How do annuloplasty rings affect mitral leaflet dynamic motion?

OBJECTIVES To define the effects of annuloplasty rings (ARs) on the dynamic motion of anterior mitral leaflet (AML) and posterior mitral leaflet (PML). METHODS Fifty-eight adult, Dorsett-hybrid, male sheep (49 + or - 5 kg) had radiopaque markers inserted: eight around the mitral annulus, four along the central meridian (from edge to annulus) of the AML (#A(1)-#A(4)) and one on the PML edge (#P(1)). True-sized Edwards Cosgrove (COS, n=12), St Jude RSAR (St. Jude Medical, St. Paul, MN, USA) (n=12), Carpentier-Edwards Physio (PHYSIO, n=12), Edwards IMR ETlogix (ETL, n=10) or Edwards GeoForm (GEO, n=12) ARs were implanted in a releasable fashion. Under acute open-chest conditions, 4D marker coordinates were obtained using biplane videofluoroscopy with the respective AR inserted (COS, RSAR, PHYSIO, ETL and GEO) and after release (COS-Control, RSAR-Control, PHYSIO-Control, ETL-Control and GEO-Control). AML and PML excursions were calculated as the difference between minimum and maximum angles between the central mitral annular septal-lateral chord and the AML edge markers (alpha(1exc)-alpha(4exc)) and PML edge marker (beta(1exc)) during the cardiac cycle. RESULTS Relative to Control, (1) RSAR, PHYSIO, ETL and GEO increased excursion of the AML annular (alpha(4exc): 13 + or - 6 degrees vs 16 + or - 7 degrees *, 16 + or - 7 degrees vs 23 + or - 10 degrees *, 12 + or - 4 degrees vs 18 + or - 9 degrees *, 15 + or - 1 degrees vs 20 + or - 9 degrees *, respectively) and belly region (alpha(2exc): 41 + or - 10 degrees vs 45 + or - 10 degrees *, 42 + or - 8 degrees vs 45 + or - 6 degrees , n.s., 33 + or - 13 degrees vs 42 + or - 14 degrees *, 39 + or - 6 degrees vs 44 + or - 6 degrees *, respectively, alpha(3exc): 24 + or - 9 degrees vs 29 + or - 11 degrees *, 28 + or - 10 degrees vs 33 + or - 10 degrees *, 16 + or - 9 degrees vs 21 + or - 12 degrees *, 25 + or - 7 degrees vs 29 + or - 9 degrees *, respectively), but not of the AML edge (alpha(1exc): 42 + or - 8 degrees vs 44 + or - 8 degrees , 43 + or - 8 degrees vs 41 + or - 6 degrees , 42 + or - 11 vs 46 + or - 10 degrees , 39 + or - 9 degrees vs 38 + or - 8 degrees , respectively, all n.s.). COS did not affect AML excursion (alpha(1exc): 40 + or - 8 degrees vs 37 + or - 8 degrees , alpha(2exc): 43 + or - 9 degrees vs 41 + or - 9 degrees , alpha(3exc): 27 + or - 11 degrees vs 27 + or - 10 degrees , alpha(4exc): 18 + or - 8 degrees vs 17 + or - 7 degrees , all n.s.). (2) PML excursion (beta(1exc)) was reduced with GEO (53 + or - 5 degrees vs 43 + or - 6 degrees *), but unchanged with COS, RSAR, PHYSIO or ETL (53 + or - 13 degrees vs 52 + or - 15 degrees , 50 + or - 13 degrees vs 49 + or - 10 degrees , 55 + or - 5 degrees vs 55 + or - 7 degrees , 52 + or - 8 degrees vs 58 + or - 6 degrees , respectively, all n.s); *=p<0.05. CONCLUSIONS RSAR, PHYSIO, ETL and GEO rings, but not COS, increase AML excursion of the AML annular and belly region, suggesting higher anterior mitral leaflet bending stresses with rigid rings, which potentially could be deleterious with respect to repair durability. The decreased PML excursion observed with GEO could impair left ventricular filling. Clinical studies are needed to validate these findings in patients.