Mitral valve repair of isolated posterior leaflet prolapse: resect or respect?

A best evidence topic in cardiac surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether it is best in a patient with posterior leaflet prolapse to resect tissue from the posterior leaflet or to preserve the leaflet tissue by only adding neochordal reconstruction. Altogether, 279 papers were found using the reported search, of which 16 represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date, country of publication, patient group, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. The results of the reported studies provided interesting results. All the studies identified were retrospective. Seven papers reported their results on mitral valve (MV) repair with neochordae. These papers included study groups of 74 to 662 patients. The spanned operation dates were from 1983 to 2008. The main disease was degenerative valve disease. The authors performed MV repair using neochordae with or without a ring. The 5-year freedom rate from reoperation was from 94.3 to 98.7%, the 10-year freedom rate from reoperation was from 81.7 to 94.7%, the 15-year freedom rate from reoperation was 92%, and the 18-year freedom rate from reoperation was 90.2%. The 5-year survival rate was from 96.6 to 96.9%, the 10-year survival rate was from 88 to 89.3%, the 15-year survival rate was 84%, and the 18-year survival rate was 66.8%. Seven papers reported their results on MV repair with resection techniques. These papers included patient groups of 162 to 3074 patients. Operation dates were from 1970 to 2008. The authors performed MV repair with quadrangular resection, plus or minus a sliding annuloplasty. The 5-year freedom rate from reoperation was from 93.9 to 98%, the 10-year freedom rate from reoperation was from 93 to 98.5%, and the 20-year freedom rate from reoperation was from 88 to 96.9%. The 5-year survival rate was from 86.9 to 96%, the 10-year survival rate was from 79 to 93.5%, the 15-year survival rate was 76%, and the 20-year survival rate was from 46 to 62%. The length of follow-up in neochordal papers was shorter and there were fewer patients. The results in the resection groups seemed to derive from larger cohorts of patients and their findings had been proved over a longer period of time. The results of both techniques are comparable and excellent. The surgeons may decide on either technique based on their own experience, safe in the knowledge that both techniques have excellent reported outcomes.