Search

Background: In EVEREST II (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair Study), treatment of mitral regurgitation (MR) with a novel percutaneous device showed superior safety compared with surgery, but less effective reduction in MR at 1 year.Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the final 5-year clinical outcomes and durability of percutaneous mitral valve (MV) repair with the MitraClip device compared with conventional MV surgery.Methods: Patients with grade 3+ or 4+ MR were randomly assigned to percutaneous repair with the device or conventional MV surgery in a 2:1 ratio (178:80). Patients prospectively consented to 5 years of follow-up.Results: At 5 years, the rate of the composite endpoint of freedom from death, surgery, or 3+ or 4+ MR in the as-treated population was 44.2% versus 64.3% in the percutaneous repair and surgical groups, respectively (p = 0.01). The difference was driven by increased rates of 3+ to 4+ MR (12.3% vs. 1.8%; p = 0.02) and surgery (27.9% vs. 8.9%; p = 0.003) with percutaneous repair. After percutaneous repair, 78% of surgeries occurred within the first 6 months. Beyond 6 months, rates of surgery and moderate-to-severe MR were comparable between groups. Five-year mortality rates were 20.8% and 26.8% (p = 0.4) for percutaneous repair and surgery, respectively. In multivariable analysis, treatment strategy was not associated with survival.Conclusions: Patients treated with percutaneous repair more commonly required surgery for residual MR during the first year after treatment, but between 1- and 5-year follow-up, comparably low rates of surgery for MV dysfunction with either percutaneous or surgical therapy endorse the durability of MR reduction with both repair techniques. (EVEREST II Pivotal Study High Risk Registry; NCT00209274). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mitral regurgitation (MR) in heart failure (HF) notoriously carries a poor prognosis. While there are multiple interventional options for treatment, the optimal intervention remains controversial. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of surgery, medical therapy, and transcatheter intervention in secondary MR.Methods: A systematic database search was performed to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluate various interventions for secondary MR. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to calculate odd ratios (ORs) and 95% credible intervals (CIs). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were moderate-severe MR, HF-hospitalizations, and freedom from severe HF symptoms.Results: We identified 12 RCTs (2316 total patients; age 67.6 ± 11; 63% males, and 74% with ischemic cardiomyopathy). There was a significant reduction of mortality at 24-months with transcatheter leaflet repair compared with medical therapy (OR = 0.57; 95% CI = 0.34-0.96). However, there were no significant differences among the competing treatments in all-cause mortality at the earlier time points of 30-days or 12-months (P > 0.05). Recurrent moderate-severe MR was significantly less with valvular interventions compared with medical therapy (P < 0.05), but there were no differences in the rates of HF-hospitalizations or persistent severe HF symptoms between the competing interventions (P > 0.05).Conclusions: Among patients with HF and secondary MR, transcatheter leaflet repair was associated with significantly reduced 24-month mortality compared with medical therapy. Valvular interventions were associated with lower rates of recurrent moderate-severe MR, but non-significant improvements in clinical outcomes. Further long-term studies are needed to identify the best route of intervention for secondary MR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) occurs in the absence of organic mitral valve disease and may develop as the left ventricle dilates or remodels or as a result of leaflet tethering with impaired coaptation, most commonly from apical and lateral distraction of the subvalvular apparatus, with late annular dilatation. The optimal therapy for SMR is unclear. This study sought to evaluate the 1-year adjudicated outcomes of all patients with SMR undergoing the MitraClip procedure in the EVEREST II (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair Study) Investigational Device Exemption program, which is comprised of the randomized clinical trial, the prospective High-Risk Registry, and the REALISM Continued Access Registry (Multicenter Study of the MitraClip System).Methods: Patients with 3+/4+ SMR enrolled in EVEREST II were stratified by non-high surgical risk (non-HR) and high surgical risk (HR) status (defined as Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk of mortality ≥12% or predefined risk factors). Clinical, echocardiographic, and functional outcomes at 1 year were evaluated.Results: A total of 616 patients (482 HR, 134 non-HR; mean age, 73.3±10.5 years; Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk, 10.2±6.9%) with SMR underwent the MitraClip procedure. At baseline, 80.5% of patients were in New York Heart Association class III/IV. Major adverse events at 30 days included death (3.6%), stroke (2.3%), and renal failure (1.5%). At discharge, 88.8% had MR ≤2+. At 1 year, there were 139 deaths, and the Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from