Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Curr Cardiol Rev. 2015;11(2):157-62.

Long-term outcomes of mitral valve repair versus replacement for degenerative disease: a systematic review.

Author information

1
1000 N. 5th Street, Springfield, IL 62702, USA. cmcneely@siumed.edu.

Abstract

The short-term advantage of mitral valve repair versus replacement for degenerative disease has been extensively documented. These advantages include lower operative mortality, improved survival, better preservation of leftventricular function, shorter post-operative hospital stay, lower total costs, and fewer valve-related complications, including thromboembolism, anticoagulation-related bleeding events and late prosthetic dysfunction. More recent written data are available indicating the long-term advantage of repair versus replacement. While at some institutions, the repair rate for degenerative disease may exceed 90%, the national average in 2007 was only 69%. Making direct comparisons between mitral valve repair and replacement using the available studies does present some challenges however, as there are often differences in baseline characteristics between patient groups as well as other dissimilarities between studies. The purpose of this review is to systematically summarize the long-term survival and reoperation data of mitral valve repair versus replacement for degenerative disease. A PubMed search was done and resulted in 12 studies that met our study criteria for comparing mitral valve repair versus replacement for degenerative disease. A systematic review was then conducted abstracting survival and reoperation data.

PMID:
25158683
PMCID:
PMC4356723
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Bentham Science Publishers Ltd. Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center