Comparative analysis of mid-term outcomes of Rigid and NeoRing support rings in mitral regurgitation surgery: a prospective randomized trial

Highlights. For the first time, as part of a prospective randomized study, a comparative assessment of the mid-term results of mitral valve annuloplasty using a new biological NeoRing ring (CJSC NeoKor, Kemerovo) and a RIGID ring (CJSC NPP MedInzh, Penza) in patients with connective tissue dysplasia was carried out. Predictors of the conversion of sinus rhythm to atrial fibrillation and residual mitral insufficiency in the medium-term follow-up period were determined.
Aim. To analysis and compare mid-term results of mitral valve annuloplasty conducted using NeoRing и RIGID rings.
Methods. From November 2019 to March 2022, 62 patients with mitral valve (MV) dysplasia underwent MV annuloplasty using NeoRing semi-rigid rings (CJSC NeoKor, Kemerovo, n = 31) and rigid RIGID rings (CJSC NPP MedInzh, Penza, n = 31). There were no differences between the groups at baseline.
Results. Two deaths were registered during inpatient treatment in the RIGID group. Both devices showed a satisfactory outcome during inpatient treatment in the form of restoration of MV function (p<0.001) and the frequency of detected maximum residual mitral regurgitation (MR) up to grade 1 in the NeoRing group 9.7% and in the RIGID group 29%, respectively, no statistically significant intergroup differences were noted (p = 0.292). After 12 months, freedom from ≥2 grade MR in the NeoRing group was 93.5% and 77.4% in the RIGID group (p = 0.147). In the RIGID group, patients had higher values of the transvalvular mitral diastolic gradient – PAV 3.70 [3.00–4.40] mm Hg vs. NeoRing group 2.3 [2.05–2.85] mmHg (p<0.001), as well as a higher transvalvular flow rate – VAV 79 [71–94] cm/sec vs. 70 [64–79] cm/sec (p = 0.017). The analysis of the achievement of composite primary endpoint (recurrence of ≥2 grade MR, MACCE, new onset arrhythmias, reoperations) by the device was carried out. The composite endpoint rate in the RIGID group was 3.067 times higher compared to the NeoRing group, odds differences were statistically significant (p = 0.037, 95% CI: 1.053–8.934).
Conclusion. The outcome of MV annuloplasty conducted using rigid and semi-rigid rings revealed no significant differences in long-term survival and recurrence of MR between groups. Given the statistically significant difference in achieving the combined endpoint, lower inpatient and long-term indicators of transmitral pressure gradient, and a positive effect on cardiac chambers reverse remodeling, it was concluded that the use of semi-rigid NeoRing rings for MV annuloplasty when performing valvepreserving operations for connective tissue dysplasia is preferable.

1. Yadgir S., Johnson C.O., Aboyans V., Adebayo O.M., Adedoyin R.A., Afarideh M., Alahdab F., Alashi A., Alipour V., Arabloo J. et al.; Global Burden of Disease Study 2017 Nonrheumatic Valve Disease Collaborators. Global, Regional, and National Burden of Calcific Aortic Valve and Degenerative Mitral Valve Diseases, 1990-2017. Circulation. 2020;141(21):1670-1680. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043391.

2. Carpentier A. F., Adams D. H., Filsoufi F., Williams M. Carpentier’s reconstructive valve surgery: from valve analysis to valve reconstruction. Missuri: Saunders Elsevier; 2010. 354 p.

3. Delling F.N., Rong J., Larson M.G., Lehman B., Fuller D., Osypiuk E., Stantchev P., Hackman B., Manning W.J., Benjamin E.J., Levine R.A., Vasan R.S. Evolution of Mitral Valve Prolapse: Insights From the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 2016;133(17):1688-95. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.115.020621.

4. Silaschi M., Chaubey S., Aldalati O., Khan H., Uzzaman M.M., Singh M., Baghai M., Deshpande R., Wendler O. Is Mitral Valve Repair Superior to Mitral Valve Replacement in Elderly Patients? Comparison of Short- and Long-Term Outcomes in a Propensity-Matched Cohort. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016;5(8):e003605. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003605.

