Hemodynamic data and chordae forces were measured and analyzed using an incomplete counterbalanced repeated measures design with the healthy pre-prolapse valve as a control. RESULTS: With the exception of the edge-to-edge technique, all repair methods effectively corrected mitral regurgitation, returning regurgitant fraction to baseline levels (baseline 11.9% ± 3.7%, edge-to-edge 22.5% ± 6.9%, nonresectional remodeling 12.3% ± 3.0%, neochordal 13.4% ± 4.8%, resection 14.7% ± 5.5%, P < 0.01). Forces on the primary chordae were minimized using the neochordal and nonresectional techniques whereas the edge-to-edge and resectional techniques resulted in significantly elevated primary forces. Secondary chordae forces also followed this pattern, with edge-to-edge repair generating significantly higher secondary forces and leaflet resection trending higher than the nonresectional and neochord repairs. CONCLUSIONS: Although multiple methods of degenerative mitral valve repair are used clinically, their biomechanical properties vary significantly. Nonresectional techniques, including leaflet remodeling and neochordal techniques, appear to result in lower chordal forces in this ex vivo technical engineering model.

Minimally invasive mitral valve repair.

Minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) repair is being increasingly performed over the last 2 decades due to the constantly growing patient demand, since it offers a shorter recovery, less restriction and faster return to normal physical activities, reduction in pain, and superior cosmetic results. However, such procedures have to be performed through small incisions which limit visualization and the freedom of movement of the surgeon, in contrast to conventional operations that are performed through a sternotomy. Therefore, special long surgical instruments are required, and visualization is usually enhanced with advanced port-access two-dimensional (2D) or three-dimensional (3D) thoracoscopic cameras. This makes performance of a minimally invasive MV repair more challenging for the surgeon and is thereby associated with a steep learning curve. Nonetheless, the vast majority of patients who require MV repair are usually good candidates for this less invasive technique, though adequate patient selection is of utmost importance for success. Concomitant cardiac procedures such as ablation surgery for atrial fibrillation or right-sided interventions such as tricuspid valve surgery, heart tumor resection, and atrial septal defect closure can easily be performed using this approach. Short- and long-term results after minimally invasive MV repair are excellent and comparable with those achieved through a sternotomy approach. There are few drawbacks associated with minimally invasive MV repair such as the high technical demands of working through a constrained space and development of complications associated with peripheral cannulation and seldom unilateral pulmonary edema. Nonetheless, high-volume centers have been able to achieve similar operating times, postoperative complication rates, and mid-/long-term outcomes to those obtained through conventional sternotomy. Up-to-date evidence is needed in order to improve recommendations supporting minimally invasive MV repair. Future innovations should concentrate on decreasing complexity and improving reproducibility of minimally invasive procedures in low-volume centers.