Skip to main content

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement versus Medical Therapy for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison.

Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions

Authors: Sebastian Ludwig, Lenard Conradi, David J Cohen, Augustin Coisne, Andrea Scotti, William T Abraham, Walid Ben Ali, Zhipeng Zhou, Yanru Li, Saibal Kar, Alison Duncan, D Scott Lim, Marianna Adamo, Björn Redfors, David W M Muller, John G Webb, Anna Sonia Petronio, Hendrik Ruge, Georg Nickenig, Lars Sondergaard, Matti Adam, Damiano Regazzoli, Andrea Garatti, Tobias Schmidt, Martin Andreas, Gry Dahle, Thomas Walther, Joerg Kempfert, Gilbert Hl Tang, Simon R Redwood, Maurizio Taramasso, Fabien Praz, Neil P Fam, Nicolas Dumonteil, Jean-François Obadia, Ralph Stephan von Bardeleben, Tanja Katharina Rudolph, Michael J Reardon, Marco Metra, Paolo Denti, Michael J Mack, Jörg Hausleiter, Federico M Asch, Azeem Latib, JoAnn Lindenfeld, Thomas Modine, Gregg W Stone, Juan F Granada

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is an emerging therapeutic alternative for patients with secondary mitral regurgitation (MR). Outcomes of TMVR versus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) have not been investigated for this population. This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes of patients with secondary MR undergoing TMVR versus GDMT alone. The CHOICE-MI registry included patients with MR undergoing TMVR using dedicated devices. Patients with MR etiologies other than secondary MR were excluded. Patients treated with GDMT alone were derived from the control arm of the COAPT trial. We compared outcomes between the TMVR and GDMT groups, using propensity score (PS)-matching to adjust for baseline differences. After PS-matching, 97 patient pairs undergoing TMVR (72.9±8.7 years, 60.8% male, transapical access 91.8%) versus GDMT (73.1±11.0 years, 59.8% male) were compared. At 1 and 2 years, residual MR was ≤1+ in all patients of the TMVR group compared to 6.9% and 7.7%, respectively, in those receiving GDMT alone (both p<0.001). The 2-year rate of HF hospitalization was significantly lower in the TMVR group (32.8% vs. 54.4%, HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.35-0.99; p=0.04). Among survivors, a higher proportion of patients were in NYHA functional class I or II in the TMVR group at 1 year (78.2% vs. 59.7%, p=0.03) and at 2 years (77.8% vs. 53.2%, p=0.09). Two-year mortality was similar in the two groups (TMVR vs. GDMT, 36.8% vs. 40.8%, HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62-1.64; p=0.98). In this observational comparison, over 2-year follow-up, TMVR using mostly transapical devices in patients with secondary MR was associated with significant reduction of MR, symptomatic improvement, less frequent hospitalizations for HF and similar mortality compared with GDMT.

PMID: 37194288

Participating cluster members