Search

Background: Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is an emerging therapeutic alternative for patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR). Outcomes of TMVR versus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) have not been investigated for this population. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of patients with secondary MR undergoing TMVR versus GDMT alone. Methods: The CHOICE-MI registry (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency) included patients with MR undergoing TMVR using dedicated devices. Patients with MR pathogeneses other than secondary MR were excluded. Patients treated with GDMT alone were derived from the control arm of the COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation). We compared outcomes between the TMVR and GDMT groups, using propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences. Results: After propensity score matching, 97 patient pairs undergoing TMVR (72.9±8.7 years; 60.8% men; transapical access, 91.8%) versus GDMT (73.1±11.0 years; 59.8% men) were compared. At 1 and 2 years, residual MR was ≤1+ in all patients of the TMVR group compared with 6.9% and 7.7%, respectively, in those receiving GDMT alone (both P<0.001). The 2-year rate of heart failure hospitalization was significantly lower in the TMVR group (32.8% versus 54.4%; hazard ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35–0.99]; P=0.04). Among survivors, a higher proportion of patients were in the New York Heart Association functional class I or II in the TMVR group at 1 year (78.2% versus 59.7%; P=0.03) and at 2 years (77.8% versus 53.2%; P=0.09). Two-year mortality was similar in the 2 groups (TMVR versus GDMT, 36.8% versus 40.8%; hazard ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.62–1.64]; P=0.98). Conclusions: In this observational comparison, over 2-year follow-up, TMVR using mostly transapical devices in patients with secondar, Background: Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is an emerging therapeutic alternative for patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR). Outcomes of TMVR versus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) have not been investigated for this population. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of patients with secondary MR undergoing TMVR versus GDMT alone. Methods: The CHOICE-MI registry (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency) included patients with MR undergoing TMVR using dedicated devices. Patients with MR pathogeneses other than secondary MR were excluded. Patients treated with GDMT alone were derived from the control arm of the COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation). We compared outcomes between the TMVR and GDMT groups, using propensity score matching to adjust for baseline differences. Results: After propensity score matching, 97 patient pairs undergoing TMVR (72.9±8.7 years; 60.8% men; transapical access, 91.8%) versus GDMT (73.1±11.0 years; 59.8% men) were compared. At 1 and 2 years, residual MR was ≤1+ in all patients of the TMVR group compared with 6.9% and 7.7%, respectively, in those receiving GDMT alone (both P<0.001). The 2-year rate of heart failure hospitalization was significantly lower in the TMVR group (32.8% versus 54.4%; hazard ratio, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.35-0.99]; P=0.04). Among survivors, a higher proportion of patients were in the New York Heart Association functional class I or II in the TMVR group at 1 year (78.2% versus 59.7%; P=0.03) and at 2 years (77.8% versus 53.2%; P=0.09). Two-year mortality was similar in the 2 groups (TMVR versus GDMT, 36.8% versus 40.8%; hazard ratio, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.62-1.64]; P=0.98). Conclusions: In this observational comparison, over 2-year follow-up, TMVR using mostly transapical devices in patients with secondary MR was associated with significant red

Background: Valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) failure has not been studied in detail. Objectives: The authors sought to determine outcomes of TAVR surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) vs redo-TAVR because they are largely unknown. Methods: From May 2009 to February 2022, 396 patients in the international EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR registry underwent TAVR-explant (181, 46.4%) or redo-TAVR (215, 54.3%) for transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 1 year. Results: The incidence of reintervention after THV failure was 0.59% with increasing volume during the study period. Median time from index-TAVR to reintervention was shorter in TAVR-explant vs redo-TAVR (17.6 months [IQR: 5.0-40.7 months] vs 45.7 months [IQR: 10.6-75.6 months]; P < 0.001], respectively. TAVR-explant had more prosthesis–patient mismatch (17.1% vs 0.5%; P < 0.001) as the indication for reintervention, whereas redo-TAVR had more structural valve degeneration (63.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.023), with a similar incidence of ≥moderate paravalvular leak between groups (28.7% vs 32.8% in redo-TAVR; P = 0.44). There was a similar proportion of balloon-expandable THV failures (39.8% TAVR-explant vs 40.5% redo-TAVR; P = 0.92). Median follow-up was 11.3 (IQR: 1.6-27.1 months) after reintervention. Compared with redo-TAVR, TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days (13.6% vs 3.4%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (32.4% vs 15.4%; P = 0.001), with similar stroke rates between groups. On landmark analysis, mortality was similar between groups after 30 days (P = 0.91). Conclusions: In this first report of the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR global registry, TAVR-explant had a shorter median time to reintervention, with less structural valve degeneration, more prosthesis–patient mismatch, and similar paravalvular leak rates compared with redo-TAVR. TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days and 1 year, but similar r

