Percutaneous Versus Surgical Revascularization in Patients With Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation
This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
Background—The proper way of revascularization remains controversial in patients with ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR). We sought to compare the long-term results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and surgical revascularization in IMR.
Methods and Results—From 1996 to 2008, 185 consecutive patients (132 men; age, 63±9 years) with significant IMR underwent PCI (PCI group) (n=66) or coronary artery bypass graft surgery (OP group) (n=119). In the OP group, 68 (57%) patients also underwent concomitant mitral annuloplasty. Significant IMR was defined as functional MR occurring >1 week after myocardial infarction with an effective regurgitant orifice area ≥0.2 cm2. During a median follow-up of 54 months, there were 2 operative mortalities, 26 cardiac deaths, and 11 heart failure hospitalizations in the OP group and 22 cardiac deaths and 10 heart failure hospitalizations in the PCI group. The survival and cardiac mortality rates were not significantly different between the 2 groups, but event-free survival rates were significantly higher in the OP group. For the 45 propensity score-matched pairs, the risk of cardiac events was significantly lower in the OP group than in the PCI group (hazard ratio, 0.499; 95% CI, 0.251 to 0.990; P=0.043). Compared with patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft surgery alone, event-free survival rates were significantly higher in those who underwent additional mitral annuloplasty.
Conclusions—Compared with PCI, surgical revascularization is associated with an improved long-term event-free survival, and concomitant mitral annuloplasty should be considered in patients with significant IMR.
- © 2011 American Heart Association, Inc.