Impact of procedural success on clinical outcome after MitraClip: Results from the MITRA-FR trial.
Mitral regurgitation
Outcomes
Transcatheter mitral valve therapy
Journal
Archives of cardiovascular diseases
ISSN: 1875-2128
Titre abrégé: Arch Cardiovasc Dis
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101465655
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2022
Nov 2022
Historique:
received:
28
12
2021
revised:
23
05
2022
accepted:
24
05
2022
pubmed:
17
10
2022
medline:
7
12
2022
entrez:
16
10
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Differences in procedural success rates have been proposed to explain the divergent results between the MITRA-FR trial (Percutaneous Repair with the MitraClip Device for Severe Functional/Secondary Mitral Regurgitation) and the COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation). To examine whether MITRA-FR patients who had successful clip implantation achieved a better outcome than the control group. Based on the per protocol population of MITRA-FR, we compared the outcome in 71 patients in whom optimal clip implantation was achieved (group 1: mitral regurgitation grade ≤ 1 + at discharge) with that in 23 patients with non-optimal clip implantation (group 2: mitral regurgitation grade ≥ 2 + at discharge) and that in 137 patients in the control group (group 3). The primary endpoint was all-cause death or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 24 months. Event-free survival was not different across the groups (42±6% in group 1, 30±10% in group 2 and 31±4% in group 3; log-rank P=0.32). In multivariable analyses, after adjustment for age, sex, rhythm, aetiology, left ventricular ejection fraction and mitral regurgitation severity, group was not associated with variations in outcome: using Group 3 as reference, hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.27 (P=0.43) in group 1; and hazard ratio 0.98 95% confidence interval 0.54-1.76 (P=0.94) in group 2. The clinical outcome of patients in whom optimal procedural result was achieved at discharge was not different compared with the control group. Our results do not support the hypothesis that the differences in rates of residual mitral regurgitation at discharge between MITRA-FR and COAPT explain the divergent results between the two trials.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Differences in procedural success rates have been proposed to explain the divergent results between the MITRA-FR trial (Percutaneous Repair with the MitraClip Device for Severe Functional/Secondary Mitral Regurgitation) and the COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation).
AIM
OBJECTIVE
To examine whether MITRA-FR patients who had successful clip implantation achieved a better outcome than the control group.
METHODS
METHODS
Based on the per protocol population of MITRA-FR, we compared the outcome in 71 patients in whom optimal clip implantation was achieved (group 1: mitral regurgitation grade ≤ 1 + at discharge) with that in 23 patients with non-optimal clip implantation (group 2: mitral regurgitation grade ≥ 2 + at discharge) and that in 137 patients in the control group (group 3). The primary endpoint was all-cause death or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 24 months.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Event-free survival was not different across the groups (42±6% in group 1, 30±10% in group 2 and 31±4% in group 3; log-rank P=0.32). In multivariable analyses, after adjustment for age, sex, rhythm, aetiology, left ventricular ejection fraction and mitral regurgitation severity, group was not associated with variations in outcome: using Group 3 as reference, hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.58-1.27 (P=0.43) in group 1; and hazard ratio 0.98 95% confidence interval 0.54-1.76 (P=0.94) in group 2.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The clinical outcome of patients in whom optimal procedural result was achieved at discharge was not different compared with the control group. Our results do not support the hypothesis that the differences in rates of residual mitral regurgitation at discharge between MITRA-FR and COAPT explain the divergent results between the two trials.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36244966
pii: S1875-2136(22)00172-3
doi: 10.1016/j.acvd.2022.05.013
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
545-551Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.