Key result
PASCAL Precision yields similar 30-day MR reduction in non-A2P2 versus A2P2 mitral anatomies.
Why the study?
Mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair can be more challenging in noncentral regions of the valve and in anterior or bileaflet lesions, motivating this evaluation of how implant and leaflet lesion locations affect the safety and effectiveness of the PASCAL Precision system in degenerative MR.
Does implant location (A2P2 vs non-A2P2) or leaflet lesion location (anterior vs posterior vs bileaflet) affect 30-day safety and effectiveness outcomes of the PASCAL Precision system in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation?
Observational (n=1,825)
Yes
Does implant location (A2P2 vs non-A2P2) or leaflet lesion location (anterior vs posterior vs bileaflet) affect 30-day safety and effectiveness outcomes of the PASCAL Precision system in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation?
In real-world patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation, transcatheter edge-to-edge repair with the PASCAL Precision system demonstrates favorable 30-day safety, MR reduction, and quality of life improvements regardless of whether the implant is in a non-A2P2 location or treats anterior or bileaflet lesions.
Supports PASCAL across noncentral lesions; leaves open randomized confirmation of durability and outcomes.
Background Mitral valve transcatheter edge‐to‐edge repair can be more challenging in noncentral regions of the valve and in anterior or bileaflet lesions. We assess effect of implant location and leaflet lesion location on safety and effectiveness of PASCAL Precision system in degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR). Methods Mitral valve transcatheter edge‐to‐edge repair outcomes in patients with degenerative MR treated with PASCAL Precision system (September 2022–October 2024), from the US STS/ACC TVT (Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry, were analyzed by implant location (A2P2/non‐A2P2) and leaflet lesion location (anterior/posterior/bileaflet). Procedural, clinical, and echocardiographic outcomes to 30 days were assessed. Results At 30 days, both A2P2 (n=1526) and non‐A2P2 (n=299) groups had low event rates (cardiovascular mortality: 1.1% versus 1.0%, mitral valve reintervention: 0.4% versus 0.0% and single leaflet device attachment: 0.5% versus 0.3%; all P >0.05) and demonstrated significant MR reduction ( P <0.001 versus baseline) with no significant difference between groups ( P =0.750) (MR ≤2+: 93.4% versus 95.4%; MR ≤1+: 72.0% versus 73.3%). Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary scores improved significantly in both groups (∆19.3, ∆17.7 points; P =0.741). The anterior (n=250), posterior (n=902), and bileaflet (n=192) disease groups also had low event rates (cardiovascular mortality: 0.4%, 1.1%, 0.0%; mitral valve reintervention: 0.8%, 0.1%, 0.5%; and single leaflet device attachment: 0.8%, 0.2%, 0.5%; all P >0.05), and demonstrated significant MR reduction ( P <0.001 versus baseline) with no significant difference across groups ( P =0.459) (MR ≤2+: 94.1%, 93.1%, and 94.5%; MR ≤1+: 79.0%, 69.2%, and 72.4%). All groups experienced significant improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary scores (∆21.4, ∆18.8, ∆12.0 points; P =0.087). Conclusion In real‐world patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation, treatment with the PASCAL Precision system was associated with favorable safety and effectiveness at 30 days, regardless of implant location or leaflet lesion location.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ramanathan et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Degenerative mitral regurgitation (n=1,825). PASCAL Precision system in non-A2P2 implant location vs. PASCAL Precision system in A2P2 implant location was evaluated on Mitral regurgitation reduction (MR ≤2+ at 30 days) (p=0.750). PASCAL Precision system achieved similar 30-day MR ≤2+ rates across non-A2P2 vs A2P2 implants (95.4% vs 93.4%, P=0.750) and anterior, posterior, and bileaflet lesions (P=0.459).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: