Minimally Invasive Mitral Valve Surgery After Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair

OBJECTIVE

Up to 28% of patients may need mitral valve (MV) surgery after transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER). This study evaluates the outcomes of minimally invasive MV surgery after TEER. Methods: International multicenter registry of minimally invasive MV surgery after TEER between 2013 and 2020. Subgroups were stratified by the number of devices implanted (≤1 vs >1), as well as time interval from TEER to surgery (≤1 year vs >1 year). Results: A total of 56 patients across 13 centers were included with a mean age of 73 ± 11 years, and 50% were female. The median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS PROM) score for MV replacement was 8% (Q1-Q3 = 5% to 11%) and the ratio of observed to expected mortality was 0.9. The etiology of mitral regurgitation (MR) prior to TEER was primary MR in 75% of patients and secondary MR in 25%. There were 30 patients (54%) who had >1 device implanted. The median time between TEER and surgery was 252 days (33 to 636 days). Hemodynamics, including MR severity, MV area, and mean gradient, significantly improved after minimally invasive surgery and sustained to 1-year follow-up. In-hospital and 30-day mortality was 7.1%, and 1-year actuarial survival was 85.6% ± 6%. Conclusions: Minimally invasive MV surgery after TEER may be achieved as predicted by the STS PROM. Most patients underwent MV replacement instead of repair. As TEER is applied more widely, patients should be informed about the potential need for surgical intervention over time after TEER. These discussions will allow better informed consent and post-procedure planning.

Clinical Outcomes after Mitral Valve Surgery in Failed MitraClip Procedures

BACKGROUND

 We retrospectively evaluated in-hospital and overall outcome of patients who received mitral valve replacement (MVR) after failed MitraClip procedure.

METHODS

 A total of 26 out of 740 patients received MVR after treatment with MitraClip between June 2010 and December 2020. We analyzed in-hospital mortality and overall mortality during the median follow-up period of 72 days after MVR.

RESULTS

 The median age in the entire cohort was 77.5 years. In-hospital mortality was 15.4% (n = 4) and the overall mortality during the follow-up period was 27% (n = 7). The median time between the MitraClip procedure and surgery was 34.5 days. The main reasons for surgery were mitral stenosis (23.1%), persistent prolapse of the mitral valve leaflets (42.3%), and persistent tethering of the mitral valve leaflets (34.6%). At the time of surgery all of the patients presented with New York Heart Association 3 and above. The underlying mitral valve pathology was mainly secondary 61.5% (n = 16). Median left ventricular end-diastolic diameter was 60 mm. Preoperative ejection fraction was 40% and above in 73% of the cohort. In addition to the mitral valve procedure, 57.7% of patients received either concomitant tricuspid annuloplasty, aortic valve surgery, ascending aortic replacement, or coronary artery bypass grafting.

CONCLUSION

 The need for MVR for failed MitraClip repair is low and the results are acceptable. However, remaining options for reconstruction are usually limited and MVR is often needed. Anticipating success or failure according to the underlying pathology more than according to concomitant risk factors should form the basis in decision making for the treatment modality of first choice.

Mitral valve surgery after a failed MitraClip procedure

OBJECTIVES

Among patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair with the MitraClip device, a relevant proportion (2-6%) requires open mitral valve surgery within 1 year after unsuccessful clip implantation. The goal of this review is to pool data from different reports to provide a comprehensive overview of mitral valve surgery outcomes after the MitraClip procedure and estimate in-hospital and follow-up mortality.

METHODS

All published clinical studies reporting on surgical intervention for a failed MitraClip procedure were evaluated for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The primary study outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital adverse events and follow-up mortality. Pooled estimate rates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of study outcomes were calculated using a DerSimionian-Laird binary random-effects model. To assess heterogeneity across studies, we used the Cochrane Q statistic to compute I2 values.

