OBJECTIVE: Conventional or minimally invasive surgical mitral valve repair (MVR) is the gold-standard treatment for severe mitral regurgitation (MR) of any etiology. Given its good safety profile, trans-catheter MVR with the MitraClip™ device is used increasingly for high-risk or inoperable patients. We report our experience with failed MitraClip™ therapy and its impact on subsequent surgical strategies, such as the feasibility of MVR in high-risk patients. METHODS: During a follow-up of 344 ± 227 days from the first 215 consecutive patients treated with the MitraClip™ device, six patients required surgical re-intervention due to failed repair (n = 3) or recurrent severe MR (n = 3) at 35.8 ± 47.7 (range 0-117) days after trans-catheter MVR. Feasibility of secondary surgical MVR was assessed with regard to prior clip therapy. RESULTS: In three patients, secondary surgical MVR was successfully performed following the surgical strategy deemed optimal before trans-catheter treatment. Injury of the mitral leaflets caused by prior clip treatment was present in three other patients and influenced the surgical strategy toward more complex surgical techniques in one case and MV replacement in two others. One patient died 6 days after MV replacement. All other patients are alive with adequate valve function at the latest follow-up of 12.4 ± 7.4 months (range 4-22). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary surgical MVR was feasible in some patients after prior clip treatment, but led to valve replacement in others. At present, patient selection criteria for trans-catheter MVR should not be expanded toward more healthy patients, as primary trans-catheter MVR may complicate secondary surgery in certain cases and may even preclude reconstructive valve surgery.
OBJECTIVE: Conventional or minimally invasive surgical mitral valve repair (MVR) is the gold-standard treatment for severe mitral regurgitation (MR) of any etiology. Given its good safety profile, trans-catheter MVR with the MitraClip™ device is used increasingly for high-risk or inoperable patients. We report our experience with failed MitraClip™ therapy and its impact on subsequent surgical strategies, such as the feasibility of MVR in high-risk patients. METHODS: During a follow-up of 344 ± 227 days from the first 215 consecutive patients treated with the MitraClip™ device, six patients required surgical re-intervention due to failed repair (n = 3) or recurrent severe MR (n = 3) at 35.8 ± 47.7 (range 0-117) days after trans-catheter MVR. Feasibility of secondary surgical MVR was assessed with regard to prior clip therapy. RESULTS: In three patients, secondary surgical MVR was successfully performed following the surgical strategy deemed optimal before trans-catheter treatment. Injury of the mitral leaflets caused by prior clip treatment was present in three other patients and influenced the surgical strategy toward more complex surgical techniques in one case and MV replacement in two others. One patient died 6 days after MV replacement. All other patients are alive with adequate valve function at the latest follow-up of 12.4 ± 7.4 months (range 4-22). CONCLUSIONS: Secondary surgical MVR was feasible in some patients after prior clip treatment, but led to valve replacement in others. At present, patient selection criteria for trans-catheter MVR should not be expanded toward more healthy patients, as primary trans-catheter MVR may complicate secondary surgery in certain cases and may even preclude reconstructive valve surgery.
Authors: Nadejda Monsefi; Andreas Zierer; Mahmud Khalil; Mahmut Ay; Andres Beiras-Fernandez; Anton Moritz; Ulrich Alfred Stock Journal: Tex Heart Inst J Date: 2014-12-01
Authors: Jan-Philipp Minol; Payam Akhyari; Udo Boeken; Alexander Albert; Philipp Rellecke; Vanessa Dimitrova; Stephan Urs Sixt; Hiroyuki Kamiya; Artur Lichtenberg Journal: Front Surg Date: 2018-02-09