Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Therapy: Defining the Patient Who Will Benefit

  • Interventional Cardiology (SR Bailey, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Cardiology Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

This report aims to define the clinical and anatomic variables key in determining patient suitability for transcatheter mitral valve therapies.

Recent Findings

Candidacy for transcatheter mitral valve repair requires weighing the clinical variables that may impact the ability to improve patient symptoms and prolong survival that include left ventricular ejection fraction, symptom severity, pulmonary hypertension, and magnitude of residual regurgitation or stenosis. Individualized selection of transcatheter repair or replacement based on patho-anatomy is being explored. The primary goal is achieving significant reduction in mitral regurgitation.

Summary

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement requires rigorous anatomic screening using computed tomography and candidates should be able to take oral anticoagulation. Selection of patients for transcatheter mitral valve repair is complex and requires intimate knowledge of clinical variables and specific device limitations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, Gottdiener JS, Scott CG, Enriquez-Sarano M. Burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet. 2006;368:1005–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Dziadzko V, Clavel M-A, Dziadzko M, et al. Outcome and undertreatment of mitral regurgitation: a community cohort study. Lancet. 2018;391:960–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Monteagudo Ruiz JM, Galderisi M, Buonauro A, et al. Overview of mitral regurgitation in Europe: results from the European Registry of mitral regurgitation (EuMiClip). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging 2018:jey011-jey.

