Mitral Valve Repair for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Endocarditis: Analysis of a 10-Year Single-Center Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background/Objectives: Acute bacterial endocarditis (ABE) is a frequent situation and continues to be a challenge. Mitral valve involvement during acute bacterial endocarditis is often the result of the spread of the endocarditic process from the adjacent aortic valve. Mitral involvement, on the other hand, could also be an expression of the initial localization of the bacteria. The best option for treating mitral ABE is still a matter of debate. Recent reports have shown satisfactory results with mitral reconstructive techniques in the treatment of mitral ABE. In this study, we present a comprehensive review of our 10-year institutional experience in the surgical management of acute mitral endocarditis with a focus on technical considerations, outcomes, and the durability of mitral valve repair in this high-risk population. Methods: We queried the institutional database, cross-referencing patients admitted with a diagnosis of “acute bacterial endocarditis” with patients undergoing surgical procedures for “valvular disease” at our division. Out of 1136 valvular procedures listed in our PACS database, 180 patients were admitted with a diagnosis of active acute endocarditis, and 46 included treatment of the mitral valve. We analyzed and compared short- and long-term follow-up (ranging from 3 to 141 months with a mean of 42 ± 38 months) of these 46 patients, dividing them into two groups: mitral valve repair (MVr) and mitral valve replacement (MVR). Results: 18 (40%) patients underwent reconstructive treatment of the mitral valve, and 28 (60%) underwent mitral valve replacement. Cumulative in-hospital mortality was 10% (5 pts, all from the MVR group), however, with no difference between the two groups. A shorter time gap from diagnosis to surgery (<10 days) was the only predictive factor for early mortality. A further 11 patients died during follow-up (2 from group A and 9 from group B). Long-term survival, on the other hand, was negatively influenced by MV surgical replacement (p = 0.0178), older patients’ age (>60 years), and urgent surgical procedures. Finally, patients with MVr also experienced a favorable postoperative event-free curve for endocarditis recurrence (p = 0.0260) and time elapsed before recurrence (p = 0.0438). Conclusions: Mitral valve repair in the case of active endocarditis could be a treatment associated with more favorable outcomes, providing that a complete eradication of infective tissue can be accomplished. Conservative treatment, when feasible, seems to offer favorable cumulative long-term outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".