Key result
Interatrial shunt implantation yields 0% procedural MACNE through 2 years in heart failure.
Why the study?
Long-term device durability and phenotype-specific safety outcomes after interatrial shunting in heart failure require further characterization.
Does interatrial shunt implantation affect safety and procedural outcomes in patients with heart failure stratified by ejection fraction?
RCT (n=605)
Sham-controlled
1:1
Does interatrial shunt implantation affect safety and procedural outcomes in patients with heart failure stratified by ejection fraction?
Interatrial shunt implantation demonstrates long-term mechanical reliability but yields a divergent, phenotype-specific safety profile with increased adverse events in HFpEF and no excess safety events in HFrEF.
BACKGROUND: Long-term device durability and phenotype-specific safety outcomes after interatrial shunting require further characterization. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the procedural success, device durability, and heart failure (HF) phenotype-specific safety outcomes of an interatrial shunt in the RELIEVE-HF trial. METHODS: Randomized patients were assigned 1:1 to shunt or sham control with prespecified stratification by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) into heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) (LVEF ≤40%) and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) (LVEF >40%). Procedural performance, device durability, serious adverse events (SAEs), major adverse cardiovascular or neurological events (MACNE), major bleeding, and renal outcomes were assessed through 2 years. RESULTS: Among 605 enrolled patients (508 randomized; 97 roll-in), shunt implantation was attempted in 370 and was successful in 369 (99.7%). Among implanted patients with follow-up (n = 348), no device- or procedure-related MACNE occurred through 2 years (0%; 95% CI: 0%-0.9%), and shunt patency was 99.4% (95% CI: 97.9%-99.9%). Prespecified LVEF-stratified analyses demonstrated divergent safety profiles. In HFrEF, shunt therapy was not associated with excess all-cause MACNE, major bleeding, or renal decline and was associated with lower SAE burden. In HFpEF, shunt therapy was associated with higher all-cause MACNE, greater SAE burden, increased major bleeding, and greater renal decline. CONCLUSIONS: Interatrial shunt implantation was mechanically reliable and durable through 2 years. Safety outcomes differed by HF phenotype, with no evidence of excess clinical safety events in HFrEF but increased adverse events in HFpEF. These findings support phenotype-specific evaluation of interatrial shunt therapy. (REducing Lung congestion symptoms using the v-wavE shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure [RELIEVE-HF]; NCT03499236).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Rodés‐Cabau et al. (2026) conducted an RCT in Heart failure (n=605). Interatrial shunt vs. Sham control was evaluated on Device- or procedure-related major adverse cardiovascular or neurological events (MACNE) through 2 years (95% CI 0-0.9). Interatrial shunt implantation in heart failure patients resulted in 0% device- or procedure-related MACNE through 2 years, with divergent overall safety profiles between HFrEF and HFpEF phenotypes.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: