Key result
Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement is linked to ~67% lower inpatient mortality by 2020.
Why the study?
Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement is increasingly used for prosthetic mitral valve dysfunction, but trends in predictors and in-hospital outcomes remain unclear.
Does transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement (TMVR ViV) for prosthetic valve dysfunction show improving procedural volumes and in-hospital outcomes over time?
Observational (n=5,233)
Yes
Does transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement (TMVR ViV) for prosthetic valve dysfunction show improving procedural volumes and in-hospital outcomes over time?
Odds Ratio: 0.33
p-value: p=<0.04
Real-world national data demonstrate increasing adoption and improving short-term safety of TMVR ViV from 2016 to 2020, although patients with prosthetic mitral stenosis face significantly higher inpatient mortality compared to those with regurgitation.
INTRODUCTION: Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement (TMVR ViV) is becoming a favorable, less invasive procedure among high-risk patients to manage mitral valve dysfunction. We aimed to investigate the trends of the predictors and outcomes of the procedure. METHODS: The national inpatient sample databases of 2016-2020 were analyzed using STATA 17 software and ICD-10 codes for TMVR ViV, with stratification for mitral stenosis (MS) or Mitral regurgitation (MR) as etiology for prosthetic valve dysfunction. The primary outcome was inpatient mortality, whereas myocardial infarction and stroke were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Over the 5 years, a total of 5233 patients with TMVR ViV were found, exhibiting a yearly increase of procedural volume from 490 in 2016 to 1400 patients in 2020 and decreasing odds for inpatient mortality (aOR 0.74, p = 0.53 in 2017 to aOR: 0.33, p < 0.04 in 2020). Myocardial infarction was significantly lower with TMVR ViV over the years and with similar odds of stroke post-operatively. There was a decreasing trend of length of stay over the years. Upon stratification, 635 patients were found to have MR with a prosthetic valve (MRPV), and 50 had MS with a prosthetic valve (MSPV). Among those who underwent TMVR ViV, in-hospital mortality was recorded in 30 (4%) patients of MRPV and 15 (30%) patients of MSPV (p = 0.002), with significantly higher odds for the MSPV group than MRPV. CONCLUSION: The continued decline in short-term mortality and length of stay, with the progressive incorporation of more patients, gives real-world evidence for the safety and efficacy of TMVR ViV. Extended post-procedure follow-up studies are required to investigate long-term procedural benefits and to explore factors causing higher mortality in the MSPV population.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jamshed et al. (2024) conducted an observational in Prosthetic mitral valve dysfunction (n=5,233). Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement (TMVR ViV) vs. Previous years (baseline 2016) was evaluated on Inpatient mortality (aOR 0.33, p=<0.04). Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement showed decreasing odds for inpatient mortality by 2020 (aOR 0.33; P<0.04), though mortality was significantly higher for stenosis vs regurgitation (30% vs 4%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: