Comparative efficacy and safety of mitral valve repair versus mitral valve replacement in Rheumatic heart disease: A high-value care systematic review and meta-analysis

Rheumatic Heart Disease (RHD) remains a leading cause of cardiovascular death (CVD) globally. Mitral Valve repair (MVP) and mitral valve replacement (MVR) are the two most commonly and successfully used techniques to treat the disease. MVP is associated with reduced post-operative complications compared to MVR; however, it carries the risk of valvular fibrosis and scarring. Given the lack of recommendations, inconsistent findings, and paucity of pathophysiological evidence at present, we aimed to conduct a meta-analysis and systematically review the available literature to determine the efficacy and safety of MVP compared to MVR in improving clinical outcomes among patients with RHD. A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, Cochrane Central, Google Scholar was conducted from its inception up until September 2023. The primary objective was early mortality defined as any cause-related death occurring 30 days following surgery. Secondary outcomes included long-term survival was referred to as the period of time between discharge and death from any cause. Infectious endocarditis, thromboembolic events (including stroke, brain infarction, peripheral embolism, valve thrombosis, and transient ischemic attack), and haemorrhagic events (any serious bleeding event that required hospitalisation, resulted in death, resulted in permanent injury, or required blood transfusion) were all considered as post- operative complications. Additionally aggregated Kaplan-Meier curves were reconstructed for long term survival, freedom from reoperation, and freedom from valve-related adverse events by merging the reconstructed individual patient data (IPD) from each individual study. A significant decrease in early mortality with MV repair strategy versus MV replacement [RR 0.63; P = 0.003) irrespective of mechanical or bioprosthetic valves was noted. The results reported significantly higher long-term survival in patients undergoing MVP versus MVR (HR 0.53; P = 0.0009). Reconstructed Kaplan-Meier curves showed that the long term survival rates at 4, 8, and 12 years were 88.6, 82.0, 74.6%, in the MVR group and 91.7, 86.8, 81.0%, in the MVP group, respectively. MVP proved to be statistically significant in reducing early mortality, adverse vascular events, and better long-term survival outcomes compared to the MVR strategy in this analysis.