Loop neochord versus leaflet resection techniques for minimally invasive mitral valve repair: long-term results

OBJECTIVES Non-leaflet resection techniques including loop chordal replacement are being used with increasing frequency, but the long-term results of these techniques are still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term results of loop neochord replacement with leaflet resection techniques in patients undergoing minimally invasive mitral valve (MV) repair for MV prolapse. METHODS Between 1999 and 2014, 2134 consecutive MV prolapse patients underwent minimally invasive MV repair with isolated loop (n = 1751; 82.1%) or resection techniques (n = 383, 17.9%) at our institution. Follow-up data were available for 86% of patients with a mean follow-up time of 6.1 ± 4.3 years. RESULTS The 30-day mortality was 0.8% for all patients (loop: 0.7%, resection: 1.6%; P = 0.09). Leaflet resection was associated with more moderate or more mitral regurgitation on predischarge echocardiography (P = 0.003). The 1-, 5- and 10-year survival rates were 98 ± 1%, 95 ± 1% and 86 ± 2% for the loop technique versus 97 ± 1%, 92 ± 1% and 81 ± 2% for resection patients, respectively (P = 0.003). Significant predictors for late mortality were MV repair technique (P = 0.004), left ventricular ejection fraction (P CONCLUSIONS In our patient cohort, MV repair with loop chordal replacement is associated with less early recurrent mitral regurgitation and very good long-term results when compared to classical leaflet resection techniques for MV prolapse and is therefore an excellent option for such patients.