Left ventricle-mitral valve ring size mismatch: understanding the limitations of mitral valve repair for ischemic mitral regurgitation

Left ventricular remodeling after mitral valve repair and papillary muscle approximation

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve repair with papillary muscle approximation (MVr-PMA) for severe secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) decreases MR recurrence compared with MVr alone. This study assessed the effects of MVr-PMA on left ventricular (LV) remodeling and shape, systolic function and strain mechanics.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients who underwent MVr-PMA for severe secondary MR and had follow-up echocardiograms available for review were identified. Student's t-test, linear regression modeling, and receiver-operating characteristic curves were used in the statistical analyses.

RESULTS

Median follow-up time was 14.9 months. MVr-PMA was associated with significant LV reverse remodeling with a smaller LV end-diastolic diameter, Systolic Sphericity Index, and interpapillary muscle distance at follow-up. Nine patients (18.8%) experienced moderate recurrent MR. When compared to recurrent MR patients at follow-up, those with durable MVr-PMA had a greater LV ejection fraction (32.8 vs. 22.0%, P=0.03), a smaller end-diastolic diameter (59.6 vs. 67.3 mm, P=0.03), Systolic Sphericity Index (0.35 vs. 0.47, P=0.03), and end-systolic interpapillary muscle distance (16.3 vs. 21.1 mm, P=0.03). A durable MVr-PMA also resulted in stable global longitudinal strain when compared with pre-operative values, while the recurrent MR group experienced a further decline (no recurrent MR: -8.4 vs. -7.5%; recurrent MR: -8.2 vs. -5.4%; P<0.05). A pre-operative LV end-diastolic diameter ≥ 64 mm was a discriminative predictor of MR recurrence (sensitivity=100%, specificity=51%, AUC=0.756, P=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

A durable MVr-PMA confers improved LV geometry and function, and stable LV mechanics. The extent of baseline LV remodeling identifies patients at risk for recurrent MR.

Mitral Valve and Subvalvular Repair for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Rationale and Clinical Outcomes of the Papillary Muscle Sling

Secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) is a common finding in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy, and it is associated with poor outcomes. It is the result of incomplete systolic closure of the mitral valve (MV) as a consequence of left ventricular dilatation, papillary muscle displacement with impaired systolic shortening, and mitral leaflet tethering. MV surgery may be performed in cases of significant secondary MR despite guideline-directed medical therapy. However, MV repair, which is most commonly performed with an undersized ring annuloplasty, is associated with a 30-60% recurrence of moderate or greater MR at mid-term follow-up. To improve MV repair durability, several adjunctive subvalvular procedures have been proposed, one of which is the addition of papillary muscle approximation utilizing a papillary muscle sling. Recent studies comparing the outcomes of a conventional undersized ring annuloplasty with a MV repair utilizing a papillary muscle sling have reported a significant reduction in recurrent moderate or severe MR, greater left ventricular reverse remodeling, and improved MV apparatus geometry with the addition of the papillary muscle sling. We present a comprehensive review of the pathophysiology of secondary MR, and the rationale and clinical outcomes of MV repair with papillary muscle sling placement for the treatment of secondary MR.

Mitral valve repair and subvalvular intervention for secondary mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled and propensity matched studies

BACKGROUND

Combining a ring annuloplasty (Ring) with a mitral subvalvular intervention (Ring + subvalvular) in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR) may improve mitral valve (MV) repair durability. However, the outcomes of this strategy compared with a Ring only, have not been clearly defined.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed utilizing randomized controlled and propensity matched studies which compared a Ring + subvalvular versus Ring MV repair for the treatment of secondary MR. Risk ratio (RR), weighted mean difference (MD), and the 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by the Mantel-Haenszel and inverse-variance methods, for clinical outcomes and echocardiographic measures of follow-up MR, left ventricular (LV) reverse remodeling, and MV apparatus geometry.

RESULTS

Five studies were identified, with a total of 397 patients. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups, and all patients had moderate to severe secondary MR, with the vast majority in the setting of ischemic cardiomyopathy. A Ring + subvalvular repair consisted of papillary muscle approximation (n=2), papillary muscle relocation (n=2), or secondary chordal cutting (n=1). Follow-up ranged from 10.1 (mean range =0.25-42) to 69 [interquartile range (IQR) =23-82] months. When compared with Ring only at last follow-up, a Ring + subvalvular MV repair was associated with: (I) a smaller MR grade (MD =-0.44, 95% CI -0.69 to -0.19; P=0.0005); (II) a reduced risk of moderate or greater recurrent MR (RR =0.43, 95% CI, 0.27-0.66; P=0.0002); (III) a smaller mean LV end-diastolic diameter (MD =-3.56 mm, 95% CI -5.40 to -1.73; P=0.0001) and a greater ejection fraction (MD =2.64%, 95% CI, 0.13-5.15; P=0.04); and, (IV) an improved MV apparatus geometry. There were no differences in operative mortality, post-operative morbidity, or follow-up survival between surgical approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

When compared with Ring only, a Ring + subvalvular MV repair is associated with greater LV reverse remodeling and systolic function, less recurrence of moderate or greater MR, and an improved geometry of the MV apparatus at short and mid-term follow-up.