Residual versus recurrent mitral regurgitation after transcatheter mitral valve edge-to-edge repair.
MitraClip
mitral regurgitation
recurrent MR
residual MR
Journal
Journal of cardiac surgery
ISSN: 1540-8191
Titre abrégé: J Card Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8908809
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2021
Jun 2021
Historique:
received:
05
01
2021
accepted:
07
02
2021
pubmed:
25
2
2021
medline:
20
5
2021
entrez:
24
2
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The number of MtraClip procedures is increasing, and consequently, the number of patients with residual or recurrent mitral regurgitation (MR). We aimed to characterize patients who had residual versus recurrent MR after MitraClip and report the outcomes of different treatment strategies. From 2012 to 2020, 167 patients had MitraClip. Out of them, 16 patients (9.5%) had residual mitral regurgitation (MR), and 27 patients (16.2%) had recurrent MR. The median age in patients with residual MR was 67.5 (59-73) years versus 69 (61-78) years in patients with recurrent MR (p = .87). The etiology of mitral valve disease was functional in 13 patients (81.3%) and 22 patients (84.6%) in residual versus recurrent MR patients (p > .99). Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator implantation was higher in patients with residual MR (p = .02). Survival was 93.7% at 1 year, 76.4% at 3 years versus 92.5% at 1 year, and 84.5% at 3 years in residual versus recurrent MR (p = .69). Two patients in the residual MR group had re-clip, and three had surgery, and in the recurrent MR group, one patient had re-clip, and two patients had surgery (p = .23). Patients who had re-clip were older (p = .09). Surgery was associated with 100% survival at 5 years, 63% after medical therapy and the worst survival was reported in re-clip patients (p = .007). The outcomes of patients with residual versus recurrent mitral regurgitation after MitraClip were comparable. Survival could be improved with surgery compared with medical therapy and re-clip.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The number of MtraClip procedures is increasing, and consequently, the number of patients with residual or recurrent mitral regurgitation (MR). We aimed to characterize patients who had residual versus recurrent MR after MitraClip and report the outcomes of different treatment strategies.
METHODS
METHODS
From 2012 to 2020, 167 patients had MitraClip. Out of them, 16 patients (9.5%) had residual mitral regurgitation (MR), and 27 patients (16.2%) had recurrent MR.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The median age in patients with residual MR was 67.5 (59-73) years versus 69 (61-78) years in patients with recurrent MR (p = .87). The etiology of mitral valve disease was functional in 13 patients (81.3%) and 22 patients (84.6%) in residual versus recurrent MR patients (p > .99). Cardiac resynchronization therapy-defibrillator implantation was higher in patients with residual MR (p = .02). Survival was 93.7% at 1 year, 76.4% at 3 years versus 92.5% at 1 year, and 84.5% at 3 years in residual versus recurrent MR (p = .69). Two patients in the residual MR group had re-clip, and three had surgery, and in the recurrent MR group, one patient had re-clip, and two patients had surgery (p = .23). Patients who had re-clip were older (p = .09). Surgery was associated with 100% survival at 5 years, 63% after medical therapy and the worst survival was reported in re-clip patients (p = .007).
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The outcomes of patients with residual versus recurrent mitral regurgitation after MitraClip were comparable. Survival could be improved with surgery compared with medical therapy and re-clip.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1904-1909Informations de copyright
© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Bonow RO, O'Gara PT, Adams DH, et al. Focused update of the 2017 ACC expert consensus decision pathway on the management of mitral regurgitation: a report of the American College of Cardiology Solution Set Oversight Committee. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;75:2236-2270.
Feldman T, Kar S, Elmariah S, et al. Randomized comparison of percutaneous repair and surgery for mitral regurgitation: 5-year results of EVEREST II. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66(25):2844-2854.
Mack MJ, Abraham WT, Lindenfeld J, et al. Cardiovascular outcomes assessment of the MitraClip in patients with heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation: design and rationale of the COAPT trial. Am Heart J. 2018;205:1-11.
Bardeleben RS, Hobohm L, Kreidel F, et al. Incidence and in-hospital safety outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valve edge-to-edge repair using MitraClip: five-year German national patient sample including 13,575 implants. EuroInterv J Eur Collab with Work Gr Interv Cardiol Eur Soc Cardiol. 2019;14(17):1725-1732.
Kreidel F, Alessandrini H, Wohlmuth P, Schmoeckel M, Geidel S. Is surgical or catheter-based interventions an option after an unsuccessful mitral clip? Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018;30(2):152-157.
EL-Shurafa H, Arafat AA, Albabtain MA, et al. Reinterventions after transcatheter edge to edge mitral valve repair: is early clipping warranted? J Card Surg. 2020;35:3362-3367.
Gyoten T, Schenk S, Grimmig O, Just S, Fritzsche D, Messroghli D. Outcome of medical therapy, repeat intervention, and mitral valve surgery after failed MitraClip therapy. Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2020. Available from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11748-020-01530-z
Wunderlich NC, Siegel RJ. Peri-interventional echo assessment for the MitraClip procedure. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2013;14(10):935-949.
Katz WE, Conrad Smith AJ, Crock FW, Cavalcante JL. Echocardiographic evaluation and guidance for MitraClip procedure. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2017;7(6):616-632.
Doherty JU, Kort S, Mehran R, Schoenhagen P, Soman P. ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/HRS/SCAI/SCCT/SCMR/STS 2017 appropriate use criteria for multimodality imaging in valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, American Association for Thoracic Surgery, American Heart Association, American Society of Echocardiography, American Society of Nuclear Cardiology, Heart Rhythm Society, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography, Society for Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Nucl Cardiol. 2017;24:2043-2063.
Feldman T, Kar S, Rinaldi M, et al. Percutaneous mitral repair with the MitraClip system: safety and midterm durability in the initial EVEREST (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge REpair Study) cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54(8):686-694.
Feldman T, Wasserman HS, Herrmann HC, et al. Percutaneous mitral valve repair using the edge-to-edge technique: six-month results of the EVEREST Phase I Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;46(11):2134-2140.
Ansari MT, Ahmadzai N, Coyle K, Coyle D, Moher D. Mitral valve clip for treatment of mitral regurgitation: an evidence-based analysis. Ont Health Technol Assess Ser. 2015;15(12):1-104.
Gheorghe L, Ielasi A, Rensing BJWM, et al. Complications following percutaneous mitral valve repair. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2019;6:146. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31681798
Gyoten T, Schenk S, Rochor K, et al. Outcome comparison of mitral valve surgery and MitraClip therapy in patients with severely reduced left ventricular dysfunction. ESC Hear Fail. 2020;7(4):1781-1790. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32445540
Mkalaluh S, Szczechowicz M, Karck M, Weymann A. Failed MitraClip therapy: surgical revision in high-risk patients. J Cardiothorac Surg. 2019;14(1):75. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30971281
Pibarot P, Delgado V, Bax JJ. MITRA-FR vs. COAPT: lessons from two trials with diametrically opposed results. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;20(6):620-624.
Alozie A, Paranskaya L, Westphal B, et al. Clinical outcomes of conventional surgery versus MitraClip® therapy for moderate to severe symptomatic mitral valve regurgitation in the elderly population: an institutional experience. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017;17(1):85. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28320316