Postoperative Outcomes of Mitral Valve Repair for Mitral Restenosis after Percutaneous Balloon Mitral Valvotomy.
10.5090/kjtcs.2015.48.5.328
- Author:
Seong LEE
1
;
Hyun Keun CHEE
;
Jun Seok KIM
;
Myong Gun SONG
;
Jae Bum PARK
;
Je Kyoun SHIN
Author Information
1. Department of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, Konkuk University Medical Center, Konkuk University School of Medicine, Korea. jekshin@kuh.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Restenosis;
Mitral valve, repair;
Percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy;
Complication
- MeSH:
Balloon Valvuloplasty;
Disease-Free Survival;
Endocarditis;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Mitral Valve*;
Ultrasonography
- From:The Korean Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
2015;48(5):328-334
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: There have been a number of studies on mitral valve replacement and repeated percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy for mitral valve restenosis after percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy. However, studies on mitral valve repair for these patients are rare. In this study, we analyzed postoperative outcomes of mitral valve repair for mitral valve restenosis after percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy. METHODS: In this study, we assessed 15 patients (mean age, 47.7+/-9.7 years; 11 female and 4 male) who underwent mitral valve repair between August 2008 and March 2013 for symptomatic mitral valve restenosis after percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy. The mean interval between the initial percutaneous mitral balloon valvotomy and the mitral valve repair was 13.5+/-7 years. The mean preoperative Wilkins score was 9.4+/-2.6. RESULTS: The mean mitral valve area obtained using planimetry increased from 1.16+/-0.16 cm2 to 1.62+/-0.34 cm2 (p=0.0001). The mean pressure half time obtained using Doppler ultrasound decreased from 202.4+/-58.6 ms to 152+/-50.2 ms (p=0.0001). The mean pressure gradient obtained using Doppler ultrasound decreased from 9.4+/-4.0 mmHg to 5.8+/-1.5 mmHg (p=0.0021). There were no early or late deaths. Thromboembolic events or infective endocarditis did not occur. Reoperations such as mitral valve repair or mitral valve replacement were not performed during the follow-up period (39+/-16 months). The 5-year event-free survival was 56.16% (95% confidence interval, 47.467-64.866). CONCLUSION: On the basis of these results, we could not conclude that mitral valve repair could be an alternative for patients with mitral valve restenosis after percutaneous balloon mitral valvotomy. However, some patients presented with results similar to those of mitral valve replacement. Further studies including more patients with long-term follow-up are necessary to determine the possibility of this application of mitral valve repair.
