Skip to main content
Journal of Clinical Medicine logoLink to Journal of Clinical Medicine
. 2025 Jul 9;14(14):4855. doi: 10.3390/jcm14144855

Ischemic Mitral Valve Regurgitation in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting—Early and Late-Term Outcomes of Surgical Treatment

Paweł Walerowicz 1, Mirosław Brykczyński 2, Aleksandra Szylińska 1,*, Jerzy Pacholewicz 1
Editor: Francesco Giallauria
PMCID: PMC12295808  PMID: 40725548

Abstract

Background: Coronary heart disease (CHD) remains the most prevalent pathology within the circulatory system. Among its chronic complications, ischemic mitral valve regurgitation (IMR) is observed in approximately 15% of patients with sustained myocardial ischemia. The presence of this complex valvular defect significantly increases both overall mortality and the incidence of adverse cardiovascular events. Notably, the presence of moderate to severe mitral regurgitation in patients undergoing surgical revascularization has been shown to double the risk of death. Despite the well-established etiology of IMR, data regarding the efficacy of surgical interventions and the determinants of postoperative outcomes remain inconclusive. Methods: The objective of the present study was to evaluate both early and long-term outcomes of surgical treatment of mitral regurgitation in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) due to ischemic heart disease. Particular attention was given to the influence of the severity of regurgitation, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and the dimensions of the left atrium (LA) and left ventricle (LV) on the postoperative prognosis. An additional aim was to identify preoperative risk factors associated with increased postoperative mortality and morbidity. A retrospective analysis was conducted on 421 patients diagnosed with ischemic mitral regurgitation who underwent concomitant mitral valve surgery and CABG. Exclusion criteria included emergent and urgent procedures as well as non-ischemic etiologies of mitral valve dysfunction. Results: The study cohort comprised 34.9% women and 65.1% men, with the mean age of 65.7 years (±7.57). A substantial proportion (76.7%) of patients were aged over 60 years. More than half (51.5%) presented with severe heart failure symptoms, classified as NYHA class III or IV, while over 70% were categorized as CCS class II or III. Among the surgical procedures performed, 344 patients underwent mitral valve repair, and 77 patients required mitral valve replacement. Additionally, 119 individuals underwent concomitant tricuspid valve repair. Short-term survival was significantly affected by the presence of hypertension, prior cerebrovascular events, and chronic kidney disease. In contrast, hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were identified as significant predictors of adverse late-term outcomes. Conclusions: Interestingly, neither the preoperative severity of mitral regurgitation nor the echocardiographic measurements of LA and LV dimensions were found to significantly influence surgical outcomes. The perioperative risk, as assessed by the EuroSCORE II (average score: 10.0%), corresponded closely with observed mortality rates following mitral valve repair (9.9%) and replacement (10.4%). Notably, the need for concomitant tricuspid valve surgery was associated with an elevated mortality rate (12.4%). Furthermore, the preoperative echocardiographic evaluation of LA regurgitation severity, as well as LA and LV dimensions, did not exhibit a statistically significant impact on either early or long-term surgical outcomes. However, a reduced LVEF was correlated with increased long-term mortality. The presence of advanced clinical symptoms and the necessity for tricuspid valve repair were independently associated with a poorer late-term prognosis. Importantly, the annual mortality rate observed in the late-term follow-up of patients who underwent surgical treatment of ischemic mitral regurgitation was lower than rates reported in the literature for patients managed conservatively. The EuroSCORE II scale proved to be a reliable and precise tool in predicting surgical risk and outcomes in this patient population.

Keywords: cardiac surgery, mitral regurgitation, CABG, coronary artery bypass grafting

1. Introduction

Ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) is one of the most complex complications of ischemic heart disease. It is most commonly classified as type IIIb, where regurgitation is caused by a restrictive limitation of the posterior mitral leaflet’s motion despite normal leaflet morphology [1].

Unlike mitral regurgitation of other etiologies, IMR is a disease of the entire heart, as valve regurgitation occurs due to ischemia-induced remodeling [2,3,4]. Two primary mechanisms underlie the pathogenesis of changes in the left ventricle and subsequent dysfunction of the mitral apparatus.

The first mechanism involves ischemia-related papillary muscle dysfunction. The second is left ventricular dilation accompanied by impaired contractility [5]. Ischemia of the left ventricle triggers pathological myocardial remodeling, leading to ventricular dilation. Dilation, on the other hand, increases the distance between the papillary muscles and the mitral annulus. The displacement of the subvalvular apparatus toward the apex of the heart results in systolic tethering of the mitral leaflets, reducing the coaptation zone [6].

Left ventricular dilation increases volume, which affects left ventricular afterload. Rising end-diastolic volume leads to a greater wall tension, as described by Laplace’s law, creating a self-perpetuating mechanism of disease progression [7].

The prevalence of IMR among patients with ischemic heart disease is estimated at approximately 15% [8,9], while it is present in about half of those with heart failure [8]. Accurate prevalence estimation is challenging due to the absence of a universally accepted definition of the disease’s dynamic nature. Multiple factors, including delayed post-infarction left ventricular remodeling, influence its progression. The defect changes over time. The use of drugs that reduce the symptoms of heart failure has a significant impact. The entire dynamics of the defect affect the delays in its diagnosis [2,3,4,10,11].

IMR secondary to coronary artery disease significantly worsens the prognosis. For patients with ischemic heart disease managed conservatively and without mitral dysfunction, the 4-year survival rate is 90%. In contrast, this rate drops to 40% for those with significant regurgitation [8,12]. The SAVE study reports nearly 30% cardiovascular mortality within three years following myocardial infarction complicated by ischemic mitral regurgitation [13]. In comparison, mortality in the same patient group without IMR was more than twice as low. Other studies report an annual mortality rate of 6% in patients without IMR, compared to 10% to 40% in those with IMR, depending on the severity of regurgitation. The above data show that the mere presence of the defect significantly affects the prognosis. For this reason, it is so important to determine the appropriate moment at which to implement the operation. In accordance with the changing guidelines, the decision to operate is postponed until severe regurgitation is diagnosed.

2. Objective

The primary objective was to evaluate the early and late outcomes of surgical treatment for mitral regurgitation in patients undergoing surgery for ischemic heart disease. The secondary objective was to examine the relationship between these outcomes and preoperative echocardiographic data, preoperative risk factors, the patient’s preoperative condition, and the impact of the postoperative course on late outcomes.

3. Materials and Methods

The analysis included 486 patients who underwent simultaneous mitral valve surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting. Exclusion criteria in the study included the following:

  • Emergency surgery;

  • Non-ischemic etiology of the defect;

  • Intraoperative conversion of valve repair to replacement.

The study retrospectively evaluated 421 (Figure 1) patients who underwent mitral valve repair or replacement combined with concurrent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Due to the natural history of the condition, additional tricuspid valve repair was necessary for some patients during the surgery.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Flowchart of the study group.

This study received a waiver from the Bioethical Committee of the Pomeranian Medical University because of its retrospective and observational nature (decision no. KB-0012/351/09/16 dated 29 September 2016).

Patients were admitted to the clinic one day before the planned surgery. On the day of admission, a medical history was collected, echocardiographic examinations performed outside the clinic were verified, and routine preoperative laboratory tests were conducted. Upon admission, the risk of surgery-related mortality was assessed using the standardized EuroScore (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation).

Preoperative echocardiographic data included left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and dimensions of the left ventricle and left atrium. Subsequent echocardiographic evaluations were routinely conducted on the first, third, and fifth postoperative days to assess changes in EF. For the purposes of this study, left atrial enlargement was classified as follows:

  • Normal: <41 mm;

  • Enlargement I: 41–46 mm;

  • Enlargement II: 47–51 mm;

  • Enlargement III: >51 mm.

At the study center, significant ischemic mitral regurgitation was treated via restrictive annuloplasty or mitral valve replacement combined with concurrent CABG. In cases of significant tricuspid regurgitation secondary to mitral valve disease, tricuspid valve repair was also performed. Surgical outcomes were standardized, as the procedures were consistently performed by the same two cardiac surgeons.

The endpoints included the following:

  1. Early mortality, defined as death within the first 30 days following cardiac surgery.

  2. Late mortality, defined as any death occurring more than 30 days after surgery.

  3. Follow-up period, defined as the number of days survived by the patient from the 30th day post-surgery onward. The data were verified in the national registry of cardiosurgical operations.

4. Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis was performed using the licensed software Statistica 13.0 (StatSoft, Inc., Tulsa, OK, USA). The group characteristics were primarily presented using means, frequencies, and percentages. The normality of variable distributions was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test, and variance homogeneity was tested with Levene’s test. Differences between two groups were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U test, while differences among more than two groups were analyzed using the Kruskal–Wallis test. Qualitative data were analyzed using the Chi-squared test, with Yates’ correction applied when subgroup sample sizes were small. Associations between selected parameters were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression (adjusted by age, comorbidities, and sex) The model of regression was presented using the standard deviation and confidence interval. Survival probabilities in selected groups were presented using Kaplan–Meier curves. The log-rank test was applied to assess the Kaplan–Meier model. A significance level of p < 0.05 was adopted.

5. Results

Table 1 presents preoperative data based on the occurrence of death. In individuals over 65 years of age, a higher 30-day mortality rate was observed (p < 0.001). Moreover, an increased 30-day mortality was noted among patients with CCS class III (p = 0.007) and CCS class IV (p < 0.001). Statistically significant differences in mortality beyond 30 days were observed in patients with NYHA class I (p = 0.031), arterial hypertension (p = 0.003), and COPD (p = 0.016). Atrial fibrillation was found in 35.4% of patients upon hospital admission, and diabetes in 30.2%. However, these conditions had no significant impact on either the early or long-term outcomes of surgical treatment.

Table 1.

Preoperative characteristics of patients and their impact on outcomes.

EARLY OUTCOME LATE OUTCOME
Number of Patients % of Patients EuroScore II Death ≤ 30 Days % of Deaths p Liczba Chorych Death > 30 Days % of Deaths % of Deaths per Year p Follow-Up (Months)
Total 421 100 10.0 44 10.4 377 52 13.8 2.3 73
Women 147 34.9 9.7 12 8.2 0.261 135 13 9.6 1.6 0.109 74
Men 274 65.1 10.2 32 11.7 0.261 242 39 16.1 2.7 0.109 72
Age ≤ 65 212 50.3 6.5 10 4.7 <0.001 202 23 11.4 1.8 0.345 76
Age > 65 209 49.7 13.6 34 16.3 <0.001 175 29 16.6 2.9 0.345 69
NYHA I 103 24.5 10.7 14 13.6 0.231 89 19 21.3 3.4 0.031 76
NYHA II 101 24.0 6.4 3 2.9 0.008 98 9 9.2 1.4 0.302 77
NYHA III 182 43.2 10.1 19 10.4 0.995 163 21 12.9 2.2 0.658 69
NYHA IV 35 8.3 18.1 8 22.8 0.027 27 3 11.1 1.9 0.659 70
CCS I 46 10.9 7.9 6 13.0 0.734 40 5 12.5 2.1 0.931 73
CCS II 109 25.9 7.4 7 6.4 0.157 102 12 11.8 1.9 0.745 74
CCS III 205 48.7 8.4 13 6.3 0.007 192 31 16.1 2.6 0.125 73
CCS IV 61 14.5 21.8 18 29.5 <0.001 43 4 9.3 1.7 0.202 67
HA 247 58.7 9.6 19 7.7 0.027 228 41 17.9 3.0 0.003 71
AF 149 35.4 9.6 17 11.4 0.634 132 24 18.2 3.2 0.083 69
DM 127 30.2 11.1 12 9.4 0.788 115 17 14.7 2.6 0.672 69
CKD 25 5.9 17.6 7 28.0 0.002 18 5 27.8 5.9 0.382 57
TIA 37 8.8 13.6 9 24.3 0.009 28 8 28.6 6.0 0.125 57
COPD 28 6.7 11.0 2 7.1 0.554 26 8 30.8 6.4 0.016 58

Legend: HA—arterial hypertension; DM—diabetes mellitus; NYHA—New York Heart Association; CCS—Canadian Cardiovascular Society; AF—atrial fibrillation; COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; p—statistical significance. Bolds and background colours are used to highlight statistically significant data, same below.

The echocardiographic data, depending on the occurrence of death after cardiac surgery, are presented in Table 2. The lowest mortality rate was observed in patients with an ejection fraction above 50% (p = 0.014). No other statistically significant differences were found.

Table 2.

Characteristics of preoperative echocardiographic findings and their impact on surgical treatment outcomes for IMR.

Number of Patients % of Patients EuroScore II Death ≤ 30 Days % of Deaths p Number of Patients Death > 30 Days % of Deaths % of Deaths per Year p Follow-Up MC.
Total 421 100 10.0 44 10.4 377 49 13.0 2.3 73
IMR 399 A 94.8
++ 74 18.6 B 8.8 6 8.1 0.588 68 12 17.6 1.9 0.189 75
+++ 234 58.6 B 9.9 27 11.5 0.536 207 26 12.6 4.2 0.737 75
++++ 91 22.8 B 10.9 9 9.9 0.976 82 9 11.0 1.5 0.652 71
EF (%) 419 A 99.5
>50 86 20.5 B 6.0 2 2.3 0.014 84 8 9.5 1.2 0.425 82
50–31 197 47.0 B 8.7 22 11.2 0.568 175 26 14.9 4.3 0.645 72
21–30 99 23.6 B 13.6 14 14.1 0.199 85 13 15.3 2.2 0.803 70
<21 37 8.9 B 15.4 4 10.8 0.905 33 5 15.1 1.0 0.962 60
LV (mm) 381 A 90.5
40–55 124 32.5 B 10.4 11 8.9 0.882 113 9 7.9 1.6 0.054 68
56–60 90 23.7 B 9.8 4 4.4 0.116 86 15 17.4 2.6 0.153 70
61–65 95 24.9 B 8.8 10 10.5 0.602 85 11 12.9 1.8 0.796 72
>65 72 18.9 B 8.9 10 13.9 0.125 62 12 19.3 1.9 0.215 75
LA (mm) 396 A 94.0
<41 51 12.9 B 9.7 4 7.8 0.891 47 4 8.5 0.7 0.271 72
41–46 148 37.4 B 9.7 12 8.1 0.514 136 15 11.0 2.5 0.319 72
47–51 105 26.5 B 10.0 8 7.6 0.603 97 18 18.5 3.0 0.104 73
>51 92 23.2 B 8.5 13 14.1 0.072 79 13 16.4 2.2 0.620 70

Legend: IMR—ischemic mitral regurgitation; EF—ejection fraction; LA—left atrium; LV—left ventricle; p—statistical significance. A—Number of results available from the entire study group of 421 patients; B—Percentage of results consistent with the size of subgroup A treated as 100%.

Figure 2 presents the survival curves of patients after surgery, depending on the preoperative severity of mitral valve regurgitation. In the analyzed groups, 20-month mortality was lowest among patients with preoperatively severe mitral regurgitation.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Kaplan–Meier survival curve based on the severity of regurgitant flow.

The long-term mortality analysis, extending beyond 130 months of follow-up, showed similar results. However, these findings were not statistically significant.

Figure 3 presents survival curves based on left ventricular function, represented by ejection fraction (EF). The risk of late mortality was lowest in patients with good left ventricular function (EF > 50%). The highest mortality within the first 20 months after surgery was observed in patients with severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction (EF ≤ 20%). However, statistical significance was not achieved.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Kaplan–Meier survival curve based on EF.

The Kaplan–Meier survival curve according to the size of the left ventricle is presented in Figure 4. No statistically significant differences were found between the survival curves. However, there is a tendency toward the best long-term outcomes in patients with normal left ventricular (LV) dimensions. Regardless of the degree of LV dilation, the results of ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) treatment at 20 months after surgery were nearly identical. Increased mortality among patients with severely enlarged LV becomes particularly noticeable after 60 months of follow-up.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Kaplan–Meier survival curve based on LV size.

Figure 5 presents the Kaplan–Meier survival curve according to left atrial size. The probability of survival was higher in patients with a non-enlarged left atrium; however, statistical significance was not achieved.

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Kaplan–Meier survival curve based on the degree of LA enlargement.

Table 3 presents an analysis of demographic data, surgical risk, and echocardiographic parameters, categorized according to left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) groups. Statistically significant associations across LVEF groups were found for sex (both women and men, p < 0.001), NYHA class II (p = 0.018), CCS class I (p = 0.002), CCS class IV (p = 0.009), arterial hypertension (p = 0.015), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.010), as well as the type of mitral valve surgery, left ventricular size, and intraoperative data, including cardiopulmonary bypass time (p = 0.009) and aortic cross-clamping time (p = 0.007).

Table 3.

Assessment of selected parameters in relation to EF size.

TOTAL EF
>50%
EF
50–31%
EF
30–21%
EF
<21%
p
n % B n % B n % B n % B
Total 419 86 20.5 197 47.0 99 23.7 37 8.8
Women 146 50 34.2 74 50.7 19 13.0 3 2.1 <0.001
Men 273 36 13.2 123 45.1 80 29.3 34 12.4 <0.001
NYNA I 101 14 13.9 50 49.5 29 28.7 8 7.9 0.201
NYHA II 101 28 27.7 52 51.5 17 16.8 4 4.0 0.018
NYHA III 182 39 21.4 80 44.0 45 24.7 18 9.9 0.719
NYHA IV 35 5 14.5 15 42.9 8 22.6 7 20.0 0.099
CCS I 46 18 39.1 22 47.8 5 10.9 1 2.2 0.002
CCS II 109 30 27.5 49 44.9 22 20.3 8 7.3 0.190
CCS III 205 33 16.1 101 49.3 52 25.4 19 9.2 0.182
CCS IV 59 5 8.5 25 42.4 20 33.8 9 15.3 0.009
HA 245 58 23.7 121 49.3 45 18.4 21 8.6 0.015
AF 149 38 25.5 77 51.7 27 18.1 7 4.7 0.010
DM 127 20 15.7 64 50.4 34 26.8 9 7.1 0.277
CKD 25 3 12.0 12 48.0 8 32.0 2 8.0 0.628
STR/TIA 35 8 22.9 14 40.0 11 31.4 2 5.7 0.551
COPD 20 4 20.0 10 50 4 20.0 2 10 0.709
IMR 397 A
IMR ++ 74 19 25.7 32 43.2 16 21.6 7 9.5 0.700
IMR +++ 232 45 19.4 110 47.4 59 25.4 18 7.8 0.577
IMR ++++ 91 19 20.9 42 46.1 20 22.0 10 11.0 0.844
LV (mm) 381 A
40–55 124 43 34.7 61 49.2 15 12.1 5 4.0 <0.001
56–60 90 15 16.7 41 45.6 24 266 10 11.1 0.749
61–65 95 10 10.5 47 49.5 32 33.7 6 6.3 0.019
>65 72 6 8.3 28 38.9 25 34.7 13 18.1 <0.001
LA (mm) 396 A
<41 51 10 19.6 25 49.0 11 21.6 5 9.8 0.956
41–46 148 25 16.9 71 47.9 38 25.7 14 9.5 0.539
47–51 105 27 25.7 43 40.9 29 27.7 6 5.7 0.169
>51 92 20 21.7 45 48.9 17 18.5 10 10.9 0.514
MVP 342 55 16.1 164 47.9 94 27.5 29 8.5 <0.001
MVR 77 31 40.3 33 42.8 5 6.5 8 10.4 <0.001
MVP/MVR TVP 118 26 22.0 55 46.6 29 24.7 8 6.7 0.793
Number of CABG (avg.) 2.8 2.3 2.9 3.1 2.5 <0.001
CPB [minutes] (avg.) 89.7 84.1 90.9 88.0 96.7 0.009
ACC [minutes] (avg.) 63.0 60.0 64.1 61.4 66.6 0.007

Legend: HA—arterial hypertension; DM—diabetes mellitus; IMR—ischemic mitral regurgitation; ACC—aortic cross-clamping; CPB—cardiopulmonary bypass; EF—ejection fraction; TIA—transient ischemic attack; NYHA—New York Heart Association; CCS—Canadian Cardiovascular Society; COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; p—statistical significance. A—Number of results available from the entire study group of 421 patients; B—Percentage of results consistent with the size of subgroup A treated as 100%.

Table 4 presents an analysis of preoperative and intraoperative demographic data in relation to left ventricular size. Statistically significant associations were found with sex (p < 0.001); atrial fibrillation (p = 0.008); ejection fraction group above 50% (p < 0.001), 21–30 (p < 0.001), and below 21% (p < 0.006); type of valve surgery —MVP (p < 0.001) and MVR (p < 0.001); number of coronary artery bypass grafts performed (p = 0.018); and left atrial group below 41 mm (p < 0.001), 41–46 mm (p = 0.001), and above 51 mm (p < 0.001).

Table 4.

Assessment of selected parameters in relation to left ventricle size.

TOTAL LV
40–55 mm
LV
56–60 mm
LV
61–65 mm
LV
>65 mm
p
n % B n % B n % B n % B
Total 381 A 124 32.5 90 23.7 95 24.9 72 18.9
Women 125 71 56.8 28 22.4 20 16 6 4.8 <0.001
Men 256 53 20.7 62 24.2 75 29.3 66 25.8 <0.001
NYNA I 87 23 26.4 28 32.2 24 27.6 12 13.8 0.083
NYHA II 96 34 35.5 20 20.8 20 20.8 22 22.9 0.439
NYHA III 168 59 35.2 35 20.8 40 23.8 34 20.2 0.564
NYHA IV 30 8 26.7 7 23.3 11 36.7 4 13.3 0.444
CCS I 43 19 44.2 8 18.6 7 16.3 9 20.9 0.251
CCS II 98 33 33.7 22 22.4 26 26.6 17 17.3 0.934
CCS III 192 55 28.6 50 26.0 48 25.0 39 20.4 0.365
CCS IV 48 17 35.4 10 20.8 14 29.2 7 14.6 0.739
HA 226 79 34.9 53 23.5 51 22.6 43 19.0 0.522
AF 138 56 40.6 29 21.0 23 16.7 30 21.7 0.008
DM 115 36 31.4 32 27.8 31 26.9 16 13.9 0.290
CKD 22 4 18.2 8 36.4 3 13.6 7 31.8 0.099
STR/TIA 32 11 34.4 8 25.0 7 21.9 6 18.7 0.926
COPD 16 4 25.0 8 50.0 1 6.3 3 18.7 0.644
IMR 365 A
IMR ++ 70 24 34.3 16 22.8 20 28.6 10 14.3 0.712
IMR +++ 210 70 33.3 56 26.7 49 23.3 35 16.7 0.280
IMR ++++ 85 23 27.1 15 17.6 24 28.2 23 27.1 0.066
EF (%) 381 A
>50 74 43 58.1 15 20.3 8 10.8 8 10.8 <0.001
50–31 177 61 34.5 41 23.2 47 26.6 28 15.7 0.492
21–30 96 15 15.6 24 25.0 32 33.3 25 26.1 <0.001
<21 34 5 14.7 10 29.5 6 17.6 13 38.2 0.006
LA (mm) 379 A
<41 49 29 59.2 8 16.3 9 18.4 3 6.1 <0.001
41–46 141 49 34.8 36 25.5 44 31.2 12 8.5 0.001
47–51 101 26 25.7 29 28.7 25 24.8 21 20.8 0.274
>51 88 20 22.7 17 19.3 17 19.3 34 38.7 <0.001
MVP 313 89 28.4 81 25.9 87 27.8 56 17.9 <0.001
MVR 68 35 51.5 9 13.2 8 11.8 16 23.5 <0.001
MVP/MVR TVP 111 37 33.3 23 20.7 29 26.1 22 19.9 0.862
Number of CABG (avg.) 2.8 2.6 3.1 2.9 2.8 0.018
CPB [minutes] (avg.) 89.6 87.9 86.6 88.0 98.7 0.221
ACC [minutes] (avg.) 63.6 63.8 63.0 62.1 65.9 0.688

Legend: HA–arterial hypertension; DM—diabetes mellitus; IMR—ischemic mitral regurgitation; ACC—aortic cross-clamping; CPB—cardiopulmonary bypass; EF—ejection fraction; TIA—transient ischemic attack; NYHA—New York Heart Association; CCS—Canadian Cardiovascular Society; COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; p—statistical significance. A—Number of results available from the entire study group of 421 patients; B—Percentage of results consistent with the size of subgroup A treated as 100%.

Table 5 presents an analysis of preoperative and intraoperative demographic data in relation to left atrial size. Statistically significant associations were found with sex (p = 0.005), NYHA class I (p < 0.001) and III (p < 0.001), CCS class I (p = 0.002) and IV (p = 0.003), atrial fibrillation (p < 0.001), type of valve surgery (p < 0.001), number of coronary artery bypass grafts performed (p = 0.006), cardiopulmonary bypass time (p < 0.001), and left ventricular sizes 40–50 mm (p < 0.001) and above 65 mm (p < 0.001).

Table 5.

Assessment of selected parameters in relation to left atrial size.

