Moderate ischemic mitral regurgitation: Is there a case for early intervention?

Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) results from left ventricular remodelling after myocardial infarction and severely affects cardiovascular mortality and morbidity. Ischemic mitral valve regurgitation also represents a negative prognostic factor for long-term survival in patients undergoing surgical myocardial revascularization. While severe mitral regurgitation should always be corrected during a coronary artery bypass operation, the decision making is more difficult in patients with a moderate degree of regurgitation. In this review, we wish to highlight the negative impact of IMR on long-term survival and discuss the available evidence for surgical correction of IMR at the time of coronary revascularization.     

Aneurysm of the interventricular membranous septum with thrombo-embolism -- an indication for surgical repair?

A 40-year-old woman with a significant neurological historypresented with right hemiparesia, paraesthesia of the rightupper member and of the hemiface. Computer tomography scanningrevealed hypodensity along the right lateral ventricle whichcorresponded to the left hemiplegia which had developed whenshe was 20 years old. Arteriograply of the four cervical axeswas normal. Echocardiography visualizedan aneurysm of the membranousseptum free of thrombosis without ventricular septal defect.The embolism was thought to be of cardiac origin and a decisionwas taken to correct it by surgery. Ten years after surgicalrepair no other neurological event has occurred     

Paravalvular leakage after mitral valve replacement: is left atrial enlargement an additional indication for reoperation?

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Prostheses used to treat heart valve disease improve patient survival, but have certain disadvantages. Paravalvular leakage (PVL) is a rare complication after mitral valve replacement (MVR), and can impair cardiac function and reduce the patient's functional capacity, depending on the degree of periprosthetic regurgitation. METHODS: Between 1985 and July 1999, 2,502 patients underwent MVR with or without concomitant cardiac procedures. Of these patients, 33 (18 males, 15 females; mean age 39.8+/-15.3 years; range: 12-62 years) had PVL of differing degree. The interval between MVR and observation of PVL was 30.5+/-31.5 months (range: 1-126 months), and the period after diagnosis was 22.6+/-31.5 months (range: 2-114 months). Fourteen patients (42.4%) underwent reoperation (RO group), and 19 (57.6%) were followed medically (ME group). Indications for reoperation were reduction of functional capacity, echocardiographically proven serious mitral regurgitation, and hemolysis. RESULTS: Reoperative mortality was 3.0% (1/33), and late mortality 3.1% (1/32) for all patients. Cumulative survival after PVL was 90.2+/-6.7% at both five and ten years. Annular calcification (33.0%) and infective endocarditis (18.2%) were important predictive factors for development of PVL. Only one patient required second re-do surgery. Univariate and forward stepwise logistic regression analyses showed that there was no predictor for the development of severe PVL requiring a second reoperation. No difference was observed between left ventricular dimensions before and after periprosthetic regurgitation. The only significant finding between groups was an increase in left atrial diameter in RO patients after the development of PVL (p <0.05). CONCLUSION: Among patients undergoing MVR there are no clinical features to distinguish who will develop severe PVL during follow up. If PVL reduces the patient's functional capacity or causes serious hemolysis, or if severe PVL is evaluated echocardiographically, then reoperation must be performed. Mild or moderate mitral regurgitation without impairment of functional capacity may be followed medically. In asymptomatic patients, enlargement (>5%) of the left atrial diameter following development of moderate PVL may be a valuable criterion for deciding when to reoperate.     

Is peripapillary choledochoduodenal fistula an indication for endoscopic sphincterotomy?

BACKGROUND: Most patients with a peripapillary choledochoduodenal fistula undergo fistulotomy by endoscopic sphincterotomy for the treatment of bile duct stones. However, whether sphincterotomy should be performed in patients with the fistula but without stones is controversial. METHODS: Among 165 patients in whom a benign peripapillary choledochoduodenal fistula was diagnosed at ERCP, the clinical outcome was retrospectively analyzed and compared between those who underwent fistulotomy by endoscopic sphincterotomy (group 1) and those whose fistula was left untreated (group 2). All patients with hepatolithiasis, residual stones, biliary diversion, or transduodenal papilloplasty were excluded (32, leaving 133). Fistulas were divided into types I and II according to the location of the fistula (Ikeda classification). RESULTS: Follow-up data collected during a median period of 124 months were available for 127 of 133 patients (95%), 76 in group 1 and 53 in group 2. Late complications were bile duct stone recurrence (17 patients), acute cholangitis (7 patients), and biliary carcinoma (2 patients). The incidence of stone recurrence was not significantly different between the 2 groups (p = 0.1). In group 2, 4 patients (8%) with an untreated type II fistula had 1 to 3 episodes of presumed reflux cholangitis, which resolved quickly with conservative treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic sphincterotomy is not always necessary for peripapillary choledochoduodenal fistulas if bile duct stones are absent because reflux cholangitis is a relatively rare complication that can be easily managed.     

Surgical management of moderate ischemic mitral valve regurgitation: Where do we stand?

Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) represents a common complication after myocardial infarction. The valve is anatomically normal and the incompetence is the result of papillary muscles displacement and annular dilatation, causing leaflets tethering. Functionally the leaflets present a restricted systolic motion due to tethering forces that displaces the coaptation surface toward the left ventricle apex. The patients present poor left ventricular function at the time of surgery and the severity of the mitral regurgitation increases the risk of mortality. Currently there is general agreement to treat surgically severe IMR nevertheless strong evidences for patient with moderate insufficiency remains poor and proper treatment debated. The most effective surgical approach for the treatment of IMR remains debated. Some authors demonstrated that coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) alone is beneficial in patients with IMR. Conversely, in most patients, moderate IMR will persist or worsen after CABG alone which translate in higher long-term mortality as a function of residual mitral regurgitation severity. A probable reason for this unclear surgical management of functional MR is due to the contemporary suboptimal results of reparative techniques. The standard surgical treatment of chronic IMR is CABG associated with undersized annuloplasty using complete ring. Though, the recurrence of mitral regurgitation remains high (> 30%) because of continous left ventricle remodeling. To get better long term results, in the last decade, several subvalvular procedures in adjunct to mitral anuloplasty have been developed. Among them, surgical papillary muscle relocation represents the most appreciated option capable to restore normal left ventricle geometry. In the next future new preoperative predictors of increased mitral regurgitation recurrence are certainly needed to find an individual time period of treatment in each patient with moderate IMR.