Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May;99(6):1829-1838.
doi: 10.1002/ccd.30161. Epub 2022 Mar 24.

Mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures: Midterm outcomes in a French nationwide registry

Affiliations

Mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures: Midterm outcomes in a French nationwide registry

Robin Le Ruz et al. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 May.

Abstract

Objectives: Report contemporary outcomes in patients included in the Mitragister registry and treated with transcatheter mitral valve implantation for failed surgical annuloplasty rings or deteriorated bioprosthesis.

Background: Midterm survival rates have been reported, but little is known about contemporary morbimortality endpoints.

Methods: The primary safety outcome was the technical success rate. The primary efficacy composite endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalizations.

Results: From 2016 to 2021, 102 patients (median age: 81 [74;84] years, 61% female, Euroscore II 11.0% [7.8;16.0]) undergoing valve-in-valve (ViV; n = 89) or valve-in-ring (ViR; n = 13) procedures were consecutively included. At baseline, ViR group patients had worse left ventricular ejection fraction (50% vs. 60%; p = 0.004) and more frequently severe regurgitation (46% vs. 15%; p = 0.014). The primary safety outcome was 95%: 77% and 98% in the ViR and ViV populations, respectively, (p = 0.014). At intermediate follow-up (6-12 months) clinical improvement was notable, 88% of the patients were in NYHA class ≤ II (vs. 25% at baseline; p < 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 17.1 ± 11.0 months, the primary efficacy composite reached 27%. By multivariate analysis, paravalvular leak (PVL) was the only independent predictor (hazard ratio: 2.39, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-5.29; p = 0.031) while ViR was not found statistically associated (p = 0.456).

Conclusions: This study confirms the safety and efficacy of the mitral ViV procedure. ViR patients appear at higher risk of procedural complications. The presence of PVL could be associated with markedly worse midterm prognosis. Whatever the intervention, procedural strategies to reduce PVL incidence remain to be assessed to prevent latter adverse outcomes.

Keywords: heart failure; mitral valve disease; paravalvular leak; percutaneous intervention; percutaneous valve therapy; structural heart disease intervention.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017;2017(38):2739-2791.
    1. Malvindi PG, Mastro F, Kowalewski M, et al. Durability of mitral valve bioprostheses: a meta-analysis of long-term follow-up studies. Ann Thorac Surg. 2020;109:603-611.
    1. Mohty D, Orszulak TA, Schaff HV, Avierinos J-F, Tajik JA, Enriquez-Sarano M. Very long-term survival and durability of mitral valve repair for mitral valve prolapse. Circulation, 108(12 suppl 1):I1-I7.
    1. Yoon S-H, Whisenant BK, Bleiziffer S, et al. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated bioprosthetic valves and failed annuloplasty rings. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1121-1131.
    1. Simonato M, Whisenant B, Ribeiro HB, et al. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement after surgical repair or replacement: comprehensive midterm evaluation of valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring implantation from the VIVID registry. Circulation. 2021;143:104-116.

LinkOut - more resources