Cargando…

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Valve Repair in Patients with Severe Mitral Regurgitation

Background. Transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TMVR) is increasingly performed. However, its efficacy in comparison with surgical MV treatment (SMV) is unknown. Methods. Consecutive patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) undergoing TMVR (68% functional, 32% degenerative) or SMV...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Koschutnik, Matthias, Dannenberg, Varius, Donà, Carolina, Nitsche, Christian, Kammerlander, Andreas A., Koschatko, Sophia, Zimpfer, Daniel, Hülsmann, Martin, Aschauer, Stefan, Schneider, Matthias, Bartko, Philipp E., Goliasch, Georg, Hengstenberg, Christian, Mascherbauer, Julia
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8779938/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35055405
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12010090
Descripción
Sumario:Background. Transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TMVR) is increasingly performed. However, its efficacy in comparison with surgical MV treatment (SMV) is unknown. Methods. Consecutive patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) undergoing TMVR (68% functional, 32% degenerative) or SMV (9% functional, 91% degenerative) were enrolled. To account for differences in baseline characteristics, propensity score matching was performed, including age, EuroSCORE-II, left ventricular ejection fraction, and NT-proBNP. A composite of heart failure (HF) hospitalization/death served as primary endpoint. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox-regression analyses were used to investigate associations between baseline, imaging, and procedural parameters and outcome. Results. Between July 2017 and April 2020, 245 patients were enrolled, of whom 102 patients could be adequately matched (73 y/o, 61% females, EuroSCORE-II: 5.7%, p > 0.05 for all). Despite matching, TMVR patients had more co-morbidities at baseline (higher rates of prior myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, pacemakers/defibrillators, and diabetes mellitus, p < 0.009 for all). Patients were followed for 28.3 ± 27.2 months, during which 27 events (17 deaths, 10 HF hospitalizations) occurred. Postprocedural MR reduction (MR grade <2: TMVR vs. SMV: 88% vs. 94%, p = 0.487) and freedom from HF hospitalization/death (log-rank: p = 0.811) were similar at 2 years. On multivariable Cox analysis, EuroSCORE-II (adj.HR 1.07 [95%CI: 1.00–1.13], p = 0.027) and residual MR (adj.HR 1.85 [95%CI: 1.17–2.92], p = 0.009) remained significantly associated with outcome. Conclusions. In this propensity-matched, all-comers cohort, two-year outcomes after TMVR versus SMV were similar. Given the reported favorable long-term durability of TMVR, the interventional approach emerges as a valuable alternative for a substantial number of patients with functional and degenerative MR.