Search

Background: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) and morphologic presence of relevant mitral annular calcification (MAC) represent a challenging phenotypic subset with limited treatment options., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using dedicated devices for the treatment of MAC patients., Methods: Consecutive patients with symptomatic MR receiving TMVR and with available computed tomography data from the CHOICE-MI (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency) multicenter registry were stratified by the presence of none or mild mitral annular calcification (MAC none/mild ) vs moderate or severe mitral annular calcification (MAC mod/sev )., Results: Among 279 eligible patients (median age = 76.0 years [Q1-Q3: 71.0-81.0 years], EuroSCORE II = 6.2% [Q1-Q3: 3.9%-12.1%]), 222 (79.6%) presented with MAC none/mild and 57 (20.4%) with MAC mod/sev . Patients with MAC mod/sev  had a higher prevalence of extracardiac arteriopathy (P = 0.011) and primary MR (P < 0.001). Although the technical success rate and the extent of MR elimination did not differ, TMVR treatment in MAC mod/sev patients was associated with higher rates of postprocedural bleeding complications (P = 0.02) and renal failure (P < 0.001). Functional improvement at the 1- and 2-year follow-up did not differ between groups. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no differences between patients with MAC mod/sev and MAC none/mild regarding all-cause mortality (38.5% vs 37.7%; P = 0.76), cardiovascular mortality (21.3% vs 24.9%; P = 0.97), and all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization (52.4% vs 46.7%; P = 0.28) CONCLUSIONS: TMVR in patients with MAC mod/sev is associated with higher rates of postprocedural complications but similar rates of survival, MR resolution, and functional improvement compared to MAC none/mild . Further studies are necessary to define the role of dedicated TMVR devices in this population. (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency Registry [CHOICE-MI]; NCT04688190)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by a grant from the German Heart Foundation. Dr Coisne is a proctor for Abbott Vascular; and has received speaker fees for Abbot Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, GE Healthcare, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer. Dr Ludwig has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences; has received honoraria from Bayer and Abbott; is a consultant for NVT; and was supported by a research grant from the German Heart Foundation. Dr Ali has received research grants from Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Duncan is a consultant for and has received honoraria from Abbott Laboratories, Edward Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Kalbacher has received personal fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Pi-Cardia Ltd, and Medtronic. Dr Rudolph has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Vascular. Dr Hausleiter has received consulting fees, speaker honoraria, and support of research projects paid to the institution from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Ruge serves as a physician proctor for Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; is a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott, and Edwards Lifesciences; and is a member of the Abbott Advisory Board. Dr Schmidt has received consultant fees and travel support from Cardiovalve. Dr Taramasso is consultant or has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Shenqi Medical, MEDIRA, PiCardia, CoreMedic, Cardiovalve, Simulands, CoreQuest, HiD Imaging, and OneCrea Medical. Dr Denti has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received consultant fees from Approxima, HVR, InnovHeart, and Pi-Cardia Ltd. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston, and Zoll; and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background Edge-to-edge transcatheter mitral valve repair as salvage therapy in high surgical risk patients with severe mitral regurgitation presenting with cardiogenic shock (CS) has been described in small case series, but large clinical results have not been reported. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve repair with MitraClip in patients with mitral regurgitation and CS using a large national database. Methods and Results From January 2014 to March 2019, we identified hospitalizations for CS in patients with mitral valve disease using data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Those with a prior surgical or percutaneous mitral valve intervention were excluded. We compared survival between patients who underwent MitraClip during the index hospitalization and those who did not using propensity-matched analysis. The analysis included 38 166 patients (mean age, 71±11 years, 41.6% women) of whom 622 (1.6%) underwent MitraClip. MitraClip was increasingly used during CS hospitalizations over the study period ( P <0.001). After matching, patients receiving MitraClip had significantly lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.47-0.77; P <0.001) and 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65-0.88; P <0.001) compared with those without MitraClip. The survival benefit associated with MitraClip was consistent across subgroups of interest, with the exception of patients requiring acute mechanical circulatory support or hemodialysis at index. Conclusions In patients with mitral regurgitation presenting with CS, use of MitraClip is increasing and associated with greater in-hospital and 1-year survival. Further studies are warranted to optimize patient selection and procedure timing for those receiving MitraClip as a treatment option in CS.

