Key result
The learning curve for MitraClip significantly impacted mid-term durability, with 89.4% of patients in the latest period achieving MR ≤2+ at 6 months versus 65.0% in the earliest period (P=0.03).
Why the study?
Does the learning curve impact procedural and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip?
Population
75 consecutive patients with mitral valve regurgitation treated with MitraClip at a single center
Comparison
Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip vs Earlier periods of experience
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
6 months
Authors
Loading...
Experience improves MitraClip durability; leaves open optimal training to accelerate proficiency.
Cohort (n=75)
No
Does the learning curve impact procedural and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip?
Absolute Event Rate: 89.4% vs 65%
p-value: p=0.03
There is a significant learning curve associated with MitraClip procedures, with later cases showing shorter procedure times, fewer safety events, and better 6-month durability of mitral valve repair.
Schillinger et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Mitral valve regurgitation (n=75). MitraClip learning curve (subsequent treatment periods) vs. Initial treatment period (first 25 patients) was evaluated on Mitral regurgitation grade ≤2+ at 6 months (p=0.03). The learning curve for MitraClip significantly impacted mid-term durability, with 89.4% of patients in the latest period achieving MR ≤2+ at 6 months versus 65.0% in the earliest period (P=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: