Is mitral valve repair superior to replacement for chronic ischemic mitral regurgitation with left ventricular dysfunction?

Table 4 Follow-up Clinical and Echocardiographic Results

	Mitral repair			Mitral replacement
	Preoperative (n = 112)	At discharge (n = 109)	Follow-up (n = 107)	Preoperative (n = 106)	At discharge (n = 102)	Follow-up (n = 99)
Follow-up duration (month)	48.1 ± 13.7			50.2 ± 14.4
NYHA class (Mean ± SD)	2.9 ± 1.0	1.5 ± 0.4 ^a	1.9 ± 0.5 ^a	2.8 ± 1.0	2.3 ± 0.7 ^{a b}	1.6 ± 0.4 ^a
NYHA class III or greater(n)	59(52.7%)	10(9.2%) ^a	21(19.6%) ^a	52(49.1%)	23(22.5%) ^a	11(11.1%) ^ac
LVEDD(mm)	66.29 ± 6.36	54.01 ± 5.15 ^a	49.01 ± 4.57 ^a	65.35 ± 6.29	62.14 ± 5.06 ^{a b}	50.22 ± 4.35 ^a
LVESD(mm)	50.21 ± 11.08	43.09 ± 8.54 ^a	39.12 ± 7.52*	51.12 ± 11.53	48.34 ± 8.02 ^{a b}	40.06 ± 7.76 ^a
LAD(mm)	58.04 ± 17.26	53.31 ± 15.03 ^a	48.32 ± 9.34 ^a	57.86 ± 17.15	54.02 ± 15.28 ^a	40.21 ± 8.05 ^ac
LVEF (%)	34.6 ± 5.5	45.3 ± 4.3 ^a	54.2 ± 3.1 ^a	35.1 ± 4.3	40.2 ± 4.9 ^{a b}	55.1 ± 3.6 ^a
SPAP(mmHg)	47.24 ± 14.31	40.43 ± 10.52 ^a	37.07 ± 8.26 ^a	48.01 ± 14.59	40.05 ± 10.12 ^a	31.24 ± 7.13 ^ac
Grade of MR (Mean ± SD)	3.57 ± 0.38	0.95 ± 0.36 ^a	1.30 ± 0.65 ^a	3.42 ± 0.35	0.15 ± 0.05 ^a	0.40 ± 0.10 ^ac
Carpentier classification[6], n (%)
Ia MR	40(35.7%)	40(36.7%)	38(35.5%)	35(33.1%)	33(32.4%)	32(32.3%)
IIIb MR	72 (64.3%)	69(63.3%)	69(64.5%)	71(66.9%)	69(67.6%)	67(67.7%)

Compares with Preoperative ^a p < 0.05; significantly MVR versus MVP group at discharge ^b p < 0.05; MVR versus MVP group in follow-up ^c p < 0.05.
NYHA = New York Heart Association; LVEDD = left ventricular end-diastolic diameter; LVESD = left ventricular end-systolic diameter; LAD = left atrial diameter; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; SPAP = systolic pulmonary artery pressure; MR = mitral regurgitation; SD = standard deviation.;

ISSN: 1749-8090