Outcomes with percutaneous mitral repair vs. optimal medical treatment for functional mitral regurgitation: systematic review

Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology Consensus Recommendations on the Use of MitraClip for Mitral Regurgitation

Transcatheter mitral valve repair with the MitraClip, a catheter-based percutaneous edge-to-edge repair technique to correct mitral regurgitation (MR), has been demonstrated in Western studies to be an effective and safe MR treatment strategy. However, randomised clinical trial data on its use in Asian-Pacific patients is limited. Hence, the Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology convened an expert panel to review the available literature on MitraClip and to develop consensus recommendations to guide clinicians in the region. The panel developed statements on the use of MitraClip for the management of degenerative MR, functional MR, and other less common indications, such as acute MR, dynamic MR, hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, and MR after failed surgical repair. Each statement was voted on by each panel member and consensus was reached when 80% of experts voted ‘agree’ or ‘neutral’. This consensus-building process resulted in 10 consensus recommendations to guide general cardiologists in the evaluation and management of patients in whom MitraClip treatment is being contemplated.

Quadrangular resection versus chordal replacement for degenerative posterior mitral leaflet prolapse

Background

The aims of the present study was to compare midterm results of quadrangular leaflet resection versus chordal replacement for the repair of degenerative posterior mitral leaflet (PML) prolapse, and to explore the risk factors for recurrent severe mitral regurgitation (MR).

Methods

From January 2012 to December 2018, 1,423 consecutive patients underwent mitral valve (MV) repair. A total of 317 had degenerative PML prolapse and constituted the study population. Of these, 74 (23.3%) underwent quadrangular leaflet resection, and 243 (76.7%) underwent chordal replacement. Outcomes were compared by using unadjusted data and propensity score-matched analyses.

Results

Patients with multiple leaflet prolapse were more likely to undergo chordal replacement (18.4% vs. 41.9%, P<0.001), and performed as a minimally invasive approach (47.3% vs. 61.7%, P=0.027). Of the entire cohort, 1 death (0.3%) occurred due to intraoperative aortic dissection, and 1 patient who had undergone chordal replacement required reoperation before discharge for posterior leaflet tearing. There was no significant difference in the probability of freedom from recurrent severe MR at 82 months between the resection and neochordae groups in both the pre-matched (95.6% vs. 88.8%, P=0.105) and matched (95.2% vs. 88.5%, P=0.170) cohorts, which was consistent across all of the examined subgroups (P>0.05). Multivariate Cox regression indicated that dilated left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD) was an independent risk factor for recurrent severe MR [<40 vs. >40 mm, hazards ratio (HR): 3.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20–8.39, P=0.020]; however, surgical technique was not (resection vs. neochordae, HR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.07–1.37, P=0.122).

Conclusions

Chordal replacement for the repair of degenerative posterior MV prolapse yields similar satisfactory outcomes when compared with quadrangular resection, and is promising in minimally invasive cardiac surgery for various lesions. However, it is also associated with more recurrent severe MR, albeit non-significant, for which patients with dilated LVESD are at high risk.

Transcatheter Mitral Repair for Functional Mitral Regurgitation According to Left Ventricular Function: A Real-Life Propensity-Score Matched Study

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) could improve survival in functional mitral regurgitation (FMR), but it is necessary to consider the influence of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Therefore, we compare the outcomes after TMVR with Mitraclip® between two groups according to LVEF.

METHODS

In an observational registry study, we compared the outcomes in patients with FMR who underwent TMVR with and without LVEF <30%. The primary endpoint was the combined one-year all-cause mortality and unplanned hospital readmissions due to HF. The secondary end-points were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and mitral regurgitation (MR) severity. Propensity-score matching was used to create two groups with the same baseline characteristics, except for baseline LVEF.

RESULTS

Among 535 FMR eligible patients, 144 patients with LVEF <30% (group 1) and 144 with LVEF >30% (group 2) had similar propensity scores and were included in the analyses. The primary study endpoint was significantlly higher in group 1 (33.3% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.002). There was a maintained improvement in secondary endpoints without significant differences among groups.

CONCLUSION

FMR patients with LVEF <30% treated with MitraClip® had higher mortality and readmissions than patients with LVEF ≥30% treated with the same device. However, both groups improved the NYHA functional class and MR severity.