Why the study?
Conflicting clinical trial results created challenges in identifying which patients with secondary mitral regurgitation benefit most from percutaneous mitral valve repair.
What is the pooled mortality and what are the clinical predictors of mortality after percutaneous mitral valve repair in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation?
What is the pooled mortality and what are the clinical predictors of mortality after percutaneous mitral valve repair in patients with secondary mitral regurgitation?
The pooled long-term mortality after PMVR for secondary mitral regurgitation is 19.3%, with outcomes influenced by baseline LV function, atrial fibrillation, and concurrent therapies.
Background Percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) provides an available choice for patients suffering from secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR), especially those whose symptoms persist after optimal, conventional, heart-failure therapy. However, conflicting results from clinical trials have created a problem in identifying patients who will benefit the most from PMVR. Objective To pool mortality data and assess clinical predictors after PMVR among patients with SMR. To this end, subgroup and meta-regression analyses were additionally performed. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases, and 13 studies were finally included for meta-analysis. Estimated mortality and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained using a random-effects proportional meta-analysis. We also carried out a meta-regression analysis to clarify the potential influence of important covariates on mortality. Results A total of 1,259 patients with SMR who had undergone PMVR were enrolled in our meta-analysis. The long-term estimated pooled mortality of PMVR was 19.3% (95% CI: 13.6–25.1). Meta-regression analysis showed that mortality was directly proportional to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) (β = 0.009; 95% CI: 0.002–0.016; p = 0.009), an effective regurgitant orifice (ERO) (β = 0.009; 95% CI: 0.000–0.018; p = 0.047), and a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) use (β = −0.015; 95% CI: −0.023–−0.006; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis indicated that patients with preexisting AF (β = −0.002; 95% CI: −0.005– −0.000; p = 0.018) were associated with decreased mortality if they received a mitral annuloplasty device. Among the edge-to-edge repair device group, a higher left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, or lower LV end-systolic diameter, LV end-systolic volume, and LV end-diastolic volume were proportional to lower mortality. Conclusion and Relevance The pooled mortality of PMVR was 19.3% (95% CI: 13.6–25.1). Further meta-regression indicated that AF was associated with a better outcome in conjunction with the use of a mitral annuloplasty device, while better LV functioning predicted a better outcome after the implantation of an edge-to-edge repair device.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: