Edge-to-edge mitral valve repair provided a significantly greater reduction in vena contracta at 12 months compared to indirect annuloplasty (-50.8% vs -23.9%, P<0.05).
Cohort (n=41)
No
Does edge-to-edge mitral valve repair compared to indirect mitral annuloplasty improve echocardiographic parameters and symptoms in patients with atrial functional mitral regurgitation?
In patients with atrial functional mitral regurgitation, edge-to-edge repair provides greater reduction in mitral regurgitation severity, while indirect annuloplasty promotes better left atrial reverse remodeling at 12 months.
Absolute Event Rate: -50.8% vs -23.9%
p-value: p=<0.05
OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare indirect mitral annuloplasty using the Carillon Mitral Contour System and edge-to-edge repair via MitraClip in atrial functional mitral regurgitation (aFMR). BACKGROUND: In patients with left ventricular dilation, both edge-to-edge repair and indirect mitral annuloplasty are effective in reducing mitral regurgitation, while no clinical trial has compared both interventional methods in aFMR. METHODS: In a retrospective single-center analysis, 41 patients with aFMR underwent either edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (MitraClip group, n = 20) or indirect annuloplasty (Carillon group, n = 21). RESULTS: Both treatment groups showed high procedural success (100%) and low complication rates. Both treatment groups showed a comparable reduction of New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification postimplantation, after 3- and 12-months follow-up. Quantitative reduction in echocardiographic FMR parameters was significantly pronounced in the MitraClip group (reduction in vena contracta MitraClip vs. Carillon: postimplantation -74.6 ± 25.8 vs. -29.1 ± 17.8%, 3-months follow-up -65.8 ± 31.2 vs. -33.9 ± 17.5%, 12-months follow-up -50.8 ± 27.9 vs. -23.9 ± 17.0%, p < 0.05). Qualitative mitral valve assessment showed improved FMR class postimplantation, at 3-and 12-months follow-up in both treatment groups. Edge-to-edge repair revealed better results with lower average FMR classification compared to indirect coronary sinus-based annuloplasty. After 12-months left atrial (LA) volume was significantly reduced in the Carillon group, while in the MitraClip group no LA remodeling was found (reduction in LA volume MitraClip vs. Carillon at 12 months: +9.6 ± 25.1% vs. -12.3 ± 12.7%, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Both indirect mitral valve annuloplasty and edge-to-edge repair are feasible and safe in patients with aFMR, while the reduction in FMR was pronounced in the edge-to-edge repair group.
Rottländer et al. (Mon,) conducted a cohort in Atrial functional mitral regurgitation (aFMR) (n=41). Edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (MitraClip) vs. Indirect mitral annuloplasty (Carillon) was evaluated on Reduction in vena contracta at 12-months follow-up (p=<0.05). Edge-to-edge mitral valve repair provided a significantly greater reduction in vena contracta at 12 months compared to indirect annuloplasty (-50.8% vs -23.9%, P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: