Back to Search Start Over

Mitral-valve repair versus replacement for severe ischemic mitral regurgitation.

Authors :
Acker MA
Parides MK
Perrault LP
Moskowitz AJ
Gelijns AC
Voisine P
Smith PK
Hung JW
Blackstone EH
Puskas JD
Argenziano M
Gammie JS
Mack M
Ascheim DD
Bagiella E
Moquete EG
Ferguson TB
Horvath KA
Geller NL
Miller MA
Woo YJ
D'Alessandro DA
Ailawadi G
Dagenais F
Gardner TJ
O'Gara PT
Michler RE
Kron IL
Source :
The New England journal of medicine [N Engl J Med] 2014 Jan 02; Vol. 370 (1), pp. 23-32. Date of Electronic Publication: 2013 Nov 18.
Publication Year :
2014

Abstract

Background: Ischemic mitral regurgitation is associated with a substantial risk of death. Practice guidelines recommend surgery for patients with a severe form of this condition but acknowledge that the supporting evidence for repair or replacement is limited.<br />Methods: We randomly assigned 251 patients with severe ischemic mitral regurgitation to undergo either mitral-valve repair or chordal-sparing replacement in order to evaluate efficacy and safety. The primary end point was the left ventricular end-systolic volume index (LVESVI) at 12 months, as assessed with the use of a Wilcoxon rank-sum test in which deaths were categorized below the lowest LVESVI rank.<br />Results: At 12 months, the mean LVESVI among surviving patients was 54.6±25.0 ml per square meter of body-surface area in the repair group and 60.7±31.5 ml per square meter in the replacement group (mean change from baseline, -6.6 and -6.8 ml per square meter, respectively). The rate of death was 14.3% in the repair group and 17.6% in the replacement group (hazard ratio with repair, 0.79; 95% confidence interval, 0.42 to 1.47; P=0.45 by the log-rank test). There was no significant between-group difference in LVESVI after adjustment for death (z score, 1.33; P=0.18). The rate of moderate or severe recurrence of mitral regurgitation at 12 months was higher in the repair group than in the replacement group (32.6% vs. 2.3%, P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of a composite of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events, in functional status, or in quality of life at 12 months.<br />Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in left ventricular reverse remodeling or survival at 12 months between patients who underwent mitral-valve repair and those who underwent mitral-valve replacement. Replacement provided a more durable correction of mitral regurgitation, but there was no significant between-group difference in clinical outcomes. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health and the Canadian Institutes of Health; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00807040.).

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1533-4406
Volume :
370
Issue :
1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
The New England journal of medicine
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
24245543
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1312808