Literature DB >> 33888231

Prospective Evaluation of Transseptal TMVR for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Valve Arm 1-Year Outcomes.

Mayra Guerrero1, Amit Pursnani2, Akhil Narang3, Michael Salinger4, Dee Dee Wang5, Mackram Eleid6, Susheel K Kodali7, Isaac George8, Lowell Satler9, Ron Waksman9, Christopher U Meduri10, Vivek Rajagopal10, Ignacio Inglessis11, Igor Palacios11, Mark Reisman12, Marvin H Eng5, Hyde M Russell13, Ashish Pershad14, Kenith Fang14, Saibal Kar15, Rajj Makkar16, Jorge Saucedo4, Paul Pearson17, Ujala Bokhary2, Tatiana Kaptzan18, Brad Lewis19, Carl Tommaso2, Philip Krause2, Jeremy Thaden6, Jae Oh6, Roberto M Lang20, Rebecca T Hahn7, Martin B Leon7, William W O'Neill5, Ted Feldman21, Charanjit Rihal6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess 1-year clinical outcomes among high-risk patients with failed surgical mitral bioprostheses who underwent transseptal mitral valve-in-valve (MViV) with the SAPIEN 3 aortic transcatheter heart valve (THV) in the MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial.
BACKGROUND: The MITRAL trial is the first prospective study evaluating transseptal MViV with the SAPIEN 3 aortic THV in high-risk patients with failed surgical mitral bioprostheses.
METHODS: High-risk patients with symptomatic moderate to severe or severe mitral regurgitation (MR) or severe mitral stenosis due to failed surgical mitral bioprostheses were prospectively enrolled. The primary safety endpoint was technical success. The primary THV performance endpoint was absence of MR grade ≥2+ or mean mitral valve gradient ≥10 mm Hg (30 days and 1 year). Secondary endpoints included procedural success and all-cause mortality (30 days and 1 year).
RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled between July 2016 and October 2017 (median age 77.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 70.3 to 82.8 years], 63.3% women, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 9.4% [IQR: 5.8% to 12.0%], 80% in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV). The technical success rate was 100%. The primary performance endpoint in survivors was achieved in 96.6% (28 of 29) at 30 days and 82.8% (24 of 29) at 1 year. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 3.3% and was unchanged at 1 year. The only death was due to airway obstruction after swallowing several pills simultaneously 29 days post-MViV. At 1-year follow-up, 89.3% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I or II, the median mean mitral valve gradient was 6.6 mm Hg (interquartile range: 5.5 to 8.9 mm Hg), and all patients had MR grade ≤1+.
CONCLUSIONS: Transseptal MViV in high-risk patients was associated with 100% technical success, low procedural complication rates, and very low mortality at 1 year. The vast majority of patients experienced significant symptom alleviation, and THV performance remained stable at 1 year.
Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  mitral valve-in-valve; surgical mitral valve replacement; transcatheter mitral valve replacement

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33888231     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JACC Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1936-8798            Impact factor:   11.195


  8 in total

1.  Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated mitral bioprostheses: a systematic review.

Authors:  Mackram F Eleid; Charanjit S Rihal; Mayra E Guerrero
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-09

2.  Access options for transcatheter mitral valve implantation in patients with prior surgical bioprosthesis.

Authors:  Laura Besola; Anson Cheung; Jian Ye; Myriam Akodad; Andrew Chatfield; Gnalini Sathananthan; Robert Moss; John Webb
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-09

3.  Contemporary treatment of mitral valve disease with transcatheter mitral valve implantation.

Authors:  Matti Adam; Elmar Kuhn; Hendrik Wienemann; Victor Mauri; Laurin Ochs; Maria Isabel Körber; Kaveh Eghbalzadeh; Christos Iliadis; Marcel Halbach; Thorsten Wahlers; Stephan Baldus
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2022-09-15       Impact factor: 6.138

4.  Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation for Degenerated Mitral or Tricuspid Bioprosthetic Valves: A Heath Technology Assessment.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ont Health Technol Assess Ser       Date:  2022-01-05

Review 5.  Transcatheter Treatment of Mitral Regurgitation.

Authors:  Angela McInerney; Luis Marroquin-Donday; Gabriela Tirado-Conte; Breda Hennessey; Carolina Espejo; Eduardo Pozo; Alberto de Agustín; Nieves Gonzalo; Pablo Salinas; Iván Núñez-Gil; Antonio Fernández-Ortiz; Hernan Mejía-Rentería; Fernando Macaya; Javier Escaned; Luis Nombela-Franco; Pilar Jiménez-Quevedo
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-05-22       Impact factor: 4.964

Review 6.  Challenges and Open Issues in Transcatheter Mitral Valve Implantation: Smooth Seas Do Not Make Skillful Sailors.

Authors:  Giulio Russo; Francesco Maisano; Gianluca Massaro; Giuseppe Terlizzese; Enrica Mariano; Michela Bonanni; Andrea Matteucci; Andrea Bezzeccheri; Daniela Benedetto; Gaetano Chiricolo; Eugenio Martuscelli; Giuseppe Massimo Sangiorgi
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-02-09

7.  Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implantation with the Balloon-Expandable Myval Device.

Authors:  Sara Blasco-Turrión; Ana Serrador-Frutos; John Jose; Gunasekaran Sengotuvelu; Ashok Seth; Victor G Aldana; Juan Pablo Sánchez-Luna; Jose Carlos Gonzalez-Gutiérrez; Mario García-Gómez; Javier Gómez-Herrero; Cristhian Aristizabal; J Alberto San Román; Ignacio J Amat-Santos
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-02       Impact factor: 4.964

8.  Comparative differences of mitral valve-in-valve implantation: A new mitral bioprosthesis versus current mosaic and epic valves.

Authors:  Dee Dee Wang; Brian P O'Neill; Thomas G Caranasos; W Randolph Chitwood; Richard S Stack; William W O'Neill
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 2.585

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.