Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery (May 2024)

Comparison of quality of life in patients with mitral valve replacement and mitral valve repair in Imam Ali Hospital during 2014 to 2020: a cross-sectional study

  • Nahid Salehi,
  • Pouria Heydarpour,
  • Yahya Salimi,
  • Arash Ziapour,
  • Mohammad Reza Majzoobi,
  • Sahand Geravand,
  • Parisa Janjani

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-024-02780-1
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Objective Mitral valve failure is one of the most common valvular heart diseases worldwide. Valve replacement and repair have an impact on the quality of life of patients. Therefore, the present study was conducted to compare the quality of life in patients with mitral valve replacement and those who underwent mitral valve repair. Methods In this cross-sectional study, we considered all cardiac patients with ischemic mitral insufficiency who underwent mitral valve repair and patients with a history of valve replacement in Imam Ali Hospital of Kermanshah between 2014 and 2020. Two Minnesota and general quality of life questionnaires along with a checklist for demographic variables were used for data collection. Data analysis was performed using SPSS version 21 software. Results The mean quality of life score based on the general quality of life scale in the valve repair group was 32.33 (SD = 2.29) and in the valve replacement group 32.89(SD = 2.60), (p = 0.917). Also, mean quality of life, as measured by the Minnesota MLHFQ was 60.89(SD = 17.67) in the valve repair group and 63.42 (SD = 12.13) in the valve replacement group (p = 0.308). The results showed that the average general quality of life was different in study groups regarding education. Tukey’s post hoc test showed that the average general quality of life in illiterate people is significantly lower than in people with academic degrees (P-value = 0.001). Conclusion The quality of life of the patients in both the valve repair and replacement groups was at an average level. There was no significant difference between the general quality of life and the Minnesota scales, suggesting that both tools can be effectively used to measure patients’ quality of life. The study’s findings can be valuable for monitoring patients, screening for conditions, and enhancing communication between doctors and patients.

Keywords