  4. Regueiro A, Granada JF, Dagenais F, Rodés-Cabau J. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement: insights from early clinical experience and future challenges. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:2175–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Maisano F, Alfieri O, Banai S, et al. The future of transcatheter mitral valve interventions: competitive or complementary role of repair vs. replacement? Eur Heart J. 2015;36:1651–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Ling LH, Enriquez-Sarano M, Seward JB, et al. Early surgery in patients with mitral regurgitation due to flail leaflets: a long-term outcome study. Circulation. 1997;96:1819–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Suri RM, Schaff HV, Enriquez-Sarano M. Mitral valve repair in asymptomatic patients with severe mitral regurgitation: pushing past the tipping point. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;26:95–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ghoreishi M, Evans CF, DeFilippi CR, et al. Pulmonary hypertension adversely affects short- and long-term survival after mitral valve operation for mitral regurgitation: Implications for timing of surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 142:1439–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Asgar AW, Mack MJ, Stone GW. Secondary mitral regurgitation in heart failure: pathophysiology, prognosis, and therapeutic considerations. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65:1231–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bach DS, Bolling SF. Improvement following correction of secondary mitral regurgitation in end-stage cardiomyopathy with mitral annuloplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1996;78:966–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Wu AH, Aaronson KD, Bolling SF, Pagani FD, Welch K, Koelling TM. Impact of mitral valve annuloplasty on mortality risk in patients with mitral regurgitation and left ventricular systolic dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:381–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldstein D, Moskowitz AJ, Gelijns AC, et al. Two-year outcomes of surgical treatment of severe ischemic mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:344–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Rossi A, Dini FL, Faggiano P, et al. Independent prognostic value of functional mitral regurgitation in patients with heart failure. A quantitative analysis of 1256 patients with ischaemic and non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Heart. 2011;97:1675–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. de Marchena E, Badiye A, Robalino G, et al. Respective prevalence of the different carpentier classes of mitral regurgitation: a stepping stone for future therapeutic research and development. J Card Surg. 2011;26:385–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Giannini C, Fiorelli F, De Carlo M, et al. Comparison of percutaneous mitral valve repair versus conservative treatment in severe functional mitral regurgitation. Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:271–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. D'Ascenzo F, Moretti C, Marra WG, et al. Meta-analysis of the usefulness of Mitraclip in patients with functional mitral regurgitation. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:325–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2014 AHA/ACC guideline for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on practice guidelines. Circulation. 2014;129:2440–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Azzalini L, Millan X, Khan R, et al. Impact of left ventricular function on clinical outcomes of functional mitral regurgitation patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;88:1124–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Puls M, Lubos E, Boekstegers P, et al. One-year outcomes and predictors of mortality after MitraClip therapy in contemporary clinical practice: results from the German transcatheter mitral valve interventions registry. Eur Heart J. 2016;37:703–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Rudolph V, Lubos E, Schluter M, et al. Aetiology of mitral regurgitation differentially affects 2-year adverse outcomes after MitraClip therapy in high-risk patients. Eur J Heart Fail. 2013;15:796–807.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bozdag-Turan I, Paranskaya L, Birkemeyer R, et al. Percutaneous mitral repair with the MitraClip system in patients with mild-to-moderate and severe heart failure: a single-Centre experience. Cardiovasc Ther. 2014;32:66–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Geis NA, Puls M, Lubos E, et al. Safety and efficacy of MitraClip therapy in patients with severely impaired left ventricular ejection fraction: results from the German transcatheter mitral valve interventions (TRAMI) registry. Eur J Heart Fail. 2018;20:598–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lesevic H, Sonne C, Braun D, et al. Acute and midterm outcome after MitraClip therapy in patients with severe mitral regurgitation and left ventricular dysfunction. Am J Cardiol. 2015;116:749–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Melisurgo G, Ajello S, Pappalardo F, et al. Afterload mismatch after MitraClip insertion for functional mitral regurgitation. Am J Cardiol. 2014;113:1844–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Schau T, Isotani A, Neuss M, et al. Long-term survival after MitraClip<sup>&#xae;</sup> therapy in patients with severe mitral regurgitation and severe congestive heart failure: A comparison among survivals predicted by heart failure models. J Cardiol. 2016;67:287–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Varghese R, Itagaki S, Anyanwu AC, Milla F, Adams DH. Predicting early left ventricular dysfunction after mitral valve&#xa0;reconstruction: The effect of atrial fibrillation and pulmonary hypertension. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2014;148:422–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Wang J, Han J, Li Y, et al. Preoperative risk factors of medium-term mitral valve repair outcome. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2014;19:946–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Murashita T, Okada Y, Kanemitsu H, et al. The impact of preoperative and postoperative pulmonary hypertension on long-term surgical outcome after mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;21:53–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Yzeiraj E, Bijuklic K, Tiburtius C, et al. Tricuspid regurgitation is a predictor of mortality after percutaneous mitral valve edge-to-edge repair. EuroIntervention. 