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
. 2022 Feb 18;61(3):637-644.
doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab438.

Predictors of safety and success in minimally invasive surgery for degenerative mitral disease

Affiliations

Predictors of safety and success in minimally invasive surgery for degenerative mitral disease

Nikolaos Bonaros et al. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify predictors of periprocedural success and safety in minimally invasive mitral valve surgery and to determine the impact of pathology localization and repair technique on reoperation-free survival.

Methods: We isolated 686 patients (mean age 60.5, standard deviation 12.3 years, 69.4% male) who underwent surgery for mitral valve prolapse between 2002 and 2020 in a single institution. Patients with concomitant disease, redo or mitral pathology other than degenerative mitral disease were excluded from the analysis. Periprocedural safety was defined as: freedom from perioperative death, myocardial infarction, stroke, use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation or reoperation for bleeding. Operative success was defined as: successful primary mitral repair without conversion to replacement or to larger thoracic incisions, without residual mitral regurgitation > mild at discharge or reoperation within 30 days. Predictors for perioperative success and safety were identified using univariable and multivariable analyses. The impact of prolapse localization and repair technique on reoperation-free survival was assessed by Cox regression.

Results: The mitral repair rate and the need for concomitant tricuspid repair were 94.6% and 16.5%, respectively. Perioperative mortality occurred in 5 patients (0.7%). The criteria for perioperative safety and success were met in 646/686 (94.2%) and 648/686 (94.5%) patients, respectively. The absence of tricuspid disease requiring repair was the only independent predictor of safety in this cohort [hazard ratio (HR) 0.460 (0.225-0.941), P = 0.033]. The only independent predictor of operative success was the use of chordal replacement [0.27 (0.09-0.83), P = 0.022]. Reoperation-free survival was 98.5%, 94.5% and 86.9% at 1, 5 and 10 years, respectively. Posterior leaflet pathology demonstrated a higher reoperation-free survival as compared to other localizations (log-rank P = 0.002). The localization of leaflet pathology but not the repair method was an independent predictor for reoperation-free survival (HR 1.455, 95% confidence interval 1.098-1.930; P = 0.009).

Conclusions: In minimally invasive mitral surgery for degenerative disease, chordal replacement yields higher rates of periprocedural success than leaflet resection. Posterior leaflet pathology is an independent predictor of reoperation-free survival.

Keywords: Degenerative mitral disease; Minimally invasive mitral repair; Mitral prolapse; Quality management.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in