In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.
Did you know that your browser is out of date? To get the best experience using our website we recommend that you upgrade to a newer version. Learn more.

Reinterventions after percutaneous mitral commissurotomy during long-term follow-up, up to 20 years: the role of repeat percutaneous mitral commissurotomy

Valvular Heart Disease

Aims We analysed reinterventions performed during long-term follow-up after percutaneous mitral commissurotomy (PMC) with a particular focus on freedom from mitral surgery and late results of repeat PMC.

Methods and results
In 912 patients who had good immediate results of PMC (valve area ≥1.5 cm2 with mitral regurgitation ≤2/4), we analysed survival without reintervention (surgery or repeat PMC) and survival without surgery alone, with a follow-up up to 20 years. The median age was 48 years, and 251 patients (27%) had calcified valves. During a median follow-up of 12 years, 351 patients (38%) underwent a reintervention: surgery was performed in 266 (76%) patients and repeat PMC in 85 (24%). Cardiovascular survival without reintervention (surgery or repeat PMC) was 38 ± 2% at 20 years. When analysing cardiovascular survival without surgery, this rate increased to 46 ± 2% at 20 years. In the 504 patients aged <50 years at the time of their initial PMC, 20-year rates were 45 ± 3% for cardiovascular survival without reintervention and 57 ± 3% for cardiovascular survival without surgery. Of the 85 patients who underwent repeat PMC, cardiovascular survival without surgery was 60 ± 7% at 10 years.

After successful PMC, reintervention is frequently needed. However, almost half of the patients remained free from surgery at 20 years. Repeat PMC was performed in one out of four cases of reintervention in this study, thereby allowing for postponement of surgery in a substantial number of patients.

Notes to editor

Eur Heart J (2013) 34 (25): 1923-1930
The content of this article reflects the personal opinion of the author/s and is not necessarily the official position of the European Society of Cardiology.