Mitral valve repair is the ideal intervention for mitral valve disease with excellent long-term survival comparable to the age-matched general population. When the mitral valve is not repairable, mechanical prostheses may be associated with improved survival as compared with biological prostheses. Newer mechanical and biological valve prostheses have the potential to improve outcomes following mitral valve replacement in young patients. Patients presenting for mitral valve surgery after failed transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve have high rates of postoperative mortality and morbidity, exceeding those seen with reoperative mitral valve surgery, which poses issues in young patients who have a higher cumulative incidence of reintervention.
Patients presenting with mitral valve disease, the most common type of heart valve disease, have a survival advantage when they undergo mitral valve repair as opposed to replacement, and this is particularly true for young patients. When the mitral valve is not repairable, mechanical prostheses (prosthetic implants) may be associated with improved survival as compared with biological prostheses, and this difference is mostly observed until the age of 70 years. Newer techniques of treating mitral valve disease without requiring open heart surgery have not yet been shown to be superior or even equivalent to traditional open heart surgery in the general population. Patients presenting for mitral valve surgery after failure of these newer techniques have high rates of death, exceeding those seen with mitral valve reoperation, which has important implications for young patients with mitral valve disease.

OBJECTIVE: The ideal surgical intervention for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR), a disease of the left ventricle not the mitral valve itself, is still debated. We performed an updated systematic review and study-level meta-analysis investigating mitral valve repair (MVr) versus mitral valve replacement (MVR) for adult patients with SMR, with or without coronary artery disease (CAD).
METHODS: PubMed, CENTRAL and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing MVr versus MVR. Randomized trial or observational studies were considered eligible. Primary endpoint was long-term mortality for any cause. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were reconstructed and compared with Cox linear regression. Landmark analysis and time-varying hazard ratio (HR) were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses included meta-regression and separate sub-analysis. A random effects model was used.
RESULTS: Twenty-three studies (MVr=3,727 and MVR=2,839) were included. One study was a randomized trial, and 19 studies were adjusted. The mean weighted follow-up was 3.7±2.8 years. MVR was associated with significative greater late mortality (HR=1.26; 95 % CI, 1.14-1.39; P<0.0001) at 10-year follow-up. There was a time-varying trend showing an increased risk of mortality in the first 2 years after MVR (HR=1.38; 95 % CI, 1.21-1.56; P<0.0001), after which this difference dissipated (HR=0.94; 95 % CI, 0.81-1.09; P=0.41). Separate sub-analyses showed comparable long-term mortality in patients with concomitant coronary surgery ≥90 %, left ventricle ejection fraction ≤40 %, and sub-valvular apparatus preservation rate of 100 %.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to repair, MVR is associated with higher probability of mortality in the first 2 years following surgery, after which the two procedures showed comparable late mortality rate.

Rheumatic heart disease remains a major cause of cardiovascular death worldwide. Limited real-world nationwide data are available to compare the long-term outcomes between mitral valve repair and replacement in rheumatic heart disease. For patients with RHD, MVP is the superior choice of surgical intervention owing to better long-term survival, reduced incidence of early mortality and thromboembolic events. However, it entails higher chances of re-operation at follow-up at four, eight and twelve years. Although feasible, surgeons may opt for MVR in patients with a worse prognosis. Whereas degenerative mitral repair for severe MR has been proven superior to replacement, the optimal operative strategy for mitral RHD remains unclear. In developing countries, mitral RHD commonly develops in young patients, predominantly consists of MR rather than MS, and occurs more frequently than in the United States. In addition, the predominant MR etiology (rather than MS), relatively early intervention in the RHD timeline, and variation in Carpentier MR types among developing world populations further make these rheumatic MVs more amenable to repair than replacement. Patients should be carefully selected for mitral valve repair because of its higher reoperation rate, particularly those with previous percutaneous transvenous mitral commissurotomy. Careful assessment of anterior leaflet mobility/calcification to determine mitral repair or replacement was associated with improved outcomes. This decision-making strategy may alter the threshold for rheumatic mitral replacement in the current valve-in-valve era.

Electrophysiological and interventional procedures have been increasingly used to reduce morbidity and mortality in patients experiencing cardiovascular diseases. Although antithrombotic therapies are critical to reduce the risk of stroke or other thromboembolic events, they can nonetheless increase the bleeding hazard. This is even more true in an aging population undergoing cardiac procedures in which the combination of oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapies would further increase the hemorrhagic risk. Hence, the timing, dose, and combination of antithrombotic therapies should be carefully chosen in each case. However, the maze of society guidelines and consensus documents published so far have progressively led to a hazier scenario in this setting. Aim of this review is to provide-in a single document-a quick, evidenced-based practical summary of the antithrombotic approaches used in different cardiac electrophysiology and interventional procedures to guide the busy clinician and the cardiac proceduralist in their everyday practice.

This case report describes a 47-year-old woman with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) complicated by Libman-Sacks endocarditis (LSE) who developed multiple organ dysfunction after mitral valve replacement surgery. The patient presented with a 5-day history of cough, sputum, and fever. Transthoracic echocardiography showed significant vegetations on the mitral valve. Biopsy was performed, and the pathological diagnosis was SLE complicated by LSE. After the mitral valve replacement surgery, the patient developed clinical manifestations of hepatic and renal dysfunction, cardiopulmonary failure, oliguria, and shock. The clinical symptoms significantly improved after administration of mechanical ventilation, continuous renal replacement therapy, plasma exchange, anti-inflammatory and anti-infection treatments, immunomodulatory and immunosuppressive therapies, and low-molecular-weight heparin anticoagulation. Multiple organ dysfunction after mitral valve replacement in patients with SLE complicated by LSE has rarely been reported. This report discusses the clinical manifestations, pathogenesis, and treatment of this severe complication. We hope the sharing of our experience in this case will provide a clinical basis for the treatment of severe multiple organ dysfunction after mitral valve replacement in patients with SLE complicated by LSE.

UNASSIGNED: To evaluate the ongoing debate concerning the choice of valve prosthesis for women requiring mitral valve replacement (MVR) and who wish to conceive. Bioprostheses are associated with risk of early structural valve deterioration. Mechanical prostheses require lifelong anticoagulation and carry maternal and fetal risks. Also, the optimal anticoagulation regimen during pregnancy after MVR remains unclear.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted of studies reporting on pregnancy after MVR. Valve- and anticoagulation-related maternal and fetal risks during pregnancy and 30 days\' postpartum were analyzed.
UNASSIGNED: Fifteen studies reporting 722 pregnancies were included. In total, 87.2% of pregnant women had a mechanical prosthesis and 12.5% a bioprosthesis. Maternal mortality risk was 1.33% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69-2.56), any hemorrhage risk 6.90% (95% CI, 3.70-12.88). Valve thrombosis risk was 4.71% (95% CI, 3.06-7.26) in patients with mechanical prostheses. 3.23% (95% CI, 1.34-7.75) of the patients with bioprostheses experienced early structural valve deterioration. Of these, the mortality was 40%. Pregnancy loss risk was 29.29% (95% CI, 19.74-43.47) with mechanical prostheses versus 13.50% (95% CI, 4.31-42.30) for bioprostheses. Switching to heparin during the first trimester demonstrated a bleeding risk of 7.78% (95% CI, 3.71-16.31) versus 4.08% (95% CI, 1.17-14.28) for women on oral anticoagulants throughout pregnancy and a valve thrombosis risk of 6.99% (95% CI, 2.08-23.51) versus 2.89% (95% CI, 1.40-5.94). Administration of anticoagulant dosages greater than 5 mg resulted in a risk of fetal adverse events of 74.24% (95% CI, 56.11-98.23) versus 8.85% (95% CI, 2.70-28.99) in ≤5 mg.
UNASSIGNED: A bioprosthesis seems the best option for women of childbearing age who are interested in future pregnancy after MVR. If mechanical valve replacement is preferred, the favorable anticoagulation regimen is continuous low-dose oral anticoagulants. Shared decision-making remains priority when choosing a prosthetic valve for young women.