Mitral annular calcification with mitral valve disease is a challenging problem that could necessitate surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR). Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is emerging as a feasible alternative in high-risk patients with appropriate anatomy. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to December 25, 2019 for studies discussing SMVR or TMVR in patients with mitral annular calcification; 27 of 1539 articles were selected for final review. TMVR was used in 15 studies. Relevant data were available on 82 patients who underwent hybrid transatrial TMVR, and 354 patients who underwent transapical or transseptal TMVR. Outcomes on SMVR were generally reported as small case series (447 patients from 11 studies); however, 1 large study recently reported outcomes in 9551 patients. Patients who underwent TMVR had a shorter median follow-up of 9 to 12 months (range, in-hospital‒19 months) compared with patients with SMVR (54 months; range, in-hospital‒120 months). Overall, those undergoing TMVR were older and had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores. SMVR showed a wide range of early (0%-27%; median 6.3%) and long-term mortality (0%-65%; median at 1 year, 15.8%; 5 years, 38.8%, 10 years, 62.4%). The median in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rates were 16.7%, 22.7%, and 43%, respectively, for transseptal/transapical TMVR, and 9.5%, 20.0%, and 40%, respectively, for transatrial TMVR. Mitral annular calcification is a complex disease and TMVR, with a versatile option of transatrial approach in patients with challenging anatomy, offers a promising alternative to SMVR in high-risk patients. However, further studies are needed to improve technology, patient selection, operative expertise, and long-term outcomes.

Bioprosthetic mitral structural valve degeneration and failed mitral valve repair (MVr) have traditionally been treated with reoperative mitral valve surgery. Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (MVIV) and valve-in-ring (MVIR) replacement are now feasible, but data comparing these approaches are lacking. We sought to compare the outcomes of (1) reoperative mitral valve replacement (redo-MVR) and MVIV for structural valve degeneration, and (2) reoperative mitral valve repair (redo-MVr) or MVR and MVIR for failed MVr. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to July 31, 2020. Thirty-two studies involving 25 832 patients were included. Redo-MVR was required in ≈35% of patients after index surgery at 10 years, with 5% to 15% 30-day mortality. MVIV resulted in >95% procedural success with 30-day and 1-year mortality of 0% to 8% and 11% to 16%, respectively. Recognized complications included left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (0%-6%), valve migration (0%-9%), and residual regurgitation (0%-6%). Comparisons of redo-MVR and MVIV showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (11.3% versus 11.9% at 1 year, P =0.92), albeit higher rates of major bleeding and arrhythmias with redo-MVR. MVIR resulted in 0% to 34% mortality at 1 year, whereas both redo-MVr and MVR for failed repairs were performed with minimal mortality and durable long-term results. MVIV is therefore a viable alternative to redo-MVR for structural valve degeneration, whereas redo-MVr or redo-MVR is preferred for failed MVr given the suboptimal results with MVIR. However, not all patients will be candidates for MVIV/MVIR because anatomical restrictions may preclude transcatheter options from adequately addressing the underlying pathology.

Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) has shown comparable outcomes to surgical mitral valve replacement or repair (SMVR) in patients who are at a higher risk of surgical complications and therefore are not amenable to surgery. Elderly patients are considered poor surgical candidates due to their advanced age, and presence of comorbidities. A sub-analysis of EVEREST II (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair Study) trial identified patients of >70 years of age appear to have a similar risk-benefit profile for either approach of surgery or transcatheter. This finding does have some caveats considering the trial included surgical cohort with both repair and replacement. Utilizing the National Inpatient Sample, we identified a surgical cohort of ≥80 years of age that underwent mitral valve repair and used propensity matching to compare it with a similar cohort that underwent TMVR. In a well-balanced cohort, TMVR was associated with significantly lower in-patient mortality (0.7% vs 3.1%). TMVR was also associated with significantly decreased in-hospital complications such as acute kidney injury, cardiogenic shock, postoperative hemorrhage, transfusion, permanent pacemaker, and respiratory and vascular complications. Owing to this, the duration of hospital stay is approximately 6 days less with TMVR. Trend analysis has shown a paradigm shift in these elderly patients with 85% of all repairs in 2012 were performed surgically, whereas in 2016 almost 94% of all the repairs being performed via a transcatheter approach. In conclusion, in patients ≥80 years of age, the surgical MVR had 4-fold higher mortality compared to TMVR with higher cardiac, vascular, hemorrhagic and respiratory complications. Despite the limitations of being observational in nature, this data strongly supports the preferential use of the transcatheter approach for mitral valve repair in patients ≥80 years of age., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The interference of a transtricuspid cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) lead with tricuspid valve function may contribute to the mechanism of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and poses specific therapeutic challenges during transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI). Feasibility and efficacy of TTVI in presence of a CIED is unclear., Background: Feasibility of TTVI in presence of a CIED lead has never been proven on a large basis., Methods: The study population consisted of 470 patients with severe symptomatic TR from the TriValve (Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies) registry who underwent TTVI at 21 centers between 2015 and 2018. The association of CIED and outcomes were assessed., Results: Pre-procedural CIED was present in 121 of 470 (25.7%) patients. The most frequent location of the CIED lead was the posteroseptal commissure (44.0%). As compared with patients without a transvalvular lead (no-CIED group), patients having a tricuspid lead (CIED group) were more symptomatic (New York Heart Association functional class III to IV in 95.9% vs. 92.3%; p = 0.02) and more frequently had previous episodes of right heart failure (87.8% vs. 69.0%; p = 0.002). No-CIED patients had more severe TR (effective regurgitant orifice area 0.7 ± 0.6 cm 2 vs. 0.6 ± 0.3 cm 2 ; p = 0.02), but significantly better right ventricular function (tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion = 16.7 ± 5.0 mm vs. 15.9 ± 4.0 mm; p = 0.04). Overall, 373 patients (79%) were treated with the MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) (106 [87.0%] in the CIED group). Among them, 154 (33%) patients had concomitant transcatheter mitral repair (55 [46.0%] in the CIED group, all MitraClip). Procedural success was achieved in 80.0% of no-CIED patients and in 78.6% of CIED patients (p = 0.74), with an in-hospital mortality of 2.9% and 3.7%, respectively (p = 0.70). At 30 days, residual TR ≤2+ was observed in 70.8% of no-CIED and in 73.7% of CIED patients (p = 0.6). Symptomatic improvement was observed in both groups (NYHA functional class I to II at 30 days: 66.0% vs. 65.0%; p = 0.30). Survival at 12 months was 80.7 ± 3.0% in the no-CIED patients and 73.6 ± 5.0% in the CIED patients (p = 0.30)., Conclusions: TTVI is feasible in selected patients with CIED leads and acute procedural success and short-term clinical outcomes are comparable to those observed in patients without a transtricuspid lead., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We sought to evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with degenerated bioprostheses [valve-in-valve (ViV)], failed annuloplasty rings [valve-in-ring (ViR)], and severe mitral annular calcification [valve-in-mitral annular calcification (ViMAC)]., Methods and Results: From the TMVR multicentre registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of ViV, ViR, and ViMAC were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) criteria. A total of 521 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.0% underwent TMVR (322 patients with ViV, 141 with ViR, and 58 with ViMAC). Trans-septal access and the Sapien valves were used in 39.5% and 90.0%, respectively. Overall technical success was excellent at 87.1%. However, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction occurred more frequently after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV (39.7% vs. 5.0% vs. 2.2%; P < 0.001), whereas second valve implantation was more frequent in ViR compared with ViMAC and ViV (12.