Is a prosthetic ring required for mitral repair of mitral insufficiency due to posterior leaflet prolapse? Long-term results in 96 patients submitted to repair with no ring.
Palabras clave
Abstracto
OBJECTIVE
It is a common statement that every mitral repair should be stabilized by some type of prosthetic mitral ring. In the very specific situation of isolated prolapse of the posterior leaflet (PPL), this statement may be enhanced by the possible anatomically discontinuity of the mitral annulus. This article concerns 96 patients with 'isolated' PPL (IPPL) who were operated upon without ring insertion. Long-term follow-up was obtained in order to ascertain the survival, stability of the repair and the need for reoperation, thus justifying or not the lack of use of a ring.
METHODS
A total of 96 patients, 70 male and 26 female, underwent mitral repair for mitral insufficiency (MI) almost exclusively caused by PPL. Age ranged from 33 to 81 years (mean 60.7+/-11.3). All underwent quadrangular resection of the prolapsed portion and plication of the annulus. In 69 cases local stabilization was achieved by four U stitches, two on each side of the plication, passed through and sutured on some flexible material, 2-3 cm in length. Twenty seven patients had no such local reinforcement.
RESULTS
There was one case of early death (1%) caused by refractory hypoxemia in a patient with long lasting pre-operative pulmonary edema. Two patients were lost for follow-up after 2 months. Follow-up was from 0.2 to 14.7 years (mean 4.5), for a total of 422.7 patient-years. There were four late deaths at a mean of 6-year follow-up (0.9-10 years). Actuarial survival was 95.5 and 90.5% at 5 and 8 years, respectively. Event-free for recurrence of significant mitral insufficiency (MI) was 96 and 92% at 5 and 8 years. Event-free of thromboembolic or hemorrhagic events was 84.3 and 72.3% at 5 and 8 years. Event-free from reoperation was 97.8 and 94% at 5 and 8 years.
CONCLUSIONS
One can conclude that (a) IPPL repair without insertion of a ring is safe and long-lasting (b) the incidence of late death, recurrence of MI, thromboembolic/hemorrhagic events, need for reoperation, is not higher in this subset of patients than in conventional repair (c) such repair might work better and for a longer time, as reaction and sclerosis resulting from ring insertion are avoided (d) minor advantages could be due to an easier surgical procedure, especially through a minimally invasive approach.
