Patch augmentation vs. valve replacement for patients with atrial functional mitral regurgitation and long-standing atrial fibrillation

BACKGROUND: Long-standing atrial fibrillation is associated with atrial functional mitral regurgitation (AFMR) with atriogenic tethering. We compared the outcomes of patch augmentation (PA) and valve replacement (VR) for AFMR. METHODS: We retrospectively compared the data of 16 patients who underwent PA for AFMR with the data of 15 patients who underwent VR between 2008 and 2021. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <50% were excluded. We also performed atrial plication and left appendage closure if the patients had no weak atrial wall that led to severe bleeding. RESULTS: The median age was 72.5 and 76.0 years in the PA and VR groups, respectively. The PA group had a longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (206 vs. 172 min, P=0.012). Although there were no differences in hospital morbidity and mortality between the PA and VR groups, one patient underwent reoperation for patch perforation in the PA group. The overall 3-year survival rate was 93.8% and 100% in the PA and VR groups, respectively (P=0.878). The 3-year rate of freedom from major adverse cardiac events was 75.0% and 53.6% in the PA and VR groups, respectively (P=0.181). Three and six patients were readmitted for congestive heart failure in the PA and VR groups, respectively. Two patients in the PA group developed severe recurrent regurgitation, including one patient who required reoperation. No patients in the VR group required reoperation. The postoperative left atrial volume index (LAVI) was associated with thromboembolic events (P=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: PA may achieve comparable outcomes to those of VR for AFMR. Operative procedures should be chosen based on each patient’s background. Atrial reduction could be considered to prevent thromboembolic events.