ObjectiveTo evaluate the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients receiving mitral valve replacement with mechanical or biological prosthesis.MethodsThe clinical data of patients undergoing mitral valve replacement in our center between January 2005 and August 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with emergency, reoperation, bleeding or embolic events or incomplete clinical data were ruled out.ResultsTotally 569 patients were enrolled, including 325 with mechanical prosthesis (a mechanical prosthesis group, 111 males and 214 females with a mean age of 55.54±4.09 years) and 244 bioprosthesis (a bioprosthesis group, 90 males and 154 females with a mean age of 60.02±4.28 years). There was no significant difference in the in-hospital mortality between the two groups (P=0.250). The survival rate at postoperative 15 years of the bioprosthesis group was higher than that of mechanical prosthesis group (78.69% vs. 66.25%, χ2=8.844, P=0.003). No remarkable differences were found in prosthesis failure (P=0.183) and thromboembolism events (P=0.505) between the two groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.040). After the propensity-score matched analysis based on the age, the survival rate was still higher in the bioprosthesis group than in the mechanical prosthesis group (P=0.032).ConclusionBiological prosthesis can be considered as the preferable choice in mitral valve replacement procedure in order to improve the long-term survival and decrease the frequent of bleeding events.
Objective To study effects of mitral valve replacement(MVR) on the old with mitral valve diseases(MVD). Methods The documents of 265 cases undergoing MVR were reviewed, who aged 60 years old or over between June 1991 and June 2003. Demographices, clinical preoperative conditions, indications to surgery, early postoperative course and long-term outcome were collected via hospital documents and outpatient follow-up. Many risk factors were analysed. Results Follow-up rate amounted to 93.7%(236/252). The mortality was 4.9% (13/265) within 30 days. Heart failure and renal failure were the main cause of death. Compared with younger patients(lt;60 years old), long-term survival rate was lower in the old, 5-year 87.52% vs 96.84%, 10-year 81.23% vs 94.87%. There were 15 late deaths(0.17% case/M), most of whom died of heart failure, cancers and lung infections. Risk factors for MVR in the old included New York Heart Association class Ⅳ, diabetes, and lung incompetence. Conclusions The patients with MVD over 60 years old tended to present high postoperatively mortality and morbidity.
Mitral regurgitation is the most common cardiac valve disease, with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is used as a promising intervention in non-surgical patients and in those with unsuitable anatomy for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair. TMVR can also be performed for inoperable or high-risk patients with degenerated or failed bioporstheses or failed repairs, or in patients with severe annular calcifications. The complex anatomy of the mitral valves makes the design of transcatheter mitral valve prostheses extremely challenging, and increases the difficulty of TMVR procedure, thus could led to non-negligible complications including periprocedural and post-procedural long-term complications. This review aims to discuss the potential TMVR-complications and measures implemented to mitigate these complications, in order to improve the prognosis of TMVR patients.
Objective To evaluate clinical results of concomitant mitral valve replacement （MVR） and modified maze procedure with Atricure bipolar radiofrequency for chronic atrial fibrillation （AF）. Methods Clinical data of 59 patients with mitral valve diseases and chronic AF who underwent concomitant MVR and bipolar radiofrequency ablation in Subei People’s Hospital from June 2010 to September 2012 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 22 male and 37 female patients with their age of 29-71 （48±11） years. The AF duration was 1.2-26.0 （7.2±3.4） years. Preoperatively，there were 20 patients with New York Heart Association （NYHA） class Ⅱ，31 patients with NYHA class Ⅲ and 8 patients with NYHA class Ⅳ. There were 32 patients with moderate to severe mitral stenosis，9 patients with moderate to severe mitral regurgitation and 18 patients with combined mitral stenosis and regurgitation. There were 42 patients with tricuspid regurgitation. The left artial dimension was 39-98 （55.2±8.9） mm. Left atrial thrombus was found in 9 patients. Atricure bipolar radiofrequency system was used for right atrial ablation under normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass （CPB） with beating heart first，then for ablations of the left and right pulmonary vein orifices and left atrium under moderate hypothermia with heart arrest. MVR was performed after ablation procedures were completed. Amiodarone was routinely used postoperatively and patients were periodically followed up after discharge. Results There was no in-hospital death. CPB time was 65-180 （99±28）minutes，aortic cross-clamping time was 46-123 （69±17）minutes，and ablation time was 15-28 （21±4）minutes. Postoperatively，heart rhythm immediately changed to sinus rhythm （SR） in 44 patients，remained AF in 10 patients and atrial flutter in 1 patient. Temporary pacemaker was used for 4 patients with bradycardia （3 patients recovered SR and 1 patient remained AF later）. Fifty-eight patients were followed up after discharge for 6-33 months，and 1 patient was lost during follow-up. Patients’ SR rate was 86.2 % （50/58），91.4% （53/58），89.7 % （52/58），84.6 % （33/39）and 71.4 % （5/7）at discharge，3 months，6 months，1 year and 2 years after discharge respectively. There was no thrombotic event during follow-up. Conclusion Concomitant MVR and modified maze procedure with Atricure bipolar radiofrequency is a safe procedure for chronic AF with good short-term results.
Abstract： Objective To summarize our experience and clinical outcomes of preservation of posterior leaflet and subvalvular structures in mitral valve replacement（MVR）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 1 035 patients who underwent MVR in Beijing An Zhen Hospital from January 2006 to March 2011. There were 562 male patients and 473 female patients with their age of 37-78（53.84±13.13）years old. There were 712 patients with rheumatic valvular heart disease and 323 patients with degenerative valve disease, 389 patients with mitral stenosis and 646 patients with mitral regurgitation. No patient had coronary artery disease in this group. For 457 patients in non-preservation group, bothleaflets and corresponding chordal excision was performed, while for 578 patients in preservation group, posterior leafletand subvalvular structures were preserved. There was no statistical difference in demographic and preoperative clinical characteristics between the two groups. Postoperative mortality and morbidity, and left ventricular size and function were compared between the two groups. Results There was no statistical difference in postoperative mortality（2.63% vs. 1.21%, P =0.091）and morbidity （8.53% vs. 7.44%, P=0.519）between the non-preservation group and preservation group, except that the rate of left ventricular rupture of non-preservation group was significantly higher than that of preservation group（1.09% vs. 0.00%, P=0.012）. The average left ventricular end-diastolic dimension （LVEDD）measured by echocardiography 6 months after surgery decreased in both groups, but there was no statistical difference between the two groups. The average left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) 6 months after surgery was significantly improved compared with preoperative average LVEF in both groups. The average LVEF 6 months after surgery in patients with mitral regurgitation in the preservation group was significantly higher than that in non-preservation group （56.00%±3.47% vs. 53.00%±3.13%，P =0.000）, and there was no statistical difference in the average LVEF 6 months after surgery in patients with mitral stenosis between the two groups（57.00%±5.58% vs. 56.00%±4.79%，P =0.066）. Conclusion Preservation of posterior leaflet and subvalvular structures in MVR is a safe and effective surgical technique to reduce the risk of left ventricle rupture and improve postoperative left ventricular function．
Objective To investigate long-term echocardiography characteristics and their clinical significance of patients after mitral valve replacement （MVR）. Methods We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 204 patients who underwent prosthetic MVR and finished echocardiography examination at least 5 years after surgery in West China Hospital of Sichuan University. There were 44 male patients and 160 female patients with their age of 23 to 73 （50.9±10.6）years. Postoperatively， all the patients were followed up for 5-15 （7.9±2.3）years and regularly received echocardiography examination at the outpatient department. Analysis variables included left atrium （LA） dimension， left ventricle （LV） dimension，right atrium （RA） dimension， right ventricle （RV） dimension， left ventricular ejection fraction （LVEF） and effective orificearea （EOA） of the mitral valve. Results Long-term echocardiography showed that LA and LV dimensions were signifi-cantly smaller than preoperative dimensions （P＜0.05）， while RA and RV dimensions were not statistically different from preoperative dimensions （P＞0.05）. Long-term LVEF was significantly higher than preoperative value （P＜0.05）. Long-term EOA was 1.1-4.8 （2.3±0.5）cm2， including EOA of 1.1-1.4 cm2 in 7 patients （3.4%，7/204），and 1.6-1.9 cm2in 42 patients （20.6%，42/204）. During long-term follow-up， 7 patients underwent their second heart surgery， including2 patients with prosthetic valve dysfunction， 1 patient with prosthetic perivalvular leak and severe hemolytic anemia，3 patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation which were not improved after medication treatment， and 1 patient with moderateaortic valve stenosis and regurgitation. Two patients had left atrial thrombosis during follow-up， including 1 patient who died of endocarditis 7 years after surgery， and another patient who was still receiving conservative therapy and further follow-up. Conclusion Concomitant tricuspid or aortic valve disease should be actively treated during MVR， and postoperative patients need better follow-up. Many patients after MVR need long-term cardiovascular medication treatment during follow-up in order to improve their heart function and long-term survival rate.