Search

Abstract Aims Wildtype transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy is an under‐recognized cause of heart failure in elderly patients. Transcatheter tricuspid valve repair is a newly emerging therapeutic option for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR). We present first insights into safety and possible benefits of this procedure in patients with cardiac amyloidosis. Methods and results Eight patients with cardiac non‐hereditary (wildtype) transthyretin (ATTRwt) amyloidosis and severe to torrential TR, undergoing successful transcatheter tricuspid valve repair, were included in the analysis and compared to a control group of 21 patients without cardiac amyloidosis. All patients presented with an advanced stage of amyloid cardiomyopathy. Primary endpoint was reduction in TR at 3 months follow‐up. Secondary endpoints were feasibility, safety, hospitalization or death, clinical improvement, cardiac biomarkers, and structural and functional right heart parameter obtained by echocardiography. Transcatheter tricuspid valve repair resulted in a significant reduction of TR (IV to II, P = 0.008) in all eight patients with cardiac amyloidosis (100%). Device success (amyloidosis 75% vs. control group 86%, P = 0.597) and overall probability of hospitalization or death (amyloidosis 13% vs. control group 25%, P = 0.646) were similar compared with those in the control group at 3 months follow‐up. Transcatheter tricuspid valve repair led to an improvement of New York Heart Association functional class (P = 0.031) and 6 min walking distance (from 313 ± 118 to 337 ± 106, P = 0.012). TR reduction in amyloidosis patients was less extensive compared with that in control group (TR‐reduction 1.6 ± 0.3, P = 0.008 vs. control group 2.3 ± 0.3, P

Abstract Aims Several new percutaneous tricuspid repair systems have recently been introduced as new treatment options for severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Clinical improvement following percutaneous tricuspid valve leaflet repair has been demonstrated by recent studies. A possible impact on exercise capacity has not yet been reported. Methods and results Eleven patients with at least severe TR and successful tricuspid leaflet repair using the PASCAL Ace implant at our cardiology department were included in this analysis. All patients suffered from symptomatic right‐sided heart failure with compromised exercise capacity. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET), clinical, laboratory, and echocardiographic parameters were assessed at baseline and 3 months follow‐up. The primary endpoint was the change in maximal oxygen consumption [VO2 max (mL/(min*kg))] at 3 months follow‐up. Secondary endpoints included improvement in TR, cardiac biomarkers, and other clinical outcomes. TR severity at 3 months follow‐up post‐PASCAL Ace implantation was significantly lower than at baseline (P = 0.004). Cardiac biomarkers including high‐sensitivity troponin T and N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide as well as right ventricular diameter improved slightly without reaching statistical significance (P = 0.89, P = 0.32, and P = 0.06, respectively). PASCAL Ace implantation resulted in a significant improvement in cardiopulmonary exercise capacity at 3 months follow‐up compared with baseline. Mean VO2 max improved from 9.5 ± 2.8 to 11.4 ± 3.4 mL/(min*kg) (P = 0.006), VO2 max per cent predicted from 42 ± 12% to 50 ± 15% (P = 0.004), peak oxygen uptake from 703 ± 175 to 826 ± 198 mL/min (P = 0.004), and O2 pulse per cent predicted from 67 ± 21% to 81 ± 25% (P = 0.011). Other CPET‐related outcomes did not show any significant change over time. Conclusions In this single‐centre retrospective analysis, direct tricuspid valve leaflet repair using the transcatheter PASCAL Ace implant system was associated with a reduced TR severity and improved cardiopulmonary exercise capacity.

Abstract Aim Percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) via MitraClip implantation is a therapeutic option for severe mitral regurgitation (MR) in advanced stages of heart failure (HF). However, progressive left ventricular dilation in these patients may lead to recurrent MR after PMVR and consequent re‐do MitraClip implantation. Here, we describe the characteristics and outcomes of this clinical scenario. Methods and results Patients with systolic HF and functional MR undergoing a re‐do MitraClip procedure were retrospectively analysed. Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, technical, device and procedural success at first MitraClip procedure, functional MR and systolic HF with an ejection fraction (EF) of

Abstract Aims Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is common in patients with advanced heart failure (HF). Percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) via MitraClip (MC) has emerged as a feasible treatment strategy for these high‐risk patients. However, as HF often further progresses, there is a frequent need for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation in these patients. We aimed to investigate whether prior MC implantation affects the subsequent LVAD implantation and outcome. Methods and results Thirty‐seven patients with advanced HF and significant MR who underwent LVAD implantation were retrospectively analysed. Follow‐up data were collected at 1 year after LVAD implantation. Primary endpoint was all‐cause mortality. Secondary endpoint included peri‐operative parameters and clinical development depicted as New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level. Seventeen patients initially received a MC device (MC group), resulting in a significant reduction in MR grade. After MC, NYHA class and INTERMACS level further worsened, leading to subsequent LVAD implantation after a median time of 475 days in the MC group. At LVAD implantation, overall characteristics were comparable with those of the patients undergoing LVAD implantation without prior MC placement (no‐MC group). Procedural data revealed a higher incidence of right ventricular (RV) failure needing mechanical RV assistance and a longer need for nitric oxide ventilation in the MC group after LVAD implantation. One‐year survival was slightly better in the no‐MC group compared with the MC group [41% (n = 7/17) vs. 65% (n = 13/20); P = 0.15], albeit event‐free survival was comparable between both groups, MC and no‐MC. Conclusions LVAD implantation after MC is feasible and safe. However, in patients with advanced HF and severe MR, PMVR may only delay a needed LVAD implantation and thereby lead to poorer peri‐operative RV function and impaired outcome. Arguably, these patients might benefit from the timely management of advanced HF by the means of early LVAD implantation or heart transplantation.