Key result
Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip significantly improved cardiopulmonary performance at 6 months, including an increase in peak VO2 from 9.8 to 13.5 mL/kg/min (P=0.033).
Why the study?
The study aimed to evaluate changes in cardiopulmonary exercise test parameters after PMVR with MitraClip in patients with HFrEF who are potential candidates for heart transplantation or destination LVAD.
Does percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip improve cardiopulmonary exercise test parameters in patients with HFrEF and functional mitral regurgitation?
Observational (n=11)
No
Does percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip improve cardiopulmonary exercise test parameters in patients with HFrEF and functional mitral regurgitation?
Absolute Event Rate: 13.5% vs 9.8%
p-value: p=0.033
Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip significantly improves objective cardiopulmonary performance and functional capacity in patients with advanced HFrEF and functional mitral regurgitation.
May improve exercise capacity in advanced HFrEF; hypothesis-generating and requires RCT confirmation.
Aims The aim of this study is to evaluate changes in cardiopulmonary exercise test (CPET) after percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) with MitraClip in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction who are potentially candidates for heart transplantation or destination left ventricular assist device. Methods and results Prospective registry of all consecutive patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and functional mitral regurgitation (MR) underwent elective PMVR between October 2015 and March 2018 in our institution. Patients with preserved or mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (>40%), advanced age (>75 years old), or severe co-morbidities (end-stage organ damage) were not included. Treadmill exercise testing with respiratory gas exchange analysis was carried out in 11 patients (male, 72.7%; median age, 67 years old) within the month prior to the procedure and at 6 month follow-up. PMVR was successfully performed in all patients. At 6 month follow-up, PMVR was associated with an improvement in New York Heart Association functional class (P = 0.021) and a reduction in MR severity (P = 0.013) and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide levels (2805 [1878–5022] vs. 1485 [654–3032] pg/mL; P = 0.012). All patients completed pre-procedural and post-procedural CPET, and all the studies showed a respiratory exchange ratio ≥1 and were consistent with sufficient exercise effort. Compared with pre-procedural CPET, patients showed a significant increase in exercise time (295 [110–335] vs. 405 [261–540] s; P = 0.047), VO2 (9.8 [9.1–13.4] vs. 13.5 [12.1–16.8] mL/kg/min; P = 0.033), ventilatory anaerobic threshold (510 [430–950] vs. 850 [670–1070] mL/kg/min; P = 0.033), peak O2 pulse (7.2 [4.3–8.6] vs. 8.3 [6.2–11.8] mL/beat; P = 0.033), and workload (5 [3–6] vs. 6 [5–8] metabolic equivalents; P = 0.049). Conclusions Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip was associated with an enhancement in cardiopulmonary performance in patients with systolic heart failure and secondary MR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Benito‐González et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Systolic heart failure and functional mitral regurgitation (n=11). Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip vs. Pre-procedural baseline was evaluated on Peak VO2 (mL/kg/min) (p=0.033). Percutaneous mitral valve repair with MitraClip significantly improved cardiopulmonary performance at 6 months, including an increase in peak VO2 from 9.8 to 13.5 mL/kg/min (P=0.033).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: