Comparison of transcatheter edge-to-edge and surgical repair in patients with functional mitral regurgitation using a meta-analytic approach

BackgroundEvidence regarding favorable treatment of patients with functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) using transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) is constantly growing. However, there is only few data directly comparing TEER and surgical mitral valve repair (SMVr).AimsTo compare baseline characteristics, short-term and 1-year outcomes in FMR patients undergoing mitral valve (MV) TEER or SMVr using a meta-analytic approach.MethodsSystematic database search identified 1,703 studies reporting on TEER or SMVr for treatment of FMR between January 2010 and December 2020. A meta-analytic approach was used to compare outcomes from single-arm and randomized studies based on measures by means of their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistical significance was assumed if CIs did not overlap. A total of 21 TEER and 37 SMVr studies comprising 4,304 and 3,983 patients were included.ResultsPatients in the TEER cohort presented with higher age (72.0 ± 1.7 vs. 64.7 ± 4.7 years, p < 0.001), greater burden of comorbidities like hypertension (p < 0.001), atrial fibrillation (p < 0.001), lung disease (p < 0.001) and chronic renal disease (p = 0.005) as well as poorer left ventricular ejection fraction (30.9 ± 5.7 vs. 36.6 ± 5.3%, p < 0.001). In-hospital mortality was significantly lower with TEER [3% (95%-CI 0.02–0.03) vs. 5% (95%-CI 0.04–0.07)] and 1-year mortality did not differ significantly [18% (95%-CI 0.15–0.21) vs. 11% (0.07–0.18)]. NYHA [1.06 (95%-CI 0.87–1.26) vs. 1.15 (0.74–1.56)] and MR reduction [1.74 (95%-CI 1.52–1.97) vs. 2.08 (1.57–2.59)] were comparable between both cohorts.ConclusionDespite considerably higher age and comorbidity burden, in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in FMR patients treated with TEER, whereas a tendency toward increased 1-year mortality was observed in this high-risk population. In terms of functional status and MR grade reduction, comparable 1-year results were achieved

Caution, "normal" BMI: health risks associated with potentially masked individual underweight - EPMA position paper 2021

An increasing interest in a healthy lifestyle raises questions about optimal body weight. Evidently, it should be clearly discriminated between the standardised "normal" body weight and individually optimal weight. To this end, the basic principle of personalised medicine "one size does not fit all" has to be applied. Contextually, "normal" but e.g. borderline body mass index might be optimal for one person but apparently suboptimal for another one strongly depending on the individual genetic predisposition, geographic origin, cultural and nutritional habits and relevant lifestyle parameters - all included into comprehensive individual patient profile. Even if only slightly deviant, both overweight and underweight are acknowledged risk factors for a shifted metabolism which, if being not optimised, may strongly contribute to the development and progression of severe pathologies. Development of innovative screening programmes is essential to promote population health by application of health risks assessment, individualised patient profiling and multi-parametric analysis, further used for cost-effective targeted prevention and treatments tailored to the person. The following healthcare areas are considered to be potentially strongly benefiting from the above proposed measures: suboptimal health conditions, sports medicine, stress overload and associated complications, planned pregnancies, periodontal health and dentistry, sleep medicine, eye health and disorders, inflammatory disorders, healing and pain management, metabolic disorders, cardiovascular disease, cancers, psychiatric and neurologic disorders, stroke of known and unknown aetiology, improved individual and population outcomes under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19. In a long-term way, a significantly improved healthcare economy is one of benefits of the proposed paradigm shift from reactive to Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine (PPPM/3PM). A tight collaboration between all stakeholders including scientific community, healthcare givers, patient organisations, policy-makers and educators is essential for the smooth implementation of 3PM concepts in daily practice