Key result
Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for native mitral valve disease demonstrated an 83.3% technical success rate, with transapical access requiring fewer valve-in-valve implants than transseptal (P=0.026).
Why the study?
Transcatheter mitral valve replacement is increasingly used for high-risk patients with native mitral valve disease, but no comprehensive studies on its effectiveness had been reported.
Is transcatheter mitral valve replacement feasible and safe for treating native mitral valve disease?
Systematic Review (n=66)
Is transcatheter mitral valve replacement feasible and safe for treating native mitral valve disease?
Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for native mitral valve disease is feasible, with transapical access currently appearing more reliable than transseptal access.
Early case series support TMVR feasibility in native disease; leaves open need for dedicated devices and prospective trials.
Transcatheter mitral valve replacement is increasingly being used as a treatment for high-risk patients who have native mitral valve disease; however, no comprehensive studies on its effectiveness have been reported. We therefore searched the literature for reports on patients with native mitral valve disease who underwent transcatheter access treatment. We found 40 reports, published from September 2013 through April 2017, that described the cases of 66 patients (mean age, 71 ± 12 yr; 30 women; 30 patients with mitral stenosis, 34 with mitral regurgitation, and 2 mixed) who underwent transcatheter mitral valve replacement. We documented their baseline clinical characteristics, comorbidities, diagnostic imaging results, procedural details, and postprocedural results. Access was transapical in 41 patients and transseptal in 25. The 30-day survival rate was 82.5%. The technical success rate (83.3% overall) was slightly but not significantly better in patients who had mitral regurgitation than in those who had mitral stenosis. Transapical access procedures resulted in fewer valve-in-valve implantations than did transseptal access procedures (P=0.026). These current results indicate that transcatheter mitral valve replacement is feasible in treating native mitral disease. The slightly higher technical success rate in patients who had mitral regurgitation suggests that a valve with a specific anchoring system is needed when treating mitral stenosis. Our findings indicate that transapical access is more reliable than transseptal access and that securely anchoring the valve is still challenging in transseptal access.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chen et al. (2020) conducted a systematic review in Native mitral valve disease (n=66). Transcatheter mitral valve replacement was evaluated on Technical success rate. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for native mitral valve disease demonstrated an 83.3% technical success rate, with transapical access requiring fewer valve-in-valve implants than transseptal (P=0.026).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: