Percutaneous mitral repair: current and future devices

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is the second most common valvular heart disease and its prevalence is increasing with population ageing. In the recent years we have witnessed the development of several transcatheter devices to correct MR in patients at high-risk for surgery. The majority of evidence regarding safety and efficacy of this new therapy comes from MitraClip studies. However, new alternatives on the field of valve repair have emerged with promising results. The aim of this review is to portrait the landscape of transcatheter mitral repair alternatives, from currently used devices to those that will have a role in the near future

Percutaneous treatment with Mitraclip for functional mitral regurgitation: medium-term follow up according to left ventricular function

Background: Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is a bad prognosis condition despite optimal medical treatment. Nowadays there is an open debate about the surgical versus percutaneous treatment. The main objective of this study is to evaluate the mid-term follow up clinical outcomes of patients with FMR treated with MitraClip((R)) system, according to their left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods: Data was obtained from two experienced centers in transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR). All consecutive cases of severe FMR undergoing TMVR in both centers with the same inclusion criteria were included prospectively in this study and followed-up. Periodical follow-ups with clinical and echocardiographic evaluation were scheduled from the baseline procedure, at 3 months and then yearly. Results: From October 2015 to October 2019, a total of 119 patients with FMR at 2 centers in Spain underwent TMVR with the MitraClip((R)) procedure and were included in this study. The mean age was 73.8+/-8.9 years old and 32 patients (26.9%) were female. A 39.5% of cases [47] had a LVEF 30% (group 2). There was a similar distribution in cardiovascular risk factors, age and other diseases. All MitraClip((R)) implantations were elective and procedural success was achieved in 110 patients (92.4%) with a similar distribution between the groups. There were no differences in procedural time and the number of implanted clips. The median follow-up was 22.6 months (IQR, 11.43-34.98 months). The primary combined endpoint occurred in the 41.6% of the global cohort, 57.5% in group 1 and 30.99% in group 2 (P=0.036). LVEF was associated to the main event in the multivariate analysis (HR 2.09, 95% CI: 1.12-3.89; P=0.02). Conclusions: The MitraClip edge-to-edge technique is a safe and effective procedure for the treatment of FMR. In this study, patients with LVEF >30% treated with Mitraclip presented better clinical cardiovascular outcomes than those with a LVEF </=30%. Regardless clinical outcomes, at the end of the follow-up, there was a sustained reduction in MR grades and an important improvement in NYHA functional class

Ventricular arrhythmias in patients with functional mitral regurgitation and implantable cardiac devices: implications of mitral valve repair with Mitraclip

Background: Limited information has been reported regarding the impact of percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) on ventricular arrhythmic (VA) burden. The aim of this study was to address the incidence of VA and appropriate antitachycardia implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) therapies before and after PMVR. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients with heart failure with reduce left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) grade 3+ or 4+ and an active ICD or cardiac resynchronizer who underwent PMVR in any of the eleven recruiting centers. Only patients with complete available device VA monitoring from one-year before to one year after PMVR were included. Baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were collected before PMVR and at 12-months follow-up. Results: Ninety-three patients (68.2+/-10.9 years old, male 88.2%) were enrolled. PMVR was successfully performed in all patients and device success at discharge was 91.4%. At 12-month follow-up, we observed a significant reduction in mitral regurgitation severity, NT-proBNP and prevalence of severe pulmonary hypertension and severe kidney disease. Patients also referred a significant improvement in NYHA functional class and showed a non-significant trend to reserve left ventricular remodeling. After PMVR a significant decrease in the incidence of non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) (5.0+/-17.8 vs. 2.7+/-13.5, P=0.002), sustained VT or ventricular fibrillation (0.9+/-2.5 vs. 0.5+/-2.9, P=0.012) and ICD antitachycardia therapies (2.5+/-12.0 vs. 0.9+/-5.0, P=0.033) were observed. Conclusions: PMVR was related to a reduction in arrhythmic burden and ICD therapies in our cohort

Five-year outcomes of chronic total occlusion treatment with a biolimus A9-eluting biodegradable polymer stent versus a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent in the LEADERS all-comers trial

Background: Few data are available on long-term follow-up of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO). The LEADERS CTO sub-study compared the long-term results in CTO and non-CTO lesions of a Biolimus A9™-eluting stent (BES) with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES).Methods: Among 1,707 patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-center, all-comers LEADERS trial, 81 with CTOs were treated with either a BES (n = 45) or a SES (n = 36). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (TVR).Results: At 5 years, the rate of MACE was numerically higher in the CTO group than in the non-CTO group (29.6% vs. 23.3%; p = 0.173), with a significant increase in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (21.0 vs. 12.6; p = 0.033), but no difference in stent thrombosis (ST). Patients with CTO receiving a BES demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE (22.2% vs. 38.9%; p = 0.147) with a significant reduction in TLR compared to patients receiving a SES (11.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.0214) with an incidence similar to that observed in the non-CTO group treated with BES (11.6%). Definite ST at 5 years nearly halved in the BES group (4.4% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.478) with no ST in the BES group after the first year (0% vs. 8.3%, p for interaction = 0.009).Conclusions: The use of a BES showed a reduction in MACE, TVR, TLR, and ST over time in the CTO subset with similar outcome as for non-CTO lesions

Five-year outcomes of chronic total occlusion treatment with a biolimus A9-eluting biodegradable polymer stent versus a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent in the LEADERS all-comers trial

Background: Few data are available on long-term follow-up of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO). The LEADERS CTO sub-study compared the long-term results in CTO and non-CTO lesions of a Biolimus A9™-eluting stent (BES) with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). Methods: Among 1,707 patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-center, all-comers LEADERS trial, 81 with CTOs were treated with either a BES (n = 45) or a SES (n = 36). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: At 5 years, the rate of MACE was numerically higher in the CTO group than in the non-CTO group (29.6% vs. 23.3%; p = 0.173), with a significant increase in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (21.0 vs. 12.6; p = 0.033), but no difference in stent thrombosis (ST). Patients with CTO receiving a BES demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE (22.2% vs. 38.9%; p = 0.147) with a significant reduction in TLR compared to patients receiving a SES (11.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.0214) with an incidence similar to that observed in the non-CTO group treated with BES (11.6%). Definite ST at 5 years nearly halved in the BES group (4.4% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.478) with no ST in the BES group after the first year (0% vs. 8.3%, p for interaction = 0.009). Conclusions: The use of a BES showed a reduction in MACE, TVR, TLR, and ST over time in the CTO subset with similar outcome as for non-CTO lesions

Five-year outcomes of chronic total occlusion treatment with a biolimus A9-eluting biodegradable polymer stent versus a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent in the LEADERS all-comers trial.

BACKGROUND Few data are available on long-term follow-up of DES in the treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO). The LEADERS CTO sub-study compared the long-term results in CTO and non-CTO lesions of a Biolimus A9™-eluting stent (BES) with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). METHODS Among 1,707 patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-center, all-comers LEADERS trial, 81 with CTOs were treated with either a BES (n = 45) or a SES (n = 36). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS At 5 years, the rate of MACE was numerically higher in the CTO group than in the non-CTO group (29.6% vs. 23.3%; p = 0.173), with a significant increase in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (21.0 vs. 12.6; p = 0.033), but no difference in stent thrombosis (ST). Patients with CTO receiving a BES demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE (22.2% vs. 38.9%; p = 0.147) with a significant reduction in TLR compared to patients receiving a SES (11.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.0214) with an incidence similar to that observed in the non-CTO group treated with BES (11.6%). Definite ST at 5 years nearly halved in the BES group (4.4% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.478) with no ST in the BES group after the first year (0% vs. 8.3%, p for interaction = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS The use of a BES showed a reduction in MACE, TVR, TLR, and ST over time in the CTO subset with similar outcome as for non-CTO lesions

Transapical mitral valve implantation for treatment of symptomatic mitral valve disease: a real-world multicentre experience.

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

Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on TAVR Activity: A Worldwide Registry

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic had a considerable impact on the provision of structural heart intervention worldwide. Our objectives were: 1) to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) activity globally; and 2) to determine the differences in the impact according to geographic region and the demographic, development, and economic status of diverse international health care systems. Methods: We developed a multinational registry of global TAVR activity and invited individual TAVR sites to submit TAVR implant data before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, the number of TAVR procedures performed monthly from January 2019 to December 2021 was collected. The adaptive measures to maintain TAVR activity by each site were recorded, as was a variety of indices relating to type of health care system and national economic indices. The primary subject of interest was the impact on TAVR activity during each of the pandemic waves (2020 and 2021) compared with the same period pre–COVID-19 (2019). Results: Data were received from 130 centers from 61 countries, with 14 subcontinents and 5 continents participating in the study. Overall, TAVR activity increased by 16.7% (2,337 procedures) between 2018 and 2019 (ie, before the pandemic), but between 2019 and 2020 (ie, first year of the pandemic), there was no significant growth (–0.1%; –10 procedures). In contrast, activity again increased by 18.9% (3,085 procedures) between 2020 and 2021 (ie, second year of the pandemic). During the first pandemic wave, there was a reduction of 18.9% (945 procedures) in TAVR activity among participating sites, while during the second and third waves, there was an increase of 6.7% (489 procedures) and 15.9% (1,042 procedures), respectively. Further analysis and results of this study are ongoing and will be available at the time of the congress. Conclusion: The COVID-19 pandemic initially led to a reduction in the number of patients undergoing TAVR worldwide, although health care systems subsequently adapted, and the number of TAVR recipients continued to grow in subsequent COVID-19 pandemic waves. Categories: STRUCTURAL: Valvular Disease: Aorti

Management and outcomes of patients with left atrial appendage thrombus prior to percutaneous closure.

Left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus has heretofore been considered a contraindication to percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC). Data regarding its management are very limited. The aim of this study was to analyse the medical and invasive treatment of patients referred for LAAC in the presence of LAA thrombus. This multicentre observational registry included 126 consecutive patients referred for LAAC with LAA thrombus on preprocedural imaging. Treatment strategies included intensification of antithrombotic therapy (IAT) or direct LAAC. The primary and secondary endpoints were a composite of bleeding, stroke and death at 18 months, and procedural success, respectively. IAT was the preferred strategy in 57.9% of patients, with total thrombus resolution observed in 60.3% and 75.3% after initial and subsequent IAT, respectively. Bleeding complications and stroke during IAT occurred in 9.6% and 2.9%, respectively, compared with 3.8% bleeding and no embolic events in the direct LAAC group before the procedure. Procedural success was 90.5% (96.2% vs 86.3% in direct LAAC and IAT group, respectively, p=0.072), without cases of in-hospital thromboembolic complications. The primary endpoint occurred in 29.3% and device-related thrombosis was found in 12.8%, without significant difference according to treatment strategy. Bleeding complications at 18 months occurred in 22.5% vs 10.5% in the IAT and direct LAAC group, respectively (p=0.102). In the presence of LAA thrombus, IAT was the initial management strategy in half of our cohort, with initial thrombus resolution in 60% of these, but with a relatively high bleeding rate (~10%). Direct LAAC was feasible, with high procedural success and absence of periprocedural embolic complications. However, a high rate of device-related thrombosis was detected during follow-up