Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2001 Sep 18;104(12 Suppl 1):I1-I7.
doi: 10.1161/hc37t1.094903.

Very long-term survival and durability of mitral valve repair for mitral valve prolapse

D Mohty  1 , T A Orszulak, H V Schaff, J F Avierinos, J A Tajik, M Enriquez-Sarano
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Very long-term survival and durability of mitral valve repair for mitral valve prolapse

D Mohty et al. Circulation. .

Abstract

Background: Mitral regurgitation (MR) due to mitral valve prolapse (MVP) is often treatable by surgical repair. However, the very long-term (>10-year) durability of repair in both anterior leaflet prolapse (AL-MVP) and posterior leaflet prolapse (PL-MVP) is unknown.

Methods and results: In 917 patients (aged 65+/-13 years, 68% male), surgical correction of severe isolated MR due to MVP (679 repairs and 238 replacements [MVRs]) was performed between 1980 and 1995. Survival after repair was better than survival after MVR for both PL-MVP (at 15 years, 41+/-5% versus 31+/-6%, respectively; P=0.0003) and AL-MVP (at 14 years, 42+/-8% versus 31+/-5%, respectively; P=0.003). In multivariate analysis adjusting for predictors of survival, repair was independently associated with lower mortality in PL-MVP (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0.61, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.85; P=0.0034) and in AL-MVP (adjusted RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.96; P=0.028). The reoperation rate was not different after repair or MVR overall (at 19 years, 20+/-5% for repair versus 23+/-5% for MVR; P=0.4) or separately in PL-MVP (P=0.3) or AL-MVP (P=0.3). However, the reoperation rate was higher after repair of AL-MVP than after repair of PL-MVP (at 15 years, 28+/-7% versus 11+/-3%, respectively; P=0.0006). From the 1980s to the 1990s, the RR of reoperation after repair of AL-MVP versus PL-MVP did not change (RR 2.5 versus 2.7, respectively; P=0.58), but the absolute rate of reoperation decreased similarly in PL-MVP and AL-MVP (at 10 years, from 10+/-3% to 5+/-2% and from 24+/-6% to 10+/-2%, respectively; P=0.04).

Conclusions: In severe MR due to MVP, mitral valve repair compared with MVR provides improved very long-term survival after surgery for both AL-MVP and PL-MVP. Reoperation is similarly required after repair or replacement but is more frequent after repair of AL-MVP. Recent improvement in long-term durability of repair suggests that it should be the preferred mode of surgical correction of MVP whether it affects anterior or posterior leaflets and is an additional incentive for early surgery of severe MR due to MVP.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types