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 2.5%; P < 0.001). Accordingly, technical success rate was higher after ViV compared with ViR and ViMAC (94.4% vs. 80.9% vs. 62.1%; P < 0.001). Compared with ViMAC and ViV groups, ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation ≥moderate (18.4% vs. 13.8% vs. 5.6%; P < 0.001) and subsequent paravalvular leak closure (7.8% vs. 0.0% vs. 2.2%; P = 0.006). All-cause mortality was higher after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV at 30 days (34.5% vs. 9.9% vs. 6.2%; log-rank P < 0.001) and 1 year (62.8% vs. 30.6% vs. 14.0%; log-rank P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with failed annuloplasty rings and severe MAC were at increased risk of mortality after TMVR [ViR vs. ViV, hazard ratio (HR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.12; P = 0.003; ViMAC vs. ViV, HR 5.29, 95% CI 3.29-8.51; P < 0.001]., Conclusion: The TMVR provided excellent outcomes for patients with degenerated bioprostheses despite high surgical risk. However, ViR and ViMAC were associated with higher rates of adverse events and mid-term mortality compared with ViV.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictors of left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction after transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR)., Background: LVOT obstruction is a major concern with TMVR, but limited data exist regarding its predictors and impact on outcomes., Methods: Patients with pre-procedural multidetector row computed tomography (MDCT) undergoing TMVR for failed mitral bioprosthetic valves (valve-in-valve), annuloplasty rings (valve-in-ring), and mitral annular calcification (valve-in-MAC) were included in this study. Echocardiographic and procedural characteristics were recorded, and comprehensive assessment with MDCT was performed to identify the predictors of LVOT obstruction (defined as an increment of mean LVOT gradient ≥10 mm Hg from baseline). The new LVOT (neo-LVOT) area left after TMVR was estimated by embedding a virtual valve into the mitral annulus on MDCT, simulating the procedure., Results: Among 194 patients with pre-procedural MDCT undergoing TMVR (valve-in-valve, 107 patients; valve-in-ring, 50 patients; valve-in-MAC, 37 patients), LVOT obstruction was observed in 26 patients (13.4%), with a higher rate after valve-in-MAC than valve-in-ring and valve-in-valve (54.1% vs. 8.0% vs. 1.9%; p < 0.001). Patients with LVOT obstruction had significantly higher procedural mortality compared with those without LVOT obstruction (34.6% vs. 2.4%; p < 0.001). Receiver-operating characteristic curve analysis showed that an estimated neo-LVOT area ≤1.7 cm 2 predicted LVOT obstruction with sensitivity of 96.2% and specificity of 92.3%., Conclusions: LVOT obstruction after TMVR was associated with higher procedural mortality. A small estimated neo-LVOT area was significantly associated with LVOT obstruction after TMVR and may help identify patients at high risk for LVOT obstruction., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We report our multicenter experience on continuous hemodynamic monitoring using exclusively the steerable guide catheter (SGC) during MitraClip repair., Background: Left atrial pressure (LAP) and V-wave are useful to evaluate MitraClip repair but no simple method of continuous monitoring exists., Methods: From 11/2016 to 8/2017, 74 patients from four centers with symptomatic moderate-severe to severe mitral regurgitation (MR), underwent MitraClip NT repair with continuous hemodynamic monitoring via the SGC. Real-time LAP/V-wave changes were compared with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). When mitral stenosis was suspected, transmitral gradients were verified by invasive hemodynamics. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were determined., Results: Mean age was 78 ± 10 years and STS score 9.1 ± 11.0%. Pathology included leaflet prolapse/flail (45%), restriction (35%), and mixed (20%). Number of clips averaged 1.7 ± 0.7 per case. There was a significant reduction in LAP (21 ± 10 to 15 ± 7 mmHg, P < 0.0001) and V-wave(37 ± 19 to 24 ± 10 mmHg, P < 0.0001) post MitraClip, but the decrease was less in patients with atrial fibrillation (P < 0.05). Transmitral gradient significantly increased from 2.0 ± 1.2 to 4.0 ± 1.7 mmHg (P < 0.0001). Paradoxical increases in LAP and V-wave despite MR reduction were observed in three cases requiring MitraClip repositioning or retrieval to avoid stenosis. Follow-up averaged 5.0 ± 2.9 months and was 100% complete. KCCQ improvement was significant and MR reduction to <1+ was 67% and <2+ was 93% at 30 days., Conclusions: Continuous hemodynamic monitoring using the SGC complements TEE to assess and optimize MitraClip repair in real-time. Further validation is necessary but this feature may be part of future MitraClip and other transcatheter mitral repair systems., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Mitral valve replacement in the setting of severe mitral annular calcification remains a surgical challenge. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using an aortic balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve is emerging as a potential treatment option for high surgical risk patients. Transseptal, transapical, or transatrial access is not always feasible, so an understanding of alternative implantation techniques is important., Objectives: The authors sought to present a step-by-step description of a contemporary transatrial TMVR technique using balloon-expandable aortic transcatheter heart valves. This procedure has evolved over time to address valve migration, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction, and paravalvular leak. The authors present a refined technique that has been associated with the most reproducible outcomes., Methods: A step-by-step description of the TMVR technique and outcomes of 8 patients treated using this technique are described. Baseline patient clinical and echocardiographic characteristics and 30-day post-TMVR outcomes are presented., Results: Eight patients underwent transatrial TMVR at a single institution. Five had previous cardiac surgery. Mean STS score was 8%. Technical success by MVARC (Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium) criteria was 100%. There was zero in-hospital and 30-day mortality. Procedural success by MVARC criteria at 30 days was 100%. Paravalvular leak immediately post-implant was none or trace in 6 and mild in 1., Conclusions: The technique described is reproducible and was associated with favorable outcomes in this early experience. It represents a useful technique for the treatment of mitral valve disease in the setting of severe annular calcification. A structured and defined implantation technique is critical to investigators as this field evolves., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Acute afterload mismatch after surgery for mitral regurgitation (MR) with transient left ventricular dysfunction is well known, but not described after transcatheter mitral valve repair with MitraClip, except in functional MR and cardiomyopathy. MitraClip to manage acute severe MR and cardiogenic shock has also been rarely reported. We report here a 77-year-old female who presented with acute severe degenerative MR from a flail posterior leaflet, with cardiogenic shock requiring intra-aortic balloon pump support. She was medically stabilized and underwent successful MitraClip repair with mild residual MR, but developed acute afterload mismatch and severe left ventricular dysfunction and shock 24 hr after her procedure. Patient was medically managed with intra-aortic balloon pump and inotropic support. She subsequently fully recovered with normal ventricular function and was discharged after 14 days. Patient remained asymptomatic in NYHA I functional class 9 months after MitraClip repair, with mild residual MR and normal ventricular function. MitraClip repair in patients with acute severe degenerative MR and cardiogenic shock is a less invasive and potentially safer alternative to open surgery, but acute afterload mismatch may occur and requires prompt diagnosis and management for a successful outcome. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Purpose of Review: Despite the proven superiority of mitral repair over replacement for degenerative mitral disease, mitral valve replacement remains common. Guidelines now recommend referral of patients, particularly those whom are asymptomatic, to valve centers of excellence, although criteria that define such centers remain to be established. The purpose of this review is to define the structure of a mitral center of excellence and to review current clinical outcomes which are possible in such a center., Recent Findings: Recently, American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association as well as the European Society of Cardiology/European Association of Cardiothoracic Surgery guidelines define mitral centers of excellence as either centers in which the likelihood of successful and durable repair exceeds 95% and with an operative mortality risk of less than 1% (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association definition) or centers with high repair rates, low operative mortality, and a record of durable results (European Society of Cardiology/European Association of Cardiothoracic Surgery definition). There is however less clarity about the structure and function of a center that achieves these outcomes., Summary: The importance of centers of excellence in mitral valve surgery are now well recognized, and this review will highlight the key components and outcomes of an established mitral valve reference center.