English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A best evidence topic was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether patients undergoing coronary bypass grafting and mitral intervention for moderate to severe ischaemic mitral regurgitation are best treated with mitral repair or replacement. Five hundred and fifty papers were found using the reported search. Based on the 14 non-randomised studies judged to represent best evidence, we concluded that whilst there is some evidence that the operative mortality may be less following mitral valve repair, long-term data are equivocal. Even with contemporary techniques, recurrent mitral regurgitation is not uncommon following repair. Replacement was more frequently performed for patients with greater co-morbidity. Whilst two studies attempted to control for this using propensity analysis, in the majority of studies this introduced considerable bias. No data was available on long-term functional outcomes and quality of life. As there is currently insufficient evidence to inform clinical practice, a randomised trial is warranted in this important area.

In patients undergoing mitral surgery for ischaemic mitral regurgitation is it preferable to repair or replace the mitral valve?