TOTAL LA
<41 mm
LA
41–46 mm
LA
47–51 mm
LA
>51 mm
p
n % B n % B n % B n % B
Total 396 A 51 12.9 148 37.4 105 26.5 92 23.2
Women 138 24 17.4 62 44.9 27 19.6 25 18.1 0.005
Men 258 27 10.5 86 33.4 78 30.2 67 25.9 0.005
NYNA I 90 13 14.4 46 51.2 25 27.7 6 6.7 <0.001
NYHA II 99 17 17.1 36 36.4 29 29.3 17 17.2 0.222
NYHA III 175 18 10.4 53 30.3 44 25.1 60 34.2 <0.001
NYHA IV 32 3 9.4 13 40.6 7 21.9 9 28.1 0.794
CCS I 44 1 2.3 10 22.7 15 34.1 18 40.9 0.002
CCS II 105 15 14.3 33 31.4 31 29.5 26 24.8 0.531
CCS III 198 25 12.6 80 40.4 47 23.7 46 23.3 0.543
CCS IV 49 10 20.4 25 51.0 12 24.5 2 4.1 0.003
HA 235 29 12.3 88 37.5 64 27.3 54 22.9 0.967
AF 146 4 2.7 34 23.3 42 28.8 66 45.2 <0.001
DM 119 16 13.4 50 42.1 27 22.7 26 21.8 0.551
CKD 22 0 0.0 9 40.9 9 40.9 4 18.2 0.166
STR/TIA 33 5 15.2 9 27.3 7 21.2 12 36.3 0.381
COPD 19 0 0.0 6 31.6 5 26.3 8 42.1 0.184
IMR 380 A
IMR ++ 69 11 15.9 28 40.6 16 23.2 14 20.3 0.612
IMR +++ 223 30 13.5 84 37.7 61 27.6 48 21.5 0.626
IMR ++++ 88 8 9.1 27 30.7 24 27.3 29 32.9 0.099
EF (%) 392 A
>50 82 10 12.2 25 30.5 27 32.9 20 24.4 0.389
50–31 180 24 13.3 71 39.4 40 22.3 45 25.0 0.621
21–30 95 11 11.6 38 40.0 29 30.5 17 17.9 0.443
<21 35 5 14.3 14 40.0 6 17.1 10 28.6 0.599
LV (mm) 378 A
40–55 123 28 22.8 49 39.8 26 21.1 20 16.3 <0.001
56–60 90 8 8.9 36 40.0 29 32.2 17 18.9 0.254
61–65 95 9 9.5 44 46.3 25 26.3 17 17.9 0.135
>65 70 3 4.3 12 17.1 21 30.0 34 48.6 <0.001
MVP 323 48 14.9 129 39.9 88 27.3 58 17.9 <0.001
MVR 73 3 4.1 19 26.0 17 23.3 34 46.6 <0.001
MVP/MVR TVP 116 5 4.3 27 23.3 39 33.6 45 38.8 <0.001
Number of CABG (avg.) 2.8 3.1 2.9 2.7 2.5 0.006
CPB [minutes] (avg.) 89.3 85.3 86.4 89.0 96.7 <0.001
ACC [minutes] (avg.) 63.3 62.9 61.5 63.2 66.6 0.221

Legend: HA—arterial hypertension; DM—diabetes mellitus; IMR—ischemic mitral regurgitation; ACC—aortic cross-clamping; CPB—cardiopulmonary bypass; EF—ejection fraction; TIA—transient ischemic attack; NYHA—New York Heart Association; CCS—Canadian Cardiovascular Society; COPD—chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; p—statistical significance. A—Number of results available from the entire study group of 421 patients; B—Percentage of results consistent with the size of subgroup A treated as 100%.

The logistic regression analysis did not show any statistically significant relationship between an enlarged left atrium and the occurrence of postoperative complications. The results are presented in Table 6.

Table 6.

Assessment of the relationship between enlarged left atrium and the occurrence of postoperative complications.

LA > 40 mm
Model I Model II
p OR Cl −95% Cl +95% p OR Cl −95% Cl +95%
Cardiac arrest 0.720 1.475 0.176 12.375 0.534 1.994 0.227 17.513
Ventricular fibrillation 0.967 0.954 0.101 9.035 0.884 0.838 0.078 9.015
Paroxysm of atrial fibrillation 0.827 0.917 0.422 1.994 0.753 0.882 0.404 1.927
Bradycardia 0.451 2.225 0.278 17.810 0.275 3.240 0.393 26.734
Low cardiac output syndrome 0.637 0.777 0.273 2.214 0.861 0.910 0.316 2.617
Intra-aortic balloon pump 0.863 0.869 0.177 4.274 0.497 1.717 0.361 8.163
Delirium syndrome 0.522 0.726 0.273 1.935 0.284 0.569 0.203 1.595
Stroke 0.641 0.680 0.135 3.439 0.614 0.665 0.136 3.242
Reoperation due to bleeding 0.187 2.708 0.617 11.891 0.161 2.877 0.657 12.603
Early mortality 0.730 1.220 0.395 3.769 0.513 1.466 0.466 4.615
Late mortality 0.374 1.654 0.546 5.012 0.294 1.829 0.592 5.649

Legend: OR—odds ratio; Cl—confidence interval; p—statistical significance. Notes: Model I: univariate logistic regression. Model II: multivariate regression adjusted by age, comorbidities, NYHA class, CCS class.

The logistic regression analysis did not show any statistically significant associations between significant and severe regurgitant flow into the left atrium and the occurrence of postoperative complications. The results are presented in Table 7.

Table 7.

Assessment of the relationship between significant and severe regurgitant flow into the left atrium and the occurrence of postoperative complications.

Grade 3+ i 4+
Model I Model II
p OR Cl −95% Cl +95% p OR Cl −95% Cl +95%
Cardiac arrest 0.865 1.143 0.245 5.329 0.953 1.051 0.205 5.390
Paroxysm of atrial fibrillation 0.843 0.935 0.480 1.820 0.666 0.858 0.429 1.718
Bradycardia 0.254 3.286 0.425 25.393 0.246 3.394 0.430 26.759
Low cardiac output syndrome 0.554 0.789 0.359 1.732 0.578 0.789 0.343 1.815
Intra-aortic balloon pump 0.752 1.225 0.348 4.320 0.617 1.392 0.381 5.086
Delirium syndrome 0.823 1.110 0.444 2.780 0.801 1.132 0.432 2.963
Stroke 0.332 0.556 0.169 1.823 0.284 0.506 0.146 1.759
Reoperation due to bleeding 0.761 1.153 0.461 2.879 0.810 1.122 0.438 2.878
Early mortality 0.455 1.412 0.572 3.485 0.449 1.443 0.559 3.728
Late mortality 0.282 0.669 0.322 1.392 0.162 0.588 0.280 1.238

Legend: OR—odds ratio; Cl—confidence interval; p—statistical significance. Notes: Model I: univariate logistic regression. Model II: multivariate regression adjusted by age, comorbidities, NYHA class, CCS class.

Table 8 presents age, EuroSCORE II, and postoperative ejection fraction depending on the preoperative ejection fraction. The analysis showed significant differences between the groups based on preoperative ejection fraction and EuroSCORE II (p < 0.001), postoperative EF (p < 0.001), and delta EF (p < 0.001).

Table 8.

Postoperative changes in EF based on baseline ejection fraction.

Preoperative EF p
EF ≤ 20%
(n = 37)
EF 21–30% (n = 99) EF 31–50% (n = 197) EF > 50% (n = 86)
M ±SD M ±SD M ±SD M ±SD
Age [years] 63.5 7.2 65.4 7.9 65.8 7.3 66.3 7.9 0.246
EuroScore II [%] 15.4 13.7 13.6 12.9 8.7 7.4 6.0 5.0 <0.001
Postoperative EF [%] 24.2 10.5 30.6 8.3 41.1 9.8 53.3 6.7 <0.001
Delta EF [%] 4.7 10.9 1.9 8.5 0.0 8.8 −5.9 7.8 <0.001

Legend: EF—ejection fraction; p—statistical significance; M–mean; SD–standard deviation.

The association between the occurrence of complications and early mortality was assessed using logistic regression. Multivariate regression (adjusted for age, comorbidities, NYHA class, and CCS class) demonstrated an association between mortality and cardiac arrest (OR = 16.348, p < 0.001), ventricular fibrillation (OR = 27.725 p = 0.003), bradycardia (OR = 3.031, p = 0.050), low cardiac output syndrome (OR = 14.235, p < 0.001), intra-aortic balloon pump (OR = 31.022, p < 0.001), and reoperation (OR = 3.169, p = 0.011).

6. Discussion

The mean age of the study group was 65.7 years. It was demonstrated that age above 65 years significantly increased early mortality (p < 0.001). This relationship was not observed in the analysis of late mortality; however, the mean follow-up duration for patients over 65 years was 7 months shorter. This suggests that age alone may not be the sole determinant of mortality in surgical treatment of IMR.

Men accounted for nearly two-thirds of the study group. Notably, women represented 34.9% of the cohort, a proportion that significantly exceeds the 15% in the STICH trial [14]. A larger female population is associated with a cumulative higher risk of surgery. This is because women are burdened with a higher risk of surgery expressed on the EuroScore II scale.

The analysis of echocardiographic data revealed that left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and left ventricular size were the primary factors contributing to lower mortality in women. Extremely low EF (<21%) was observed in 8.8% of men and only 2.1% of women. Severe left ventricular dilation (>65 mm) occurred in 25.8% of men and 4.8% of women. The lower prevalence of women in these extreme groups may explain the observed differences in both early and late outcomes. The assessment of EF is highly subjective. Therefore, comparing populations in terms of EF seems to be difficult. Nevertheless, the large population of patients with extremely low EF indicates the experience of the center.

The subjective severity of symptoms assessed using NYHA and CCS scales correlated with an increased early mortality only in patients classified as grade IV.

In the study group, the majority (47%) had mildly impaired left ventricular function, reflected in a reduced EF. Among the study population, 20.5% had no myocardial contractility dysfunction, with a mean EF of 59.3%. Patients at particular risk were those with an EF below 30%, constituting 32.5% of the operated group. Across the entire study group, the mean EF was 39.7%. Although this indicates moderate ventricular dysfunction, it is lower than the EF reported in other studies [15,16,17].

The data presented highlight significant EF changes after combined mitral valve and CABG surgery. The only group experiencing a postoperative EF decline comprised patients with initially good left ventricular function. Patients with low (+8.58%) and very low (+4.74%) preoperative EF demonstrated the greatest improvement. This finding suggests that patients with low EF benefit most from surgery.

No statistically significant differences in postoperative complications were found based on EF. However, low EF predisposed patients to severe complications, such as low cardiac output syndrome. Patients with a low preoperative EF were also more likely to require circulatory support using intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (14.8% vs. 6.9%). Severe postoperative complications and an impaired left ventricular contractility directly influenced early mortality outcomes, which were significantly lower (2.3%) among patients with normal myocardial contractility. This correlation was not observed in late mortality. Although patients with extremely low EF experienced higher late mortality, the difference compared to those with an EF above 50% was not statistically significant. This indicates that while cardiac function impacts perioperative mortality, its influence on late outcomes diminishes. These results align with findings from other authors [3,10].

The severity of regurgitation did not correlate with the incidence of postoperative complications. The small number of complications in the study group may have affected this assessment. While low EF directly influenced 30-day mortality, no such association was observed with regurgitation severity. Mortality rates of 8.1% for grade 2+ regurgitation and 9.9% for grade 4+ regurgitation showed no significant statistical differences and did not exceed the operational risk estimated by EuroScore II for these groups (10.4%). In the largest group, comprising 234 patients with significant grade 3+ regurgitation, mortality exceeded the estimated operational risk (11.5%) but did not show statistically significant differences compared to other groups. Higher early mortality in this group suggests the need for a larger-scale analysis of patients with moderate and severe regurgitation. Deja’s study also found no effect of regurgitation severity on early mortality [14]. Despite the group sizes, the results in my study correspond to those of a multicenter population.

Extending the analysis of regurgitation severity on early and late complications, multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed a significantly higher odds ratio for postoperative bradycardia in patients with moderate to severe regurgitation (OR = 3.286). Patients with severe mitral regurgitation demonstrated an increased likelihood of early mortality (OR = 1.412). However, no direct relationship was documented between regurgitation severity and late mortality.

Referencing the STICH trial, it is suspected that preoperative regurgitation severity may not significantly influence late mortality [14]. Deja identified significant differences between groups with absent or mild regurgitation and those with moderate to severe regurgitation. However, differences in late mortality between patients with grade 2+ and 3+ regurgitation were not significant (44% vs. 50%). In a 6-year follow-up, Deja observed an increased mortality risk with grade 2+ (OR = 1.54) and grade 3+ regurgitation (OR = 2.01). The odds ratios for late mortality in this study are notably higher. In our study, cumulative mortality (early and late) in patients with grade 2+ regurgitation was 24% over a 6.25-year follow-up. Interestingly, mortality decreased with increasing regurgitation severity: 22.6% for grade 3+ and 19.8% for grade 4+ over slightly shorter follow-up periods (5.9 years). More detailed data analysis and differentiation of patient groups according to EF make comparison difficult. Despite this, the trend in the results in both studies is similar.

Comorbidities such as hypertension, stroke, and chronic kidney disease increased early mortality risk. Acute kidney failure or the exacerbation of chronic kidney disease, defined as a 30% rise in baseline creatinine levels, heightened 30-day mortality. Among these comorbidities, only hypertension and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) significantly influenced late mortality. This may be due to the complex effects of persistently high blood pressure or small subgroup sizes in long-term observations of patients with chronic kidney disease and stroke. Noteworthy is the annual mortality in late follow-up observations. Among patients with COPD, stroke, and chronic kidney disease, annual mortality was approximately 6%, double that of other analyzed comorbidities.

No effect of ischemic mitral regurgitation severity on early outcomes was demonstrated. Neither regurgitant flow into the left atrium nor its size influenced early complications or 30-day mortality. However, reduced left ventricular EF significantly impacted early mortality. The difference in early mortality between patients with severely reduced EF (<21%) and those with normal EF (>50%) was nearly fivefold. Early mortality of 10.8% among patients with extreme left ventricular dysfunction correlated with the frequency of sudden cardiac arrest in this group. This suggests that sudden cardiac arrest was a direct cause of death.

The in-depth early mortality analysis utilized logistic regression (Table 9). Sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, low cardiac output syndrome, and intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation were associated with significantly higher mortality and were often direct causes of death. Postoperative ventricular fibrillation increased the risk of death by over 48 times (OR = 27.725). Bradycardia, another rhythm disturbance, also significantly impacted mortality, with an early mortality risk ratio of 3.031.

Table 9.

Assessment of the relationship between early mortality and selected complications.

Early Mortality
Model I Model II
p OR Cl −95% Cl +95% p OR Cl −95% Cl +95%
Cardiac arrest <0.001 18.186 6.230 53.091 <0.001 16.348 5.634 49.287
Ventricular fibrillation <0.001 48.205 5.492 423.142 0.003 27.725 3.040 271.410
Paroxysm of atrial fibrillation 0.290 0.593 0.225 1.561 0.415 0.662 0.246 1.785
Bradycardia 0.038 3.094 1.067 8.972 0.050 3.031 1.001 9.180
Low cardiac output syndrome <0.001 13.429 6.525 27.638 <0.001 14.235 6.631 30.556
Intra-aortic balloon pump <0.001 42.514 14.508 124.585 <0.001 31.022 9.530 100.983
Stroke 0.635 1.448 0.313 6.693 0.195 2.902 0.578 14.565
Reoperation due to bleeding 0.014 2.772 1.224 6.277 0.011 3.169 1.308 7.676

Legend: OR—odds ratio; Cl—confidence interval; p—statistical significance. Notes: Model I: univariate logistic regression. Model II: multivariate regression adjusted by age, comorbidities, NYHA class, CCS class.

Another notable finding is the mortality among patients requiring reoperation for excessive bleeding. Reopening the chest tripled the risk of death (OR = 3.169). Knapik’s study similarly demonstrated that mediastinal revision significantly increases in-hospital mortality, with operational risk scales underestimating this risk [18]. However, Knapik’s study focused on isolated CABG procedures performed on cardiopulmonary bypass, which inherently carries a lower risk of postoperative bleeding.

The long-term follow-up revealed higher survival rates among patients with normal left atrial dimensions. Differences favoring smaller atrial size became evident after 60 months post-surgery. In the first three years of observation, mortality was markedly lower in patients with mildly enlarged left atria. A detailed analysis dividing patients by the degree of atrial enlargement revealed no statistically significant differences in long-term survival but a clear trend toward lower mortality in patients with normal or mildly enlarged atria. Cardiovascular complications, particularly thromboembolic events, may play a significant role in patients with markedly enlarged left atria.

Long-term survival analysis showed significantly higher survival rates among patients with normal left ventricular EF compared to those with severely reduced EF. The highest mortality was observed in patients with an EF below 21% during the first 20 months of follow-up. Differences in late survival among other EF groups became apparent only after more than 60 months of follow-up.

Left ventricular EF is widely regarded as one of the strongest prognostic factors for early and late mortality. Based on CHARM (Candesartan in Heart failure: Assessment of Reduction in Mortality and morbidity) program results, an EF up to 45% significantly impacts late mortality [19]. Findings from this study support this hypothesis. The CHARM program demonstrated the increased risks of myocardial infarction and ischemic stroke in patients with an EF below 45%. The study showed that each 10% decrease in EF increased mortality risk by 39% [19]. In this study, combining risk factors such as reduced EF and risks associated with chronic use of antiplatelet agents and vitamin K antagonists (VKA) may decisively affect survival in patients undergoing CABG and simultaneous mitral valve surgery.

The late mortality analysis by ischemic mitral regurgitation severity yielded results differing from the STICH trial. No significant differences in survival were observed up to 40 months postoperatively. Further analysis revealed that patients with severe and moderate regurgitation derive the greatest benefit from surgery. After three years, a clear trend favoring surgery qualification for patients with grade 3+ and 4+ regurgitation emerged. A prospective study evaluating valve function and coronary graft performance is necessary for detailed conclusions.

Discrepancies in long-term survival became evident after approximately 60 months, both in analyses by EF, atrial size, and regurgitation severity. This suggests the presence of other factors significantly influencing mortality. Cardiological control in the late postoperative period was most often performed outside our center. Therefore, there is no data on the drugs used, new diseases, and other factors that could affect the long-term results of the surgery.

Our study has several important limitations that should be considered when interpreting the results. First, the analysis was performed retrospectively and is based on data from a single center, which may limit the generalizability of the results to other populations. Second, although the EuroSCORE II is a widely used tool for assessing perioperative risk in cardiac surgery, its calibration and predictive validity have not been formally verified in our study population.

7. Conclusions

  1. The degree of regurgitant flow into the LA did not significantly impact early or late outcomes of combined surgical treatment for IMR. Similarly, no effect of preoperative LA or LV size on these outcomes was observed.

  2. Among the parameters measured in preoperative echocardiographic examinations, a reduced EF was associated with higher late mortality.

  3. The cumulative annual risk of death in patients undergoing surgical treatment for IMR during long-term follow-up was lower than the annual mortality rates for CAD and IMR reported in the literature.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: J.P., P.W. and A.S.; data curation: P.W. and A.S.; formal analysis: P.W. and A.S.; investigation: M.B. and J.P.; methodology: P.W. and A.S.; project administration: M.B. and J.P.; resources: P.W., M.B. and A.S.; validation: J.P.; writing—original draft: P.W., M.B., A.S. and J.P.; writing—review and editing: P.W., M.B., A.S. and J.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted following the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Bioethical Committee of the Pomeranian Medical University (decision no. KB-0012/351/09/16 dated 29 September 2016).

Informed Consent Statement

Due to the study’s retrospective nature, informed consent was not required.

Data Availability Statement

The data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

This research received no external funding.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

References

  • 1.Siminiak T., Kuzemczak M. Przewlekła niedokrwienna niedomykalność zastawki mitralnej. Część I: Epidemiologia, patogeneza, diagnostyka. Kardiol. Polska. 2011;69:67–72. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Unger P., Magne J., Dedobbeleer C., Lancellotti P. Ischemic mitral regurgitation: Not only a bystander. Curr. Cardiol. Rep. 2012;14:180–189. doi: 10.1007/s11886-011-0241-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Sasmazel A., Fedakar A., Baysal A., Büyükbayrak F., Karaahmet T., Findik O., Bugra O., Erdem H., Zeybek R. The impact of preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction on short- and mid-term outcomes in ischemic mitral valve repair. Kardiol. Polska. 2010;68:1226–1232. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Mustonen J., Suurmunne H., Kouri J., Pitkänen O., Hakala T. Impact of coronary artery bypass surgery on ischemic mitral regurgitation. Scand. J. Surg. 2011;100:114–119. doi: 10.1177/145749691110000209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Mittal A.K., Langston M.A., Jr., Cohn K.E., Selzer A., Kerth W.J. Combined papillary muscle and left ventricular wall dysfunction as a cause of mitral regurgitation: An experimental study. Circulation. 1971;44:174–180. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.44.2.174. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bax J.J., Braun J., Somer S.T., Klautz R., Holman E.R., Versteegh M.I., Boersma E., Schalij M.J., Van Der Wall E.E., Dion R.A. Restrictive annuloplasty and coronary revascularization in ischemic mitral regurgitation: Results in reverse left ventricular remodeling. Circulation. 2004;110:103–108. doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000138196.06772.4e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Enriquez-Sarano M. Timing of mitral valve surgery. Heart. 2002;87:79–85. doi: 10.1136/heart.87.1.79. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Tcheng J.E., Jackman J.D., Jr., Nelson C.L., Gardner L.H., Smith L.R., Rankin J.S., Califf R.M., Stack R.S. Outcome of patients sustaining acute ischemic mitral regurgitation during myocardial infarction. Ann. Intern. Med. 1992;117:18–24. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-117-1-18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Mihaljevic T., Lam B.K., Rajeswaran J., Takagaki M., Lauer M.S., Gillinov A.M., Blackstone E.H., Lytle B.W. Impact of mitral valve annuloplasty combined with revascularization in patients with functional mitral regurgitation. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007;49:2191–2201. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.043. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Jeong D.S., Lee H.Y., Kim W.S., Sung K., Jun T.G., Yang J.H., Park P.W., Lee Y.T. Using a vascular strip for ischemic mitral regurgitation: Ten years of experience at a single center. J. Korean Med. Sci. 2011;26:1582–1590. doi: 10.3346/jkms.2011.26.12.1582. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Jouan J., Tapia M., Cook R.C., Lansac E., Acar C. Ischemic mitral valve prolapse: Mechanisms and implications for valve repair. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2004;26:1112–1117. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2004.07.049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Trichon B.H., Felker G.M., Shaw L.K., Cabell C.H., O’Connor C.M. Relation of frequency and severity of mitral regurgitation to survival among patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure. Am. J. Cardiol. 2003;91:538–543. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9149(02)03301-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Levine R., Schwammenthal E. Ischemic mitral regurgitation on the threshold of a solution: From paradoxes to unifying concepts. Circulation. 2005;112:745–758. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.104.486720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Deja M.A., Grayburn P.A., Sun B., Rao V., She L., Krejca M., Jain A.R., Leng Chua Y., Daly R., Senni M., et al. Influence of mitral regurgitation repair on survival in the surgical treatment for ischemic heart failure trial. Circulation. 2012;125:2639–2648. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.072256. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tsang T.S., Abhayaratna W.P., Barnes M.E., Miyasaka Y., Gersh B.J., Bailey K.R., Cha S.S., Seward J.B. Prediction of cardiovascular outcomes with left atrial size: Is volume superior to area or diameter? J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2006;47:1018–1023. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2005.08.077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Yang L.T., Liu Y.W., Shih J.Y., Li Y.H., Tsai L.M., Luo C.Y., Tsai W.C. Predictive value of left atrial deformation on prognosis in severe primary mitral regurgitation. J. Am. Soc. Echocardiogr. 2015;28:1309–1317. doi: 10.1016/j.echo.2015.07.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Naser N., Dzubur A., Kusljugic Z. Echocardiographic assessment of ischemic mitral regurgitation: Mechanism, severity, impact on treatment strategy, and long-term outcome. Acta Inform. Med. 2016;24:172–177. doi: 10.5455/aim.2016.24.172-177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Knapik P., Cieśla D., Saucha W., Knapik M., Zembala M.O., Przybyłowski P., Kapelak B., Kuśmierczyk M., Jasiński M., Tobota Z., et al. Outcome prediction after coronary surgery and redo surgery for bleeding (from the KROK Registry) J. Cardiothorac. Vasc. Anesth. 2019;33:2930–2937. doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2019.04.028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Solomon S.D., Anavekar N., Skali H., McMurray J.J., Swedberg K., Yusuf S., Granger C.B., Michelson E.L., Wang D., Pocock S., et al. Influence of ejection fraction on cardiovascular outcomes in a broad spectrum of heart failure patients. Circulation. 2005;112:3738–3744. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.561423. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


Articles from Journal of Clinical Medicine are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES