LIANG Hanqing 1,2 , WAN Qiaoli 2 , WEI Tao 2 , LI Rui 2 , GUO Zhipeng 2 , ZHANG Jian 2 , YIN Zongtao 2 , HAN Jinsong 2
  • 1. General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, The Graduate Training Base of Jinzhou Medical University, 110016, P. R. China;
  • 2. Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, General Hospital of Northern Theater Command, 110016, P. R. China;
HAN Jinsong, Email: hanjs0216@sina.com
Mitral regurgitation; functional mitral regurgitation; mitral valve plasty; mitral valve replacement
10.7507/1007-4848.202302035
Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables References Cited by

Objective  To compare the mid- and long-term clinical results of mitral valve plasty and mitral valve replacement in the treatment of functional mitral regurgitation (FMR). Methods Patients with FMR who underwent surgical treatment in the Department of Cardiovascular Surgery of the General Hospital of Northern Theater Command from 2012 to 2021 were collected. The patients who underwent mitral valve arthroplasty were divided into a MVP group, and those who underwent mitral valve replacement into a MVR group. The preoperative clinical data, operative and perioperative data of the two groups were analyzed retrospectively, and the mid- and long-term follow-up results were compared. Results  Finally 236 patients were included. There were 100 patients in the MVP group and 136 patients in the MVR group. The total follow-up rate was 100.0%, the longest follow-up was 10 years, and the average follow-up time was 3.60±2.55 years. There were 14 cumulative deaths in the MVP group and 19 in the MVR group. There was no statistical difference in baseline data between the two groups (P＞0.05). There was no statistical difference between the MVP group and the MVR group in the incidence of adverse events such as extracorporeal circulation time, aortic occlusion time, hospital stay time in the ICU, intraoperative blood loss, or hospitalization death (P＞0.05), but the time of mechanical ventilation in the MVP group was significantly shorter than that in the MVR group, and the difference was statistically significant(P=0.022).There were statistical differences in the left atrial diameter, left ventricular end-diastolic inner diameter, left ventricular end-systolic inner diameter and cardiac function grade between the two groups compared with those before surgery (P<0.05). The left ventricular ejection fraction in the postoperative MVP group was statistically higher than that before surgery (P<0.05), but there was no statistical difference in the postoperative MVR group compared with that before surgery (P>0.05). The LAD in the MVP group was reduced compared with the MVR group, and the difference was statistically different (P<0.05). The recurrence mitral regurgitation in MVP group was higher than that in MVR group, and the difference was statistically significant（10% vs.1.5%, P=0.003）. The cumulative survival rate (P=0.605) and mortality from cardiovascular events (P =0.880) were not statistically significant in the two groups by Kalan-Meier survival analysis. Conclusion  The safety and medium- and long-term clinical efficacy of MVP in the treatment of FMR patients were better than MVR, and the left atrium and left ventricle diameter are statistically reduced, and cardiac function is statistically improved. However, the surgeon needs to be well aware of the indications for the MVP procedure to reduce the rate of MR recurrence.