Transcatheter mitral valve implantation for degenerated mitral bioprostheses or failed surgical annuloplasty rings: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (TMVIV) and valve-in-ring (TMVIR) implantation for degenerated mitral bioprostheses and failed annuloplasty rings have recently emerged as treatment options for patients deemed unsuitable for repeat surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to summarize the data regarding the baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing TMVIV and TMVIR procedures.

RESULTS

A total of 245 patients (172 patients who underwent TMVIV surgery and 73 patients who underwent TMVIR surgery) were included in the study; 93.5% of patients experienced successful TMVIV or TMVIR implantation. The mortality rates at discharge, 30 days, and 6 months were 5.7%, 8.1%, and 23.4%, respectively. The transapical (TA) access route was used in most procedures (55.2%). The TA and transseptal (TS) access routes resulted in similar outcomes. No significant differences were observed in the short-term outcomes between the patients who developed mitral stenosis versus mitral regurgitation as the mode of failure.

CONCLUSIONS

TMVIV and TMVIR implantation for degenerated mitral bioprostheses and failed annuloplasty rings are safe and effective. Both procedures, via TA or TS access, can result in excellent short-term clinical outcomes in patients with mitral stenosis or regurgitation, but long-term follow-up data are currently lacking to determine the durability of these procedures.

A systematic review of reported cases of combined transcatheter aortic and mitral valve interventions

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the published data of combined transcatheter aortic and mitral valve intervention (CTAMVI).

BACKGROUND

CTAMVI, a combination of either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (TAViV) and transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR), transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve/valve-in-ring (TMViV/ViR), or percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) is an attractive alternative in high-surgical risk patients with combined aortic and mitral valve disease. However, its procedural details and clinical outcomes have not been well described.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of all the published articles from PUBMED and EMBASE.

RESULTS

A total of 37 studies with 60 patients were included. The indication for CTAMVI was high or inoperable surgical risk and symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (92%) or severe aortic regurgitation (8%) combined with moderate to severe/severe mitral stenosis (30%) or moderate/severe mitral regurgitation (65%) or both (5%). In majority of the cases, aortic valve intervention was performed prior to the mitral valve. Mortality rate were 25% for TAVR + TMVR (range 42 days to 10 months), 17% for TAVR + TMViV/ViR (range 13 days to 6 months), 0% for TAViV + TMViV/ViR (range 6-365 days), and 15% for TAVR/ViV + PMVR (range 17 days to 419 days). Significant (more than moderate) paravalvular regurgitation post-procedure was rare.

CONCLUSIONS

CTAMVI appears to confer reasonable clinical outcome. Further large study is warranted to clarify the optimal strategy, procedural details and clinical outcomes in the future.

Pain rather than self-reported sedentary time explains variation in perceived health and activity limitation in persons with rheumatoid arthritis: a cross sectional study in Sweden

To investigate (1) the amount of self-reported time spent sedentary among a large cohort of persons with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and (2) the contribution of sedentary time to explain perceived health and activity limitation in RA beyond that of previously known correlates. This cross-sectional study used data from a postal questionnaire and the Swedish Rheumatology Quality registers (SRQ). The International Physical Activity Questionnaire was used to assess sedentary time (sitting) and moderate, vigorous and walking activity (MVPA). Sociodemographics, pain, fatigue, fear-avoidance beliefs, anxiety/depression, disease duration, MVPA and sedentary time were included in multiple regression models with perceived health (Visual Analogue Scale 0-100) and activity limitation (Stanford Health Assessment Questionnaire) as dependent variables.

RESULTS

In all 3152 (59%) of 5391 persons identified as eligible from the SRQ, responded to the questionnaire. 2819 individuals with complete data on all study variables were analysed. Mean time (SD) spent sedentary was 257 (213) minutes per day. Sedentary time did not contribute significantly to explain perceived health and only minimally to explain activity limitation. Instead, variation was mainly explained by pain; for perceived health (Beta = 0.780, p < 0.001) and for activity limitation (Beta = 0.445, p < 0.001).The results indicate a non-significant role of sedentary time and a need for increased focus on pain in the management of RA. Future studies should use prospective designs and objective assessment methods to further investigate the associations between sedentary time and health outcomes in persons with RA.