RESULTS

Overall, 20 reports were included, comprising 172 patients. Mean age was 70.5 years (95% CI 67.2-73.7 years). The underlying mitral valve disease was functional mitral regurgitation in 50% and degenerative mitral regurgitation in 49% of cases. The indication for surgery was persistent or recurrent mitral regurgitation (grade >2) in 93% of patients, whereas 6% of patients presented with mitral stenosis. At the time of the operation, 80% of patients presented in New York Heart Association functional class III-IV. Despite favourable intraoperative results, in-hospital mortality was 15%. The rate of periprocedural cerebrovascular accidents was 6%. At a mean follow-up of 12 months, all-cause death was 26.5%. Mitral valve replacement was most commonly required because the possibility of valve repair was jeopardized, likely due to severe valve injury after clip implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical intervention after failed transcatheter mitral valve intervention is burdened by high in-hospital and 1-year mortality, which reflects reflecting the high-risk baseline profile of the patients. Mitral valve replacement is usually required due to leaflet injury.

MitraClip: a word of caution regarding an all too liberal indication and delayed referral to surgery in case of failure

OBJECTIVES

Although indications for the MitraClip are becoming increasingly liberal, the number of patients requiring valve surgery after an insufficient outcome of the procedure is growing. Referral to surgery is, however, frequently delayed. During this time, the patients often deteriorate. We retrospectively analysed patients before MitraClip implantation and after mitral valve surgery.

METHODS

A total of 49 patients who received a mitral valve replacement (average 8 ± 12 months after MitraClip implantation) were assessed. Of these, 53% had 2-4 clips inserted. The mean age was 73 years, and the mean log EuroSCORE was 20.79 ± 14.42%. Echocardiographic data obtained prior to MitraClip implantation and preoperatively, 10 days and 6 and 12 months after cardiac surgery were reviewed. Survival analysis, risk profile and postoperative complications were analysed.

RESULTS

The 30-day and 1-year mortality was 26.5% and 59.2%, respectively. Prior to MitraClip implantation, 42.8% of patients had mild tricuspid insufficiency and 6.1% had moderate tricuspid insufficiency. Prior to surgery, 26.5% showed mild, 32.7% moderate and 38.8% severe tricuspid insufficiency (P < 0.001). Furthermore, right heart function assessed by tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion deteriorated significantly after Implantation of the MitraClip (P < 0.001). In patients with a MitraClip, the pulmonary artery pressure was significantly higher at the time of mitral replacement than it was before the MitraClip was implanted (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

A subgroup of patients does not benefit from a MitraClip and shows progressive deterioration in cardiac function, making valve replacement under difficult circumstances inevitable. The earlier these patients are operated on, the better it is. It can be assumed that some patients would be better off with primary surgery, especially if mitral reconstruction is then still feasible. Therefore, the indications for MitraClip implantation should be carefully considered and caution should be exercised during monitoring.

Impact of failed mitral clipping on subsequent mitral valve operations

BACKGROUND

This study analyzed the effect of failed percutaneous mitral intervention with the MitraClip device (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL) on subsequent mitral valve (MV) operations.

METHODS

Nineteen patients (74 ± 9 years) with treatment failure after implantation of 37 MitraClips (mean, 1.9 ± 0.8; range, 1 to 4) for functional or degenerative MV disease underwent operations a median of 12 days later (range, 0 to 546 days). All patients were studied before and after the operation by clinical investigation and echocardiographic analysis. Intraoperative findings and the effect on the operation were analyzed and are described in detail. Data before clipping and at the time of operation were compared, and the surgical outcome was recorded.

RESULTS

There was a significant increase in risk between that at the time of clipping and that at subsequent operations, noted as a rise of the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II from a median 12.74% to 26.87%, respectively (p < 0.0001, Wilcoxon signed rank test). Severe clip implantation-induced tissue damage was found in most patients. Surgical MV repair could be performed in 5 of 6 patients (83%) with a 1-clip implant and in only 3 of 13 patients (23%) when 2 or more clips had been inserted (p = 0.0188, Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test). All patients required other associated procedures: closure of an artificial atrial septal defect that was caused by the clipping procedure (100%), tricuspid valve repair (37%), atrial fibrillation ablation operations (37%), coronary artery bypass grafting (16%), and aortic valve replacement (11%). Two early cardiac deaths (< 30 days) occurred. Survival at 1 year was 68%.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a remarkable impact of failed clipping procedures on MV operations. We observed a severely aggravated cardiac pathology in parallel with a reduced preoperative clinical state compared with the original condition. Moreover, the likelihood of an optimal surgical solution with valve reconstruction was reduced thereafter. However, operations in the critical situation of an unsuccessful mitral clipping procedure should be discussed immediately, because it still seems to be an option compared with conservative therapy.