Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective

Objective: Mitral valve repair is the gold standard for treatment of mitral regurgitation, but the optimal technique remains debated. By using a regional collaborative, we sought to determine the change in repair technique over time. Methods: We identified all patients undergoing isolated mitral val...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alex M. Wisniewski, MD, Grant N. Sutherland, BS, Raymond J. Strobel, MD, MSc, Andrew Young, MD, Anthony V. Norman, MD, Mohammed Quader, MD, Kenan W. Yount, MD, Nicholas R. Teman, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2024-04-01
Series:JTCVS Techniques
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666250724000063
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849405517579943936
author Alex M. Wisniewski, MD
Grant N. Sutherland, BS
Raymond J. Strobel, MD, MSc
Andrew Young, MD
Anthony V. Norman, MD
Mohammed Quader, MD
Kenan W. Yount, MD
Nicholas R. Teman, MD
author_facet Alex M. Wisniewski, MD
Grant N. Sutherland, BS
Raymond J. Strobel, MD, MSc
Andrew Young, MD
Anthony V. Norman, MD
Mohammed Quader, MD
Kenan W. Yount, MD
Nicholas R. Teman, MD
author_sort Alex M. Wisniewski, MD
collection DOAJ
description Objective: Mitral valve repair is the gold standard for treatment of mitral regurgitation, but the optimal technique remains debated. By using a regional collaborative, we sought to determine the change in repair technique over time. Methods: We identified all patients undergoing isolated mitral valve repair from 2012 to 2022 for degenerative mitral disease. Those with endocarditis, transcatheter repair, or tricuspid intervention were excluded. Continuous variables were analyzed via Wilcoxon rank sum, and categorical variables were analyzed via chi-square testing. Results: We identified 1653 patients who underwent mitral valve repair, with 875 (59.2%) undergoing a no resection repair. Over the last decade, there was no significant trend in the proportion of repair techniques across the region (P = .96). Those undergoing no resection repairs were more likely to have undergone prior cardiac surgery (5.0% vs 2.2%, P = .002) or minimally invasive approaches (61.4% vs 24.7%, P < .001) with similar predicted risk of mortality (median 0.6% vs 0.6%, P = .75). Intraoperatively, no resection repairs were associated with longer bypass times (140 [117-167] minutes vs 122 [91-159] minutes, P < .001). Operative mortality was similar between both groups (1.1% vs 1.0%, P = .82), as were other postoperative outcomes. Anterior leaflet prolapse (odds ratio, 11.16 [6.34-19.65], P < .001) and minimally invasive approach (odds ratio, 6.40 [5.06-8.10], P < .001) were most predictive of no resection repair. Conclusions: Despite minor differences in operative times, statewide over the past decade there remains a diverse mix of both classic “resect” and newer “respect” strategies with comparable short-term outcomes and no major timewise trends. These data may suggest that both approaches are equivocal.
format Article
id doaj-art-7bd0f777dbf7484ea2c9a7c4b43ab061
institution Kabale University
issn 2666-2507
language English
publishDate 2024-04-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
series JTCVS Techniques
spelling doaj-art-7bd0f777dbf7484ea2c9a7c4b43ab0612025-08-20T03:36:38ZengElsevierJTCVS Techniques2666-25072024-04-0124667510.1016/j.xjtc.2024.01.004Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspectiveAlex M. Wisniewski, MD0Grant N. Sutherland, BS1Raymond J. Strobel, MD, MSc2Andrew Young, MD3Anthony V. Norman, MD4Mohammed Quader, MD5Kenan W. Yount, MD6Nicholas R. Teman, MD7Division of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VaDivision of Cardiac Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va; Address for reprints: Nicholas R. Teman, MD, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, PO Box 800679, 1215 Lee St, Charlottesville, VA 22908.Objective: Mitral valve repair is the gold standard for treatment of mitral regurgitation, but the optimal technique remains debated. By using a regional collaborative, we sought to determine the change in repair technique over time. Methods: We identified all patients undergoing isolated mitral valve repair from 2012 to 2022 for degenerative mitral disease. Those with endocarditis, transcatheter repair, or tricuspid intervention were excluded. Continuous variables were analyzed via Wilcoxon rank sum, and categorical variables were analyzed via chi-square testing. Results: We identified 1653 patients who underwent mitral valve repair, with 875 (59.2%) undergoing a no resection repair. Over the last decade, there was no significant trend in the proportion of repair techniques across the region (P = .96). Those undergoing no resection repairs were more likely to have undergone prior cardiac surgery (5.0% vs 2.2%, P = .002) or minimally invasive approaches (61.4% vs 24.7%, P < .001) with similar predicted risk of mortality (median 0.6% vs 0.6%, P = .75). Intraoperatively, no resection repairs were associated with longer bypass times (140 [117-167] minutes vs 122 [91-159] minutes, P < .001). Operative mortality was similar between both groups (1.1% vs 1.0%, P = .82), as were other postoperative outcomes. Anterior leaflet prolapse (odds ratio, 11.16 [6.34-19.65], P < .001) and minimally invasive approach (odds ratio, 6.40 [5.06-8.10], P < .001) were most predictive of no resection repair. Conclusions: Despite minor differences in operative times, statewide over the past decade there remains a diverse mix of both classic “resect” and newer “respect” strategies with comparable short-term outcomes and no major timewise trends. These data may suggest that both approaches are equivocal.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666250724000063leaflet preservingleaflet resectionmitral repair techniques
spellingShingle Alex M. Wisniewski, MD
Grant N. Sutherland, BS
Raymond J. Strobel, MD, MSc
Andrew Young, MD
Anthony V. Norman, MD
Mohammed Quader, MD
Kenan W. Yount, MD
Nicholas R. Teman, MD
Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
JTCVS Techniques
leaflet preserving
leaflet resection
mitral repair techniques
title Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
title_full Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
title_fullStr Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
title_full_unstemmed Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
title_short Mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative: Respect or resect?Central MessagePerspective
title_sort mitral valve repair in a regional quality collaborative respect or resect central messageperspective
topic leaflet preserving
leaflet resection
mitral repair techniques
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666250724000063
work_keys_str_mv AT alexmwisniewskimd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT grantnsutherlandbs mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT raymondjstrobelmdmsc mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT andrewyoungmd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT anthonyvnormanmd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT mohammedquadermd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT kenanwyountmd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective
AT nicholasrtemanmd mitralvalverepairinaregionalqualitycollaborativerespectorresectcentralmessageperspective