Why the study?
Mitral valve prolapse has been linked to increased papillary muscle traction, prompting an ex vivo biomechanical comparison of edge-to-edge repair via MitraClip versus neochordal repair on papillary muscle forces.
Does neochordal repair compared to edge-to-edge repair normalize papillary muscle forces in an ex vivo model of mitral valve prolapse?
Population
8 porcine mitral valves in a left heart simulator
Comparison
Control, prolapse, chordal rupture, MitraClip, surgical edge-to-edge repair, and neochordal repair
Design
Ex vivo randomized, paired biomechanical study
Key result
In an ex vivo porcine model, MitraClip repair increased peak papillary muscle forces by ~23% versus baseline, whereas neochordal repair restored forces to near-baseline levels (6.8±1.3 N; P=0.53).
Authors
Loading...
Neochordal repair may normalize papillary muscle forces better than MitraClip in prolapse models; leaves open translation to human durability and outcomes.
Does neochordal repair compared to edge-to-edge repair normalize papillary muscle forces in an ex vivo model of mitral valve prolapse?
Absolute Event Rate: 6.8% vs 6.7%
p-value: p=0.53
In an ex vivo model, neochordal repair normalizes papillary muscle forces associated with mitral valve prolapse, whereas edge-to-edge repair increases these aberrant forces despite reducing regurgitation.
Park et al. (2026) studied mitral valve prolapse (n=8). MitraClip edge-to-edge repair and neochordal repair vs. baseline control, prolapse, and chordal rupture conditions was evaluated on peak papillary muscle forces (p=0.53). In an ex vivo porcine model, MitraClip repair increased peak papillary muscle forces by ~23% versus baseline, whereas neochordal repair restored forces to near-baseline levels (6.8±1.3 N; P=0.53).