MitraClip procedure prior to left ventricular assist device implantation

Transcatheter valvular therapies in patients with left ventricular assist devices

Aortic, mitral and tricuspid valve regurgitation are commonly encountered in patients with continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs). These valvular heart conditions either develop prior to CF-LVAD implantation or are induced by the pump itself. They can all have significant detrimental effects on patients' survival and quality of life. With the improved durability of CF-LVADs and the overall rise in their volume of implants, an increasing number of patients will likely require a valvular heart intervention at some point during CF-LVAD therapy. However, these patients are often considered poor reoperative candidates. In this context, percutaneous approaches have emerged as an attractive “off-label” option for this patient population. Recent data show promising results, with high device success rates and rapid symptomatic improvements. However, the occurrence of distinct complications such as device migration, valve thrombosis or hemolysis remain of concern. In this review, we will present the pathophysiology of valvular heart disease in the setting of CF-LVAD support to help us understand the underlying rationale of these potential complications. We will then outline the current recommendations for the management of valvular heart disease in patients with CF-LVAD and discuss their limitations. Lastly, we will summarize the evidence related to transcatheter heart valve interventions in this patient population.

Impact of preoperative mitral regurgitation on left ventricular assist device patients: propensity score-matched analysis of the EUROMACS dataset

OBJECTIVES

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is frequently observed in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation. We investigated the impact of preoperative MR on left ventricular assist device patients.

METHODS

A retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of adult patients enrolled in the EUROMACS registry between 1 January 2011 and 30 November 2021 was performed. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to the grade of preoperative MR: none-to-mild (MR 0-II) or moderate-to-severe (MR III-IV).

RESULTS

Following 1:1 propensity score matching, each group consisted of 914 patients. Incidence of postoperative temporary right ventricular support, reoperation for bleeding and dialysis was similar. MR III-IV demonstrated shorter median intensive care unit stay [14 days (6; 27.8) vs 10 days (5; 22), P = 0.004] and ventilation time [72 h (22, 320) vs 31 h (18, 150), P < 0.001]. Mortality was lower for MR III-IV patients [subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.59-0.73, P < 0.001]. The 1-year survival was 68.1% (95% CI: 65.1-71.3%) in MR 0-II and 75% (95% CI: 72.1-78%) in MR III-IV. A lower incidence of total complications [odds ratio (OR): 0.93 (0.89-0.98), P = 0.003] and trend towards a lower risk of neurological dysfunction (subdistribution hazard ratio: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.61-1.01, P = 0.063) and sustained ventricular tachycardia [OR: 0.93 (0.54-1.03), P = 0.074] were demonstrated for MR III-IV. The risk of fatal stroke and pump thrombosis was similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-to-severe MR in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device implantation is associated with better mid-term survival and lower incidence of total major adverse events and complications. The incidence of severe postoperative complications including fatal stroke and device thrombosis was similar.

Impact of severe mitral regurgitation on postoperative outcome after durable left-ventricular assist device implantation

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is a common finding in patients with end-stage heart failure. The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of preoperative moderate-to-severe MR on postoperative outcomes and survival after durable left-ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation.

METHODS

From August 2010 to May 2021, 246 patients underwent a durable LVAD implantation. We stratified the patients into two groups: Group A (n = 109) presented with MR 0-I°, and Group B presented with MR II-III° (n = 137). MR II-III° was defined according to the current recommendations (i.e., vena contracta ≥ 7 mm, regurgitation volume ≥ 30 ml or effective regurgitation orifice area ≥ 20 mm² ).

RESULTS

Significantly more patients in Group B suffered from pulmonary hypertension and presented with chronic obstructive lung disease. We observed significantly higher rates of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) II-III° in Group B (76.1%) versus Group A (14.8%) (p < 0.001) and TR III° in Group B (30.4%) versus Group A (3.7%) (p < 0.001). There was no difference in the incidence of right heart failure between the groups. Within our cohort, the in-hospital, 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year mortality was 22.4%, 32.1%, 50.7%, and 64.4%, respectively. Group B showed significantly worse overall survival (p = 0.05). Patients with preoperative TR II-III° had a significantly worse survival than those with TR 0-I° (p = 0.048). In patients presenting with MR II-III°, we discovered that TR III° seems to predict both in-hospital and mid-term mortality.

CONCLUSION

MR II-III° negatively affects the outcomes in patients requiring LVAD implantation. Persisting MR II-III° is an independent predictor of mortality. Patients with concomitant preoperative TR II-III° are at increased risk of developing postoperative major adverse events. Addressing the MR might be considered for these patients.

Safety, Mortality, and Hemodynamic Impact of Patients with MitraClip Undergoing Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation

The interactions and hemodynamic impact of transcatheter percutaneous mitral valve repair (TMR) have not yet been investigated in patients undergoing left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation, but hemodynamic adverse effects are feared in the combination of TMR and LVAD for altered mitral valve flow. This study investigated the hemodynamic interplay in combination of TMR and LVAD in 119 patients, and propensity score match analysis revealed no difference in both perioperative mortality and 2-year follow-up survival (p = 0.84). Nonetheless, postoperatively mean pulmonary arterial pressure, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, and cardiac index improved, and multivariable cox regression analysis at 2 years identified preoperative total bilirubin and temporary right ventricular mechanical circulatory support as independent risk factors for all-cause mortality but not TMR. Prior TMR has no impact on mortality or cardiovascular complications in patients with LVAD.

MitraClip implantation followed by insertion of a left ventricular assist device in patients with advanced heart failure

Aims

Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is common in patients with advanced heart failure (HF). Percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) via MitraClip (MC) has emerged as a feasible treatment strategy for these high‐risk patients. However, as HF often further progresses, there is a frequent need for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation in these patients. We aimed to investigate whether prior MC implantation affects the subsequent LVAD implantation and outcome.

Methods and results

Thirty‐seven patients with advanced HF and significant MR who underwent LVAD implantation were retrospectively analysed. Follow‐up data were collected at 1 year after LVAD implantation. Primary endpoint was all‐cause mortality. Secondary endpoint included peri‐operative parameters and clinical development depicted as New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and Interagency Registry for Mechanically Assisted Circulatory Support (INTERMACS) level. Seventeen patients initially received a MC device (MC group), resulting in a significant reduction in MR grade. After MC, NYHA class and INTERMACS level further worsened, leading to subsequent LVAD implantation after a median time of 475 days in the MC group. At LVAD implantation, overall characteristics were comparable with those of the patients undergoing LVAD implantation without prior MC placement (no‐MC group). Procedural data revealed a higher incidence of right ventricular (RV) failure needing mechanical RV assistance and a longer need for nitric oxide ventilation in the MC group after LVAD implantation. One‐year survival was slightly better in the no‐MC group compared with the MC group [41% (n = 7/17) vs. 65% (n = 13/20); P = 0.15], albeit event‐free survival was comparable between both groups, MC and no‐MC.

Conclusions

LVAD implantation after MC is feasible and safe. However, in patients with advanced HF and severe MR, PMVR may only delay a needed LVAD implantation and thereby lead to poorer peri‐operative RV function and impaired outcome. Arguably, these patients might benefit from the timely management of advanced HF by the means of early LVAD implantation or heart transplantation.

Surgical revision after percutaneous mitral valve repair by edge-to-edge device in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

Patients scheduled for surgery after unsuccessful MitraClip® intervention present increasingly with multiple comorbidities, and they are often referred to the heart team to suggest the most appropriate intervention. The publication of successful results of initial patient cohorts treated with the MitraClip device has resulted in recruitment of more seriously ill patients, who otherwise would have been denied catheter-based/surgical treatment. There has been increasingly reports on conventional surgery after failed mitral valve repair with the MitraClip device. However, data on such procedures remain scarce and mostly focused on individual case studies. The inevitable increase in use of MitraClip, however, will raise the number of patients in need of surgery post MitraClip, making it imperative for surgeons to understand challenges and outcome data related with surgery in this patient cohort. We present our long-term institutional experience with surgery after MitraClip intervention in highest risk patients.

METHODS

Eighteen patients underwent surgery of the mitral valve at our Institution between January 2015 and June 2020. These patients developed recurrent mitral regurgitation grade more than 2° at various intervals after MitraClip. Mitral valve repair was performed where possible and gross examination Valve/MitraClip were intra-operatively documented. Implanted MitraClip devices were analyzed histopathologically to evaluate the healing process and rule out inflammation. Regular patient follow-up was performed.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 74 (±9 years) and MitraClip implantation was performed at various tertiary institutions. Sixteen out of eighteen (16/18) patients received mitral valve replacement, whereas the remaining two patients received mitral valve repair and extracorporal membrane oxygenation, respectively. Four patients died of sepsis and intractable multi organ failure in-hospital. The remaining patients were discharged alive out of hospital to different rehabilitation centers. Follow-up was complete in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery is demanding when patients require surgery for persistent or recurrent mitral regurgitation after MitraClip therapy and can be successfully implemented as a possible therapy option for selective cases as an interdisciplinary approach despite calculated high perioperative mortality risk. These patients should not be denied surgery outright.

Dynamic Augmentation of Left Ventricle and Mitral Valve Function With an Implantable Soft Robotic Device

Left ventricular failure is strongly associated with secondary mitral valve regurgitation. Implantable soft robotic devices are an emerging technology that enables augmentation of a native function of a target tissue. We demonstrate the ability of a novel soft robotic ventricular assist device to dynamically augment left ventricular contraction, provide native pulsatile flow, simultaneously reshape the mitral valve apparatus, and eliminate the associated regurgitation in an Short-term large animal model of acute left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

Continuous-Flow Left Ventricular Assist Devices and Valvular Heart Disease: A Comprehensive Review

Mechanical circulatory support with implantable durable continuous-flow left ventricular assist devices (CF-LVADs) represents an established surgical treatment option for patients with advanced heart failure refractory to guideline-directed medical therapy. CF-LVAD therapy has been demonstrated to offer significant survival, functional, and quality-of-life benefits. However, nearly one-half of patients with advanced heart failure undergoing implantation of a CF-LVAD have important valvular heart disease (VHD) present at the time of device implantation or develop VHD during support that can lead to worsening right or left ventricular dysfunction and result in development of recurrent heart failure, more frequent adverse events, and higher mortality. In this review, we summarize the recent evidence related to the pathophysiology and treatment of VHD in the setting of CF-LAVD support and include a review of the specific valve pathologies of aortic insufficiency (AI), mitral regurgitation (MR), and tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Recent data demonstrate an increasing appreciation and understanding of how VHD may adversely affect the hemodynamic benefits of CF-LVAD support. This is particularly relevant for MR, where increasing evidence now demonstrates that persistent MR after CF-LVAD implantation can contribute to worsening right heart failure and recurrent heart failure symptoms. Standard surgical interventions and novel percutaneous approaches for treatment of VHD in the setting of CF-LVAD support, such as transcatheter aortic valve replacement or transcatheter mitral valve repair, are available, and indications to intervene for VHD in the setting of CF-LVAD support continue to evolve.