Scholarlink

Background <p>Management of asymptomatic severe mitral regurgitation (MR) is challenging. Both early mitral valve repair surgery and active surveillance with facilitated surgery are possible strategies. The DutchAMR registry compares clinical outcomes between these two strategies.</p> Methods <p>Patients were included between 2013–2019. Primary endpoints were cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), reoperations, and mortality. Facilitated surgery was defined as mitral valve repair surgery performed after developing a&#xa0;surgical indication during active surveillance.</p> Results <p>Ninety-nine patients were enrolled; 71&#xa0;in active surveillance and 28&#xa0;in early surgery. Over a&#xa0;median follow-up time of 5.1&#xa0;years, 51% of active surveillance patients underwent facilitated surgery due to ESC guideline triggers. Both the early and facilitated surgery groups had one perioperative CVA. During follow-up, in the active surveillance group, 5 (7%) patients died (3&#xa0;without surgery and 2&#xa0;after facilitated surgery), and 3 (4%) underwent reoperations. In the early surgery group, 4 (14%) patients reached a&#xa0;primary endpoint, including&#xa0;2 (7%) CVAs (without residual symptoms) and 2 (7%) deaths. No reoperations occurred in the early surgery group. Baseline additional testing parameters based on CPET, Holter monitoring, and CMR showed no differences between the groups.</p> Conclusions <p>After 5.1&#xa0;years, half of the active surveillance patients required facilitated surgery, with comparable postoperative outcomes to early surgery. Clinical endpoints were comparable between the early and facilitated surgery strategies. There were no differences in baseline additional testing parameters, suggesting no clear targets for upfront stratificatio. Thus, shared decision making weighing the different risks can be used to determine the strategy per patient.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Early mitral valve repair surgery versus active surveillance in asymptomatic severe primary mitral regurgitation—insights from the Dutch AMR registry

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月9日

查看全文
  • Sulayman el Mathari,
  • Einar A. Hart,
  • Rosemarijn Jansen,
  • Annemieke Wind,
  • Jeroen Schaap,
  • Maarten J. Cramer,
  • Michiel L. Bots,
  • Sebastian A. F. Streukens,
  • Lodewijk Wagenaar,
  • S. Matthijs Boekholdt,
  • Mohamed Bentala,
  • Jolanda Kluin,
  • Steven A. J. Chamuleau

摘要

Background

Management of asymptomatic severe mitral regurgitation (MR) is challenging. Both early mitral valve repair surgery and active surveillance with facilitated surgery are possible strategies. The DutchAMR registry compares clinical outcomes between these two strategies.

Methods

Patients were included between 2013–2019. Primary endpoints were cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), reoperations, and mortality. Facilitated surgery was defined as mitral valve repair surgery performed after developing a surgical indication during active surveillance.

Results

Ninety-nine patients were enrolled; 71 in active surveillance and 28 in early surgery. Over a median follow-up time of 5.1 years, 51% of active surveillance patients underwent facilitated surgery due to ESC guideline triggers. Both the early and facilitated surgery groups had one perioperative CVA. During follow-up, in the active surveillance group, 5 (7%) patients died (3 without surgery and 2 after facilitated surgery), and 3 (4%) underwent reoperations. In the early surgery group, 4 (14%) patients reached a primary endpoint, including 2 (7%) CVAs (without residual symptoms) and 2 (7%) deaths. No reoperations occurred in the early surgery group. Baseline additional testing parameters based on CPET, Holter monitoring, and CMR showed no differences between the groups.

Conclusions

After 5.1 years, half of the active surveillance patients required facilitated surgery, with comparable postoperative outcomes to early surgery. Clinical endpoints were comparable between the early and facilitated surgery strategies. There were no differences in baseline additional testing parameters, suggesting no clear targets for upfront stratificatio. Thus, shared decision making weighing the different risks can be used to determine the strategy per patient.