Survival loss linked to guideline-based indications for degenerative mitral regurgitation surgery
David Vancraeynest,Anne-Catherine Pouleur,Christophe de Meester,Agnès Pasquet,Bernhard Gerber,Hector Michelena,Giovanni Benfari,Benjamin Essayagh,Christophe Tribouilloy,Dan Rusinaru,Francesco Grigioni,Andrea Barbieri,Francesca Bursi,Jean-François Avierinos,Federico Guerra,Elena Biagini,Khung Keong Yeo,See Hooi Ewe,Alex Pui-Wai Lee,Jean-Louis J Vanoverschelde,Maurice Enriquez-Sarano,MIDA (Mitral Regurgitation International Database) investigators,Clemence Antoine,Joseph F Malouf,Vuyisile T Nkomo,Maurice L Enriquez-Sarano,Alessandro Barbarossa,Antonio Dello Russo,Randolph Wong,Song Wan,Josie Chow,Yiting Fan,Alex P W Lee,Yann Shan Keh,Nadira Hamid,Ding Zee Pin,Faouzi Trojette,Gilles Touati,Jean Paul Remadi,Henri J Poulain,Raffaello Ditaranto,Giuseppe Caponetti,Carlo Savini,Davide Pacini,Massimo Chello,Annunziata Nusca,Rosetta Melfi,Gian Paolo Ussia,Gebrine El Khoury,Bernhard L Gerber,Jean-Louis Vanoverschelde,Frédéric Collart,Alexis Théron,Jean Francois Avierinos,Francesca Mantovani,Maria Grazia Modena,Giuseppe Boriani,Andrea Rossi,Francesco Onorati,Flavio L Ribichini
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjci/jeae176
2024-11-27
Abstract:Aims: Operating on patients with severe degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR) is based on ACC/AHA or ESC/EACTS guidelines. Doubts persist on best surgical indications and their potential association with postoperative survival loss. We sought to investigate whether guideline-based indications lead to late postoperative survival loss in DMR patients. Methods and results: We analysed outcome of 2833 patients from the Mitral Regurgitation International Database registry undergoing surgical correction of DMR. Patients were stratified by surgical indications: Class I trigger (symptoms, left ventricular end-systolic diameter ≥ 40 mm, or left ventricular ejection fraction < 60%, n = 1677), isolated Class IIa trigger [atrial fibrillation (AF), pulmonary hypertension (PH), or left atrial diameter ≥ 55 mm, n = 568], or no trigger (n = 588). Postoperative survival was compared after matching for clinical differences. Restricted mean survival time (RMST) was analysed. During a median 8.5-year follow-up, 603 deaths occurred. Long-term postoperative survival was lower with Class I trigger than in Class IIa trigger and no trigger (71.4 ± 1.9, 84.3 ± 2.3, and 88.9 ± 1.9% at 10 years, P < 0.001). Having at least one Class I criterion led to excess mortality (P < 0.001), while several Class I criteria conferred additional death risk [hazard ratio (HR): 1.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.42-1.66]. Isolated Class IIa triggers conferred an excess mortality risk vs. those without (HR: 1.46, 95% CI: 1.00-2.13, P = 0.05). Among these patients, isolated PH led to decreased postoperative survival vs. those without (83.7 ± 2.8% vs. 89.3 ± 1.6%, P = 0.011), with the same pattern observed for AF (81.8 ± 5.0% vs. 88.3 ± 1.5%, P = 0.023). According to RMST analysis, compare to those operated on without triggers, operating on Class I trigger patients led to 9.4-month survival loss (P < 0.001) and operating on isolated Class IIa trigger patients displayed 4.9-month survival loss (P = 0.001) after 10 years. Conclusion: Waiting for the onset of Class I or isolated Class IIa triggers before operating on DMR patients is associated with postoperative survival loss. These data encourage an early surgical strategy.