5. Skov S.N., Røpcke D.M., Tjørnild M.J., Ilkjær C., Rasmussen J., Nygaard H., Jensen M.O., Nielsen S.L. The effect of different mitral annuloplasty rings on valve geometry and annular stress distribution†. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017 May 1;24(5):683-690. doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx004.

6. Khamooshian A., Buijsrogge M.P., de Heer F., Gründeman P.F. Mitral valve annuloplasty rings: review of literature and comparison of functional outcome and ventricular dimensions. Innovations (Phila). 2014;9(6):399-415. doi: 10.1177/155698451400900603.

7. Wan S., Lee A.P., Jin C.N., Wong R.H., Chan H.H., Ng C.S., Wan I.Y., Underwood M.J. The choice of mitral annuloplastic ring-beyond "surgeon's preference". Ann Cardiothorac Surg. 2015;4(3):261-5. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2225-319X.2015.01.05.

8. Baumgartner H., Falk V., Bax J.J., De Bonis M., Hamm C., Holm P.J., Iung B., Lancellotti P., Lansac E., Rodriguez Muñoz D., Rosenhek R., Sjögren J., Tornos Mas P., Vahanian A., Walther T., Wendler O., Windecker S., Zamorano J.L.; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(36):2739-2791. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391.

9. Lancellotti P., Tribouilloy C., Hagendorff A., Popescu B.A., Edvardsen T., Pierard L.A., Badano L., Zamorano J.L.; Scientific Document Committee of the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Recommendations for the echocardiographic assessment of native valvular regurgitation: an executive summary from the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;14(7):611-44. doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jet105.

10. Akins C.W., Miller D.C., Turina M.I., Kouchoukos N.T., Blackstone E.H., Grunkemeier G.L., Takkenberg J.J., David T.E., Butchart E.G., Adams D.H., Shahian D.M., Hagl S., Mayer J.E., Lytle B.W.; STS; AATS; EACTS. Guidelines for reporting mortality and morbidity after cardiac valve interventions. Ann Thorac Surg. 2008;85(4):1490-5. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2007.12.082.

11. Anyanwu A.C., Adams D.H. Etiologic classification of degenerative mitral valve disease: Barlow's disease and fibroelastic deficiency. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007 Summer;19(2):90-6. doi: 10.1053/j.semtcvs.2007.04.002.

12. Otto C.M., Nishimura R.A., Bonow R.O., Carabello B.A., Erwin J.P. 3rd, Gentile F., Jneid H., Krieger E.V., Mack M., McLeod C., O'Gara P.T., Rigolin V.H., Sundt T.M. 3rd, Thompson A., Toly C. 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2021;143(5):e35-e71. doi: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000932.

13. Vahanian A., Beyersdorf F., Praz F., Milojevic M., Baldus S., Bauersachs J., Capodanno D., Conradi L., De Bonis M., De Paulis R., Delgado V., Freemantle N., Gilard M., Haugaa K.H., Jeppsson A., Jüni P., Pierard L., Prendergast B.D., Sádaba J.R., Tribouilloy C., Wojakowski W.; ESC/EACTS Scientific Document Group. 2021 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2022;43(7):561-632. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab395.

14. Panicker V.T., Sreekantan R., Kotera S.S. Flexible or rigid ring in mitral annuloplasty-do the results differ? Indian J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020;36(6):566-571. doi: 10.1007/s12055-020-01019-7.

15. Arjomandi Rad A., Naruka V., Vardanyan R., Viviano A., Salmasi M.Y., Magouliotis D., Kendall S., Casula R., Athanasiou T. Mitral and tricuspid annuloplasty ring dehiscence: a systematic review with pooled analysis. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2021;60(4):801-810. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab178.

16. Bogachev-Prokophiev A.V., Afanasyev A.V., Zheleznev S.I., Nazarov V.M., Sharifulin R.M., Karaskov A.M. Mid-term results of mitral valve repair using flexible bands versus complete rings in patients with degenerative mitral valve disease: a prospective, randomized study. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017;12(1):113. doi: 10.1186/s13019-017-0679-0.

17. Bargagna M., Trumello C., Sala A., Blasio A., Castiglioni A., Alfieri O., De Bonis M. Left Circumflex Artery Injury After Mitral Valve Surgery: An Algorithm Management Proposal. Ann Thorac Surg. 2021;111(3):899-904. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.05.160.