• Bo Remenyi, Rachel Webb, Tom Gentles, Peter Russell, Kirsten Finucane, Mildred Lee, and Nigel Wilson.
• Green Lane Pediatric and Congenital Cardiac Services, Starship Children's Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.
• World J Pediatr Congenit Heart Surg. 2013 Apr 1; 4 (2): 155-64.

BackgroundMitral valve (MV) repair offers potential advantages over replacement in patients with rheumatic heart disease (RHD). We present the first long-term study that compares MV repair with replacement in children with RHD.Methods And ResultsSingle institute retrospective review of patients with RHD under 20 years of age, who underwent their first isolated MV surgery between 1990 and 2006. Of the 81 patients, 98% were Māori or Pacific Islander. The median age was 12.7 (3-19) years. The MV was repaired in 59%, a mechanical valve replacement (MVR) took place in 35% and bioprosthetic valve replacement in 6% of the patients. Follow-up data were available for 91.4% of the patients with mean follow-up of 7.6 years (range 0-19.4 years), a total of 620 patient years. Actuarial survival at 10 and 14 years for patients with MVR was 79% and 44%, compared to 90% and 90% for patients who underwent repair (P = .06). Actuarial freedom from late reoperation at 10 and 14 years for patients with MVR was 88% and 73%, compared to 76% and 76% for patients with repair (P = .52). Actuarial freedom from thrombotic, embolic, and hemorrhagic events at 10 and 14 years for patients with MVR was 63% and 45%, compared to 100% and 100% for patients with repair P < .01).ConclusionThis study shows that MV repair is superior to replacement for RHD in the young with follow-up to 19 years. Repair offers a survival advantage, greater freedom from valve-related morbidity, and long-term durability that equals that of MVR.

36 keywords...

hide…