Key result
pMVr results in ~50% shock resolution and discharge despite higher early mortality than non-shock patients.
Why the study?
Patients with severe MR and cardiogenic shock are typically at too high risk for immediate surgery, making the role of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair uncertain.
Does percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair improve outcomes in patients with severe mitral regurgitation and cardiogenic shock?
Observational (n=135)
No
Does percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair improve outcomes in patients with severe mitral regurgitation and cardiogenic shock?
Percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair may be a reasonable rescue therapy for select patients with severe acute mitral regurgitation and cardiogenic shock.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
pMVr was associated with shock resolution in half of select patients; leaves open survival benefit versus medical therapy alone.
BACKGROUND: Patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) and cardiogenic shock are typically too high risk for immediate surgery; however, percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (pMVr) may be reasonable in select patients. AIM: Describe characteristics and outcomes of patients who underwent pMVr with and without shock at a single center. METHODS: Chart review of all patients who underwent non-investigational pMVr from November 2013 to October 2018. Shock was defined as dependence on an intravenous (IV) inotrope, IV afterload reduction, and/or temporary mechanical circulatory support immediately preceding pMVr. RESULTS: There were 135 patients. Mean age was 80 ± 12 years and 56 (41%) were female. Twelve (8.9%) had shock. All patients had 3+ or 4+ MR at baseline. Post-procedure, all shock patients had 2+ or less MR. Two (17%) shock patients and 4 (3%) non-shock patients died within 30 days of pMVr (P = 0.03). Six (50%) shock patients had resolution of shock and discharged home (primary outcome). Five shock patients had acute MI, four of whom met the primary outcome. Four shock patients had chronic MR (>21 days), three of whom did not meet the primary outcome. Overall, follow-up time for mortality was median (IQR) 198 (42-379) days. Shock patients who survived to 30 days post-procedure had significantly shorter time from diagnosis of MR to pMVr compared to those who died (35 ± 68 vs. 374 ± 111 days; P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous edge-to-edge MVr may be reasonable in shock patients with acute MR and/or acute MI. This case series should guide larger studies designed to improve selection of shock patients for pMVr.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Flint et al. (2019) conducted an observational in Severe mitral regurgitation with or without cardiogenic shock (n=135). Cardiogenic shock vs. No cardiogenic shock was evaluated on Resolution of shock and discharged home. Among patients undergoing percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair, 50% of those with cardiogenic shock resolved and were discharged, with 30-day mortality of 17% vs 3% without shock (P=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: