Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Uncorrected severe mitral regurgitation (MR) due to posterior prolapse leads to left ventricular dilatation. At this stage, mitral valve repair becomes mandatory to avoid permanent myocardial injury. However, which technique among neochoardae implantation and leaflet resection provides the best results in this scenario remains unknown. METHODS: We selected 332 patients with left ventricular dilatation and severe degenerative MR due to posterior leaflet (PL) prolapse who underwent neochoardae implantation (85 patients) or PL resection (247 patients) at our institution between 2008 and 2020. A propensity score matching analysis was carried on to decrease the differences at baseline. RESULTS: Matching yielded 85 neochordae implantations and 85 PL resections. At 10 years, freedom from cardiac death and freedom from mitral valve reoperation were 92.6 ± 6.1% vs 97.8 ± 2.1% and 97.7 ± 2.2% vs 95 ± 3% in the neochordae group and in the PL resection group, respectively. The MR ≥2+ recurrence rate was 23.9 ± 10% in the neochordae group and 20.8 ± 5.8% in the PL resection group (P = 0.834) at 10 years. At the last follow-up, the neochordae group showed a higher reduction of left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (44 vs 48 mm; P = 0.001) and a better ejection fraction (60% vs 55%; P < 0.001) compared to PL resection group. CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup of patients, both neochordae implantation and leaflet resection provide excellent durability of the repair in the long term. Neochordae implantation might have a better effect on dilated left ventricle.