mortality was 76.8%. The majority of surviving patients (84.7%) remained with MR ≤2+ and New York Heart Association class I/II (83.0%). Kaplan-Meier survival at 1 year was 74.1% in HR patients and 86.4% in non-HR patients ( P=0.0175). At 1 year, both groups achieved comparable MR reduction (MR ≤2+, 84.0% versus 87.0%) and improvement in left ventricular end-diastolic volume (-8.0 mL versus -12.7 mL), whereas New York Heart Association class I/II was found in 80.1% versus 91.8% ( P=0.008) of HR and non-HR patients, respectively. In HR patients, the annualized rate of heart failure hospitalizations decreased from 0.68 to 0.46 in the 12 months before to 12 months after the procedure ( P<0.0001).Conclusions: Transcatheter mitral valve repair with the MitraClip in patients with secondary MR is associated with acceptable safety, reduction of MR severity, symptom improvement, and positive ventricular remodeling.Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT00209274, NCT01940120, and NCT01931956. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate 4-year outcomes of percutaneous repair versus surgery for mitral regurgitation. Background: Transcatheter therapies are being developed to treat valvular heart disease. In the EVEREST (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair Study) II trial, treatment of mitral valve regurgitation (MR) with a novel percutaneous device was compared with surgery and showed superior safety, but less reduction in MR at 1 year overall. We report the 4-year outcomes from the EVEREST II trial. Methods: Patients with grade 3+ or 4+ MR were randomly assigned to percutaneous repair with the MitraClip (Abbott, Menlo Park, California) device or conventional mitral valve surgery in a 2:1 ratio (184:95). Patients prospectively consented to 5 years of follow-up. Results: At 4 years, the rate of the composite endpoint of freedom from death, surgery, or 3+ or 4+ MR in the intention-to-treat population was 39.8% versus 53.4% in the percutaneous repair group and surgical groups, respectively (p = 0.070). Rates of death were 17.4% versus 17.8% (p = 0.914), and 3+ or 4+ MR was present in 21.7% versus 24.7% (p = 0.745) at 4 years of follow-up, respectively. Surgery for mitral valve dysfunction, however, occurred in 20.4% versus 2.2% (p < 0.001) at 1 year and 24.8% versus 5.5% (p < 0.001) at 4 years. Conclusions: Patients treated with percutaneous repair of the mitral valve more commonly required surgery to treat residual MR; however, after the first year of follow-up, there were few surgeries required after either percutaneous or surgical treatment and no difference in the prevalence of moderate-severe and severe MR or mortality at 4 years. (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair Study [EVEREST II]; NCT00209274) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: We sought to determine whether patients with functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) would benefit from ventricular reshaping by the Coapsys device (Myocor, Inc., Maple Grove, Minnesota). Background: FMR occurs when ventricular remodeling impairs valve function. Coapsys is a ventricular shape change device placed without cardiopulmonary bypass to reduce FMR. It compresses the mitral annulus and reshapes the ventricle. We hypothesized that Coapsys for FMR would improve clinical outcomes compared with standard therapies. Methods: RESTOR-MV (Randomized Evaluation of a Surgical Treatment for Off-Pump Repair of the Mitral Valve) was a randomized, prospective, multicenter study of patients with FMR and coronary disease with core laboratory analysis. After enrollment, patients were stratified to the standard indicated surgery: either coronary artery bypass graft alone or coronary artery bypass graft with mitral valve repair. In each stratum, randomization was to either control (indicated surgery) or treatment (coronary artery bypass graft with Coapsys ventricular reshaping). Results: The study was terminated when the sponsor failed to secure ongoing funding; 165 patients were randomized. Control and Coapsys both produced decreases in left ventricular (LV) end-diastolic dimension and MR at 2 years (p < 0.001); Coapsys provided a greater decrease in LV end-diastolic dimension (p = 0.021). Control had lower MR grades during follow-up (p = 0.01). Coapsys showed a survival advantage compared with control at 2 years (87% vs. 77%) (hazard ratio: 0.421; 95% confidence interval: 0.200 to 0.886; stratified log-rank test; p = 0.038). Complication-free survival (including death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and valve reoperation) was significantly greater with Coapsys at 2 years (85% vs. 71%) (hazard ratio: 0.372; 95% confidence interval: 0.185 to 0.749; adjusted log-rank test; p = 0.019). Conclusions: Analysis of RESTOR-MV indicates that patients with FMR requiring revascularization treated with ventricular reshaping rather than standard surgery had improved survival and a significant decrease in major adverse outcomes. This trial validates the concept of the ventricular reshaping strategy in this subset of patients with heart failure. (Randomized Evaluation of a Surgical Treatment for Off-Pump Repair of the Mitral Valve [RESTOR-MV]; NCT00120276) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]