Background Concomitant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a common finding in mitral regurgitation (MR). Transcatheter repair (TMVR) is a favorable treatment option in patients at elevated surgical risk. To date, evidence on long-term prognosis and the prognostic impact of TR after TMVR is limited. Methods Long-term survival data of patients undergoing isolated edge-to-edge repair from June 2010 to March 2018 (combinations with other forms of TMVR or tricuspid valve therapy excluded) were analyzed in a retrospective monocentric study. TR severity was categorized and the impact of TR on survival was analysed. Results Overall, 606 patients [46.5% female, 56.4% functional MR (FMR)] were enrolled in this study. TR at baseline was categorized severe/medium/mild/no or trace in 23.2/34.3/36.3/6.3% of the cases. At 30-day follow-up, improvement of at least one TR-grade was documented in 34.9%. Severe TR at baseline was identified as predictor of 1-year survival [65.2% vs. 77.0%, p = 0.030; HR for death 1.68 (95% CI 1.12–2.54), p = 0.013] and in FMR-patients also regarding long-term prognosis [adjusted HR for long-term mortality 1.57 (95% CI 1.00–2.45), p = 0.049]. Missing post-interventional reduction of TR severity was predictive for poor prognosis, especially in the FMR-subgroup [1-year survival: 92.9% vs. 78.3%, p = 0.025; HR for death at 1-year follow-up 3.31 (95% CI 1.15–9.58), p = 0.027]. While BNP levels decreased in both subgroups, TR reduction was associated with improved symptomatic benefit (NYHA-class-reduction 78.6 vs. 65.9%, p = 0.021). Conclusion In this large study, both, severe TR at baseline as well as missing secondary reduction were predictive for impaired long-term prognosis, especially in patients with FMR etiology. TR reduction was associated with increased symptomatic benefit. Graphic abstract
Objectives Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) by edge‐to‐edge therapy is an established treatment for severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR). Background Symptomatic and prognostic benefit in functional MR has been shown recently; nevertheless, data on long‐term outcomes are sparse. Methods and results We analyzed survival of patients treated with isolated edge‐to‐edge repair from June 2010 to March 2018 (primarily combined edge‐to‐edge repair with other mitral valve interventions was excluded) in a retrospective monocentric study. Overall, 627 consecutive patients (47.0% females, 78.6 years in mean) were included. Leading etiology was functional MR (57.4%). Follow‐up regarding survival was available in 97.0%. While 97.6% were discharged alive, 75.7% were alive after a 1‐year, 54.5% after 3‐year, 37.6% after 5‐year and 21.7% after 7‐year follow‐up. Higher logistic Euroscores and comorbidities such as COPD and renal insufficiency were associated with higher in‐hospital and 1‐year mortality. Importantly, in‐hospital survival increased over the years. Conclusions With the present study we established high survival rates at discharge and after 1 year of patients treated with TMVR. This goes along with high implantation numbers, increased interventional experience and a better in‐hospital survival over the years. Long‐term mortality in turn was substantially influenced by comorbidities.
Background Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is a frequent heart valve disorder affecting 1–2% of the humans in the general population and over 10% of the individuals older than 75 years. While a symptomatic and prognostic benefit of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for MR (TMVR) was reported, data regarding long-term outcome as well as influence of concomitant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) are sparse. Purpose We aimed to investigate the impact of periinterventional development of TR on survival of patients undergoing interventional edge-to-edge repair for MR in a large retrospective monocentric study. Methods We retrospectively analyzed survival of patients successfully treated with isolated edge-to-edge repair for MR from 06/2010–03/2018 (exclusion of combined forms of TMVR) in our center. Baseline, periprocedural as well as follow-up data were gathered. Concomitant TR was evaluated at baseline and after 30 days and categorized from grades 0 (no TR) to grade III (severe TR). We analyzed the influence of severe vs. non-severe TR on 30-day, 1-year and long-term survival. Results Overall, 627 consecutive patients (47.0% female, 57.4% functional MR) were enrolled. Median follow-up time was 462 days [IQR 142–945]. Survival status was available in 96.7%. Survival rates were 97.6% at discharge, 75.7% after 1, 54.5% after 3, 37.6% after 5 and 21.7% after 7 years. TR at baseline (examination results were available in 92.3%) was categorized as severe TR in 25.6%, medium TR in 33.3%, mild TR in 35.1% and no TR in 6.0%. TR at 1 month (examination results were available in 81.1%) was severe in 16.7%, medium in 30.2%, mild in 45.6% and no TR was found in 7.4%; improvement by at least 1 TR-grade was documented in 33.6% of the patients. While a severe (compared to non-severe) TR at baseline did not affect the 30-day mortality (7.4% vs. 5.2%, p=0.354), 1-year survival was substantially impaired in those patients (36.5% vs. 23.0%, p=0.012). Accordingly, severe TR was not associated with 30d-mortality (as evaluated by univariate Cox regression, p=0.340), but with 1-year survival (HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.19–2.65, p=0.005) and showed a trend towards impaired long-term survival (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.96–1.76, p=0.089). While residual severe TR at one month did not influence 1-year-mortality significantly (p=0.478), improvement of TR demonstrated a trend to better survival after the first year (86.9 vs. 81.0%, p=0.208) confirmed in the Cox regression analysis (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.36–1.22, p=0.188). Conclusions In this large retrospective monocentric study with a long-term follow-up-period of >7 years after edge-to-edge therapy for MR, we demonstrated that severe TR at the time of the intervention had an impact on 1-year-survival. Furthermore, a missing periinterventional improvement of TR was shown to be unfavorable regarding the long-term survival of these patients. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.