Abstract

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) and mitral regurgitation (MR) frequently coexist. Although some observational studies have reported that moderate or severe MR is associated with higher mortality, the optimal management of such patients is still unclear. Simultaneous replacement of both aortic and mitral valves is linked to significantly higher morbidity and mortality. Recent advances in minimally invasive surgical or transcatheter therapies for MR allow for staged procedures in which surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (SAVR/TAVR) is done first and MR severity re-evaluated afterwards. Current evidence suggests MR severity improves in some patients after SAVR or TAVR, depending on several factors (MR aetiology, type of valve used for TAVR, presence/absence of atrial fibrillation, residual aortic regurgitation, etc). However, as of today, the absence of randomised clinical trials does not allow for evidence-based recommendations about whether or not MR should be addressed at the time of SAVR or TAVR. A careful patient evaluation and clinical judgement are recommended to distinguish patients who might benefit from a double valve intervention from those in which MR should be left alone. The aim of this review is to report and critique the available data on this subject in order to help guide the clinical decision making in this challenging subset of patients.