Abstract:Objective: To compare and discuss the mid-to-long-term outcomes of mitral valve repair (MVP) versus biological mitral valve replacement (bMVR) in patients aged 60 years and above with rheumatic mitral valve disease. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study. A total of 765 patients aged 60 years and older, diagnosed with rheumatic mitral valve disease and who underwent MVP or bMVR at Beijing Anzhen Hospital from January 2010 to January 2023, were retrospectively included. Among them, 186 were male and 579 were female, with an age of (66.1±4.5) years (range: 60 to 82 years). Patients were divided into two groups based on the surgical method: the mitral valve repair group (MVP group, n=256) and the bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement group (bMVR group, n=509). A 1∶1 propensity score matching was performed using a caliper value of 0.2 based on preoperative data. Paired sample t-tests, χ² tests, or Fisher's exact tests were used for intergroup comparisons. Kaplan-Meier method was employed to plot survival curves and valve-related reoperation rate curves for both groups before and after matching, and Log-rank tests were used to compare the mid-to long-term survival rates and valve-related reoperation rates between the two groups. Results: A total of 765 patients who completed follow-up were ultimately included, with a follow-up period (M(IQR)) of 5.1(5.0) years (range: 1.0 to 12.9 years). After matching, each group consisted of 256 patients. The incidence of early postoperative atrial fibrillation (39.1% vs. 49.2%, χ2=4.95, P=0.026) and early mortality rates (2.0% vs. 6.2%, χ2=4.97, P=0.026) were lower in the MVP group. Unadjusted Kaplan-Meier analysis showed significantly higher 5-year and 10-year survival rates for the MVP group (92.54% vs. 83.02%, 86.22% vs. 70.19%, Log-rank:P=0.001). After adjustment with propensity scores, the Kaplan-Meier analysis still indicated higher 5-year and 10-year survival rates in the MVP group compared to the bMVR group (92.54% vs. 85.89%, 86.22% vs. 74.83%, Log-rank: P=0.024). There were no significant differences in the rates of valve-related reoperation between the two groups before and after matching (5-year and 10-year reoperation rates pre-matching: 1.75% vs. 0.57%, 5.39% vs. 7.54%, Log-rank:P=0.207; post-matching: 1.75% vs. 0, 5.39% vs. 9.27%, Log-rank:P=0.157). Conclusion: For patients aged 60 years and above with rheumatic mitral valve disease, mitral valve repair offers better mid-to-long-term survival compared to biological valve replacement.

Clinical outcomes following surgical mitral valve repair or replacement in patients with rheumatic heart disease: a meta-analysis

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Mitral Valve Repair Versus Mitral Valve Replacement in Improving Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Rhematic Heart Disease: A High-Value Care Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Mitral valve repair versus replacement in patients with rheumatic heart disease

A review regarding the article 'Comparative efficacy and safety of mitral valve repair versus mitral valve replacement in Rheumatic heart disease: A high-value care systematic review and meta-analysis.'

Long-term Outcomes Following Repair or Replacement in Degenerative Mitral Valve Disease.

[Comparison of mid-to-long term outcomes between mitral valve repair and biological valve replacement in patients over 60 with rheumatic mitral valve disease based on a propensity score matching study]

Comparison of Mitral Valve Repair Versus Percutaneous Mitral Balloon Commissurotomy for Patients with Rheumatic Heart Disease: A Single-Centre Study

Mitral Valve Repair Versus Replacement in Patients Undergoing Concomitant Aortic Valve Replacement

Surgical Management of Severe Ischaemic Mitral Regurgitation

Clinical Outcome of Rheumatic Mitral Valve Repair and Replacement Surgery in Indonesia; A Comparison with Non-Rheumatic Aetiology

Outcomes of Different Mitral Valve Approaches Combined with Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Degenerative Valve Disease

Midterm Outcome of Valve Repair for Rheumatic Mitral Stenosis: 6-year Experience in a Single Mid-Volume Cardiac Center

Outcome of mitral valve repair or replacement for non-ischemic mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Efficacy of mitral valve repair in combination with coronary revascularization for moderate ischaemic mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Mitral valve reconstruction and replacement for moderate to severe ischemic mitral regurgitation: comparison of midterm outcome and complications

Effects of mitral valve disease etiology on the outcomes of mechanical and biological valve replacement: retrospective cohort study

Ischemic mitral regurgitation: To repair or replace? A single center experience

Long-Term Outcomes of Bioprosthetic and Mechanical Valve Replacement for Patients Aged between 50 and 70 Years

Safety and Effectiveness of Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation in Patients with Mitral Valve Replacement Mechanical Versus Bioprosthetic Valves

Sex Differences in the Outcomes of Degenerative Mitral Valve Repair

Mitral Valve Repair vs. Replacement by Different Etiologies ― A Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study ―