To compare mitral valve (MV) repair and concomitant maze procedure with catheter ablation in treating patients with atrial functional mitral regurgitation (AFMR). We retrospectively identified 126 patients with AFMR from January 2012 to December 2015. Of these patients, 60 patients underwent MV repair and concomitant maze procedure, and 66 patients received catheter ablation. Patients were followed up for 7.98 ± 2.01 years. The survival, readmission of heart failure (HF), persistent atrial fibrillation (AF), persistent moderate-severe mitral regurgitation (MR) and tricuspid Regurgitation (TR), and echocardiographic data were analyzed in the follow-up. Predictors of readmission of HF were analyzed. There was no significant difference in baseline and echocardiographic characteristics, in-hospital mortality, and other adverse events postoperatively between two groups. The surgical group was associated with lower rates of MR > 2 + grade either at discharge (P = 0.0023) or in the follow-up (P = 0.0001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of overall survival between the two groups. The surgical group was associated with a lower rate of readmission of HF and AF in the follow-up. Univariable and multivariable analysis confirmed AF at discharge, moderate-severe MR at discharge, no MV surgery, moderate-severe TR at discharge, and LA volume as predictors of readmission of HF. Both groups experienced significant reverse cardiac remodeling. Our results suggest that for the treatment of AFMR with persistent or long-standing persistent AF and moderate-severe MR, MV repair and concomitant maze procedure may achieve a better outcome than catheter ablation procedure.

Background: The treatment strategy of early nutritional support after cardiac surgery has gradually been adopted. However, there are no scientific guidelines for the timing and specific programs of early nutritional support. Methods: A retrospective, single-center analysis (2021–2023) was carried out including elderly patients who were admitted for valvular heart disease and received open-heart valve replacement surgery. We designated patients who started the optimized nutritional support after surgery as the optimized enteral nutritional support strategy TN (EN) group and those who received traditional nutritional support as the traditional nutritional support strategy (TN) group. The nutritional and immune indexes, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and hospitalization cost of the two groups were compared and analyzed. Results: We identified 378 eligible patients, comprising 193 (51%) patients in the EN group and 185 (49%) patients in the TN group. There was no significant difference in hospital mortality between the two groups, but the proportion of nosocomial pneumonia was significantly lower in the EN group than in the TN group (P < 0.001). In the Poisson regression analysis, EN was not associated with an increase in gastrointestinal complications (P = 0.549). The EN group also seemed to have shorter hospital stays and lower hospitalization expenses (P < 0.001). In the comparison of postoperative gastrointestinal complications, fewer patients experienced diarrhea (P = 0.021) and abdominal distension (P = 0.033) in the EN group compared with the TN group. Conclusion: The optimal nutritional support strategy could effectively improve the clinical outcome of high-risk patients with valvular heart disease.