Outcomes after mitral valve repair: A single-center 16-year experience

Objective To evaluate outcomes after mitral valve repair. Methods Between May 1999 and June 2015, 446 patients underwent mitral valve repair. Isolated mitral valve annuloplasty was excluded. A total of 398 (89%) had degenerative valve disease. Mean follow-up was 5.5 ± 3.8 years. Postoperative echocardiograms were obtained in 334 patients (75%) at a mean of 24.3 ± 13.7 months. Results Survival was 97%, 96%, 95%, and 94% at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. Risk factor analysis showed age >60 years and nondegenerative etiology predict death (hazard ratio, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-8.02, P = .038; and hazard ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.16-3.02, P = .010, respectively). Considering competing risks due to mortality, the cumulative incidence of reoperation was 2.8%, 4.2%, 5.1%, and 9.6% at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. Competing risk proportional hazard survival regression identified nondegenerative etiology and previous cardiac surgery as predictors of reoperation, and posterior repair was protective (all P < .05). Cumulative incidence of progression of mitral regurgitation (2 or more grades) with mortality as a competing risk was 4.7%, 10.5%, 21.0%, and 35.8% at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. Patients with previous sternotomy, repair or coronary artery bypass grafting, and concurrent tricuspid valve procedure or isolated anterior leaflet repair were more likely to develop progression of mitral regurgitation (all P < .05), and posterior leaflet repair was protective (P = .038). On multivariate analysis diabetes, previous coronary artery bypass grafting and concurrent tricuspid valve intervention predicted MR progression. Conclusions Mitral valve repair has excellent outcomes. Our results demonstrate failures appear to occur less in those who undergo posterior leaflet repair.