Share this page on LinkedIn
Share This Page on Google+
Share This Page on Twitter
tell someone about this page print this page
You are here: Contents > 2004 > Volume 13 Number 5 September 2004 > MITRAL VALVE DISEASE > Surgical Treatment of Infective Mitral Valve Endocarditis

Surgical Treatment of Infective Mitral Valve Endocarditis

Markus J. Wilhelm, Reza Tavakoli, Kathrin Schneeberger, Simon Hörstrupp, Oliver Reuthebuch, Burkhardt Seifert, Marko Turina, Michele Genoni
Department of Cardiac Surgery, City Hospital Triemli, Zurich, Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Department of Biostatistics, Institute for Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland

Background and aim of the study: The approach to mitral valve endocarditis is a surgical challenge, and the optimal procedure remains a matter of debate. In this condition, mitral valve repair appears feasible, but its long-term effects - as opposed to more often practiced valve replacement - have not yet been determined. Herein, the authors’ experience of surgical treatment of infective mitral valve endocarditis is presented, with reference to surgical replacement or reconstruction.
Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of all patients with infective native mitral valve endocarditis treated surgically at the University Hospital Zurich and the City Hospital Triemli Zurich between 1980 and 1996. Of 154 patients, 97 (63%) underwent mitral valve replacement, and 57 (37%) mitral valve reconstruction.
Results: The 30-day mortality was 3.2% (5/154); 4% (4/97) after replacement and 1.7% (1/57) after reconstruction (p = 0.67). Survival (Kaplan-Meier) was 93%, 81% and 61% after one, five and 10 years, respectively. There was no significant difference between valve replacement and reconstruction in terms of

long-term survival (p = 0.15), but there was a trend towards better survival after reconstruction than replacement if only cardiac deaths were considered (p = 0.1). At follow up, reconstruction patients were significantly less frequently symptomatic (NYHA class III/IV) than replacement patients (0% versus 29%; p = 0.002), had a lower incidence of atrial fibrillation and need for pacemaker implantation (29% versus 47%; p = 0.04), and tended to have less dyspnea in daily life (20% versus 38%; p = 0.07). Reoperation in patients surviving more than 30 days was more common in replacement than in reconstruction patients.
Conclusion: The present data suggest a trend for better clinical outcome after mitral valve reconstruction than after replacement when treating mitral valve endocarditis. These results encourage mitral valve reconstruction in mitral valve endocarditis, but recommendations to clinicians undertaking surgery on mitral valve endocarditis must be made with caution.
The Journal of Heart Valve Disease 2004;13:754-759

Surgical Treatment of Infective Mitral Valve Endocarditis

Click the above hyperlink to view the article, right click (Ctrl click on a Mac) to open in a new browser window or tab.

Purchase this Article

Please click the button below to purchase this article. Single article purchases are provided at $50.00 per article. Upon clicking the button below, single article user account subscription details are requested and, upon successful payment, a single article user account is created. Single articles are availble in your account for seven days after purchase.