Left circumflex coronary artery (LCx) injury related to mitral valve surgery is a rare complication. The best treatment option is not defined, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may represent an effective treatment to avoid prolonged myocardial ischemia. To evaluate feasibility and efficacy of PCI treatment, all records of LCx injury related to mitral valve surgery and treated with PCI were included after a systematic PubMed searching. Moreover, we retrospectively analyzed our single-center PCI database and patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were included. Patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve intervention, non-mitral valve surgery, conservatively or surgically treated after LCx injury were excluded. Data about patient characteristics, procedural details, PCI success, and in-hospital mortality were collected. Fifty-six patients were included, 58.9% were male (n = 33) and the median age was 60.5 years (IQR = 21.75). The majority had left dominant or codominant coronary system (62.2%, n = 28 and 15.6%, n = 7, respectively). Clinical manifestations ranged from hemodynamic stability (21.1%, n = 8) to hemodynamic instability (42.1%, n = 16) and cardiac arrest (18.4%, n = 7). On ECG, 23.5% of patients (n = 12) presented ST-segment depression, 58.8% (n = 30) ST-segment elevation, 7.8% (n = 4) atrioventricular block, and 29.4% (n = 15) ventricular arrhythmias. Left ventricle dysfunction was present in 52.3% (n = 22) of patients and wall motion abnormalities in 71.4% (n = 30). PCI success rate was 82.1% (n = 46) and in-hospital mortality 4.5% (n = 2). LCx injury related to mitral surgery is a rare complication characterized by an increased risk of mortality. PCI seems a feasible treatment option, still burdened by suboptimal results, probably related to the technical challenges posed by the surgical failure.

OBJECTIVE: Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is associated with increased risks of mortality and heart failure. However, the optimal management of moderate IMR remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to appraise whether moderate IMR should be corrected during coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).
METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from its inception up to 15 October 2022 for studies that assessed CABG alone versus CABG with mitral valve (MV) surgery in patients with moderate IMR. The primary outcome was perioperative mortality.
RESULTS: Four randomized controlled trials and three observational studies with propensity-matched data including 1209 patients assessing CABG alone (n = 598) versus CABG with MV surgery (n = 611) were included. Compared to CABG alone, the addition of MV surgery did not significantly increase perioperative mortality (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.52-1.96; p = 0.98) and stroke (RR, 2.14; 95% CI, 0.97-4.72; p = 0.06), whereas a longer cardiopulmonary bypass duration (MD, 54.91; 95% CI, 42.13-67.68; p < 0.01) and an increased incidence of renal failure were observed in the combined-procedure group. At follow-up, the addition of MV surgery was significantly associated with reduced rates of residual MR (RR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.13-0.51; p < 0.01) and NYHA class III-IV (RR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37-0.78; p < 0.01). However, there was no difference in either mid-term mortality (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.65-1.70; p = 0.82) or late mortality (RR, 91; 95% CI, 0.49-1.71; p = 0.78) between the CABG alone group and the combined-procedure group.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with moderate IMR, the addition of MV surgery to CABG did not increase perioperative mortality. Despite the reduced rates of moderate MR and NYHA class III-IV at follow-up, the addition of MV surgery did not translate in a reduction in mid-term or late mortality.

UNASSIGNED: The published literature investigating the impact of sex on outcomes after mitral valve (MV) surgery has demonstrated inferior outcomes for females over males. However, the true relationship between sex and outcomes after MV surgery continues to be poorly understood.
UNASSIGNED: PubMed, Medline, and Embase were systematically searched for articles published from 1 January 2005 to 1 August 2021. This systematic review included retrospective and prospective studies investigating the relationship between sex and outcomes after MV surgery. In all, 2068 articles were initially screened and 12 studies were included in this review.
UNASSIGNED: Few studies were adequately powered or structured to investigate this topic. Few studies propensity matched patients or isolated for surgical approach. In individual studies, females experienced increased rates of short-term and long-term mortality and increased 1-year mortality in the pooled data. Males experienced increased rates of required pacemaker insertion. The remaining rates of morbidity and mortality did not differ significantly between males and females.
UNASSIGNED: This review identified increased rates of 1-year mortality in the pooled data for females, while males had increased rates of pacemaker insertion. Despite this, the absence of propensity matching and isolating for surgical approach has introduced confounding variables that impair the ability of the included studies to interpret the results found in the current literature. Studies isolating for surgical approach, propensity matching patients, and examining outcomes with long-term follow-up are required to elucidate the true nature of this relationship.

Bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (BVD) and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) may be caused by structural or nonstructural valve dysfunction. Both surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic valves have limited durability because of structural valve deterioration. The main objective of this summary of experts participating in a virtual workshop was to propose standardized definitions for nonstructural and structural BVD and BVF following aortic or mitral biological valve replacement with the goal of facilitating research reporting and implementation of these terms in clinical practice. Definitions of structural BVF, based on valve reintervention or death, underestimate the true incidence of BVF. However, definitions solely based on the presence of high transprosthetic gradient at a given echocardiogram during follow-up overestimate the incidence of structural BVD and BVF. Definitions of aortic or mitral structural BVD must therefore include the confirmation by imaging of permanent structural changes to the leaflets alongside evidence of deterioration in valve hemodynamic function at echocardiography follow-up.