Home > Journals > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery > Past Issues > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 August;63(4) > The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 August;63(4):529-35

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

Publishing options
eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as
Share

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE  CARDIAC SECTION 

The Journal of Cardiovascular Surgery 2022 August;63(4):529-35

DOI: 10.23736/S0021-9509.22.11874-4

Copyright © 2022 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Physio and Physio II rings: beyond the annular physiology

Abubakari I. SIDIKI 1 , Anastasia A. AKULOVA 1, Marina H. HUSSEIN 1, Malik K. AL-ARIKI 2, Vladislav V. DONSOV 3, Mikhail A. ILUHIN 4, Andrei A. LIMESHKIN 4, Vadim A. ANANKO 4

1 Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, People’s Friendship University of Russia (RUDN-University), Moscow, Russia; 2 Department of Surgery, People’s Friendship University of Russia (RUDN-University), Moscow, Russia; 3 Department of Cardiac Surgery, M.F. Vladimirskiy Moscow Regional Research and Clinical Institute, Moscow, Russia; 4 Cardiovascular Center, FSBI 3 Central Vishnevsky Hospital, Moscow, Russia



BACKGROUND: Engineering of the Carpentier-Edwards Physio (PR-I) and Physio II (PR-II) rings (Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA) combines flexibility with remodeling. PR-II is considered an improvement of PR-I, as it boasts of an improved shape, a double saddle, and a sewing cuff that reduces tension on sutures. Beyond the superior effect of the PR-II on the annular physiology, it has not been proven to be clinically better than the PR-I. This study compares the long-term clinical outcomes of MV repair for degenerative disease with these rings.
METHODS: From 2004 to 2020, MV repair with Physio ring annuloplasty (group PR-I) was performed in 231 patients, and with Physio-II ring annuloplasty (group PR-II) in 255 patients. A propensity score-matching analysis was used to pair 104 in each group. Primary outcome was recurrent MR≥3 and secondary outcomes were long-term survival, cardiac death, and MV-related events (MVREs). The 15-year follow-up data were complete in 97.3% of patients.
RESULTS: There were no differences in 15-year freedom from recurrent MR (P=0.721), survival and cardiac death between the matched groups (P=0.693 and P=0.135, respectively). MVREs, including cardiac death, pacemaker implantation, thromboembolism, bleeding, and reoperation were also similar between the matched groups (P=0.603). However, 5-year recurrent MR was significantly higher in PR-I than in PR-II (P=0.010). Multivariate analysis showed Barlow’s disease and preoperative MR≥3 as risk factors for late MR recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: Type of annuloplasty rings did not influence long-term clinical outcomes. Better annular dynamics seen in PR-II annuloplasty does not translate into superior freedom from recurrent MR.


KEY WORDS: Mitral valve; Mitral valve annuloplasty; Cardiovascular system

top of page