Aims Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) is a new treatment option for patients with symptomatic mitral valve (MV) disease. Real-world data have not yet been reported. This study aimed to assess procedural and 30-day outcomes of TMVI in a real-world patient cohort. Method and results All consecutive patients undergoing implantation of a transapically delivered self-expanding valve at 26 European centres from January 2020 to April 2021 were included in this retrospective observational registry. Among 108 surgical high-risk patients included (43% female, mean age 75 +/- 7 years, mean STS-PROM 7.2 +/- 5.3%), 25% was treated for an off-label indication (e.g. previous MV intervention or surgery, mitral stenosis, mitral annular calcification). Patients were highly symptomatic (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class III/IV in 86%) and mitral regurgitation (MR) was graded 3+/4+ in 95% (38% primary, 37% secondary, and 25% mixed aetiology). Technical success rate was 96%, and MR reduction to <= 1+ was achieved in all patients with successful implantation. There were two procedural deaths and 30-day all-cause mortality was 12%. At early clinical follow-up, MR reduction was sustained and there were significant reductions of pulmonary pressure (systolic pulmonary artery pressure 52 vs. 42 mmHg, p < 0.001), and tricuspid regurgitation severity (p = 0.013). Heart failure symptoms improved significantly (73% in NYHA class I/II, p < 0.001). Procedural success rate according to MVARC criteria was 80% and was not different in patients treated for an off-label indication (74% vs. 81% for off- vs. on-label, p = 0.41). Conclusion In a real-world patient population, TMVI has a high technical and procedural success rate with efficient and durable MR reduction and symptomatic improvement.

Aims: Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) represents a novel treatment option for patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) unsuitable for established therapies. The CHOICE-MI registry aimed to investigate outcomes of patients undergoing screening for TMVI. Methods and results: From May 2014 to March 2021, patients with MR considered suboptimal candidates for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and at high risk for mitral valve surgery underwent TMVI screening at 26 centres. Characteristics and outcomes were investigated for patients undergoing TMVI and for TMVI-ineligible patients referred to bailout-TEER, high-risk surgery or medical therapy (MT). The primary composite endpoint was all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization after 1 year. Among 746 patients included (78.5 years, interquartile range [IQR] 72.0–83.0, EuroSCORE II 4.7% [IQR 2.7–9.7]), 229 patients (30.7%) underwent TMVI with 10 different dedicated devices. At 1 year, residual MR ≤1+ was present in 95.2% and the primary endpoint occurred in 39.2% of patients treated with TMVI. In TMVI-ineligible patients (n = 517, 69.3%), rates of residual MR ≤1+ were 37.2%, 100.0% and 2.4% after bailout-TEER, high-risk surgery and MT, respectively. The primary endpoint at 1 year occurred in 28.8% of patients referred to bailout-TEER, in 42.9% of patients undergoing high-risk surgery and in 47.9% of patients remaining on MT. Conclusion: This registry included the largest number of patients treated with TMVI to date. TMVI with 10 dedicated devices resulted in predictable MR elimination and sustained functional improvement at 1 year. In TMVI-ineligible patients, bailout-TEER and high-risk surgery represented reasonable alternatives, while MT was associated with poor clinical and functional outcomes.

AIMS: The Evolut PRO is a new transcatheter heart valve with an outer pericardial wrap intended to reduce paravalvular leak and facilitate tissue ingrowth. We aimed to evaluate the clinical performance and safety of the Evolut PRO valve in standard practice.METHODS AND RESULTS: FORWARD PRO is a prospective, multinational, multicentre observational study. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Evolut PRO valve (23, 26, or 29 mm) was attempted in 629 non-consecutive patients from 39 centres from February 2018 to January 2019. The primary endpoint was the rate of all-cause mortality at 30 days compared to a pre-specified performance goal. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated safety endpoints based on VARC-2 definitions. All echocardiograms were centrally assessed by an independent core laboratory (Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA). Baseline characteristics included mean age 81.7±6.1 years, 61.8% female, STS score 4.7±3.3%, and 33.6% were frail. All-cause mortality at 30 days was 3.2%, which was lower than the pre-specified performance goal of 5.5% (p=0.004). Greater than mild AR was present in 1.8% of patients at discharge.CONCLUSIONS: The FORWARD PRO study confirmed the safety and efficacy of the Evolut PRO transcatheter aortic valve system with an external pericardial wrap. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03417011 Visual summary. Paravalvular leak at discharge and (right) the Evolut PRO valve (Medtronic) with external pericardial wrap. Reproduced with permission from Medtronic, Inc.