2017;12:e1817–e24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Tigges E, Blankenberg S, von Bardeleben RS, et al. Implication of pulmonary hypertension in patients undergoing MitraClip therapy: results from the German transcatheter mitral valve interventions (TRAMI) registry. Eur J Heart Fail. 2018;20:585–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Barth S, Hautmann MB, Kerber S, et al. Hemodynamic improvement at three months after MitraClipA(R) treatment in end-stage heart failure patients with functional mitral regurgitation. J Heart Valve Dis. 2016;25:475–82.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Dini FL, Conti U, Fontanive P, et al. Right ventricular dysfunction is a major predictor of outcome in patients with moderate to severe mitral regurgitation and left ventricular dysfunction. Am Heart J. 2007;154:172–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. •• Sorajja P, Vemulapalli S, Feldman T, et al. Outcomes with Transcatheter mitral valve repair in the United States: an STS/ACC TVT registry report. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:2315–27. This publication provides the most contemporary data regarding transcatheter mitral valve repair.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Toyama K, Ayabe K, Kar S, et al. Postprocedural changes of tricuspid regurgitation after MitraClip therapy for mitral regurgitation. Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:857–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Ohno Y, Attizzani GF, Capodanno D, et al. Association of tricuspid regurgitation with clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system: 30-day and 12-month follow-up from the GRASP registry. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2014;15:1246–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Frangieh AH, Gruner C, Mikulicic F, et al. Impact of percutaneous mitral valve repair using the MitraClip system on tricuspid regurgitation. EuroIntervention. 2016;11:e1680–e6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Pighi M, Estevez-Loureiro R, Maisano F, et al. Immediate and 12-month outcomes of ischemic versus nonischemic functional mitral regurgitation in patients treated with MitraClip (from the 2011 to 2012 pilot sentinel registry of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair of the European Society of Cardiology). Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:630–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Leon MB, Smith CR, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2016;374:1609–20.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Lee DH, Buth KJ, Martin BJ, Yip AM, Hirsch GM. Frail patients are at increased risk for mortality and prolonged institutional care after cardiac surgery. Circulation. 2010;121:973–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Metze C, Matzik A-S, Scherner M, et al. Impact of frailty on outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous mitral valve repair. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2017;10:1920–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Schafer U, Maisano F, Butter C, et al. Impact of Preprocedural left ventricular ejection fraction on 1-year outcomes after MitraClip implantation (from the ACCESS-EU phase I, a prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized Postapproval study of the MitraClip therapy in Europe). Am J Cardiol. 2016;118:873–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Feldman T, Foster E, Glower DD, et al. Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1395–406.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Praz F, Spargias K, Chrissoheris M, et al. Compassionate use of the PASCAL transcatheter mitral valve repair system for patients with severe mitral regurgitation: a multicentre, prospective, observational, first-in-man study. Lancet. 2017;390:773–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lesevic H, Karl M, Braun D, et al. Long-term outcomes after MitraClip implantation according to the presence or absence of EVEREST inclusion criteria. Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:1255–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Neuss M, Schau T, Isotani A, Pilz M, Schöpp M, Butter C. Elevated mitral valve pressure gradient after MitraClip implantation deteriorates long-term outcome in patients with severe mitral regurgitation and severe heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2017;10:931–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Cheng R, Dawkins S, Tat E, et al. Relation of residual mitral regurgitation despite elevated mitral gradients to risk of heart failure hospitalization after MitraClip repair. Am J Cardiol. 2017;120:1595–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Siminiak T, Wu JC, Haude M, et al. Treatment of functional mitral regurgitation by percutaneous annuloplasty: results of the TITAN trial. Eur J Heart Fail. 2012;14:931–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Lipiecki J, Siminiak T, Sievert H, et al. Coronary sinus-based percutaneous annuloplasty as treatment for functional mitral regurgitation: the TITAN II trial. Open Heart. 2016;3:e000411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Tops LF, Van de Veire NR, Schuijf JD, et al. Noninvasive evaluation of coronary sinus anatomy and its relation to the mitral valve annulus: implications for percutaneous mitral annuloplasty. Circulation. 2007;115:1426–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kim J-H, Kocaturk O, Ozturk C, et al. Mitral cerclage Annuloplasty, a novel Transcatheter treatment for secondary mitral valve regurgitation: initial results in swine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:638–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Nickenig G, Hammerstingl C, Schueler R, et al. Transcatheter mitral Annuloplasty in chronic functional mitral regurgitation: 6-month results with the Cardioband percutaneous mitral repair system. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2016;9:2039–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Muller DWM, Farivar RS, Jansz P, et al. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for patients with symptomatic mitral regurgitation: a global feasibility trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:381–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Blackstone EH, Suri RM, Rajeswaran J, et al. Propensity-matched comparisons of clinical outcomes after transapical or transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a placement of aortic transcatheter valves (PARTNER)-I trial substudy. Circulation. 2015;131:1989–2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Ribeiro HB, Nombela-Franco L, Munoz-Garcia AJ, et al. Predictors and impact of myocardial injury after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;66:2075–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. • Wang DD, Eng MH, Greenbaum AB, et al. Validating a prediction modeling tool for left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction after transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2017. Seminal work first describing the a minimum residual left ventricular outflow tract area before left ventricular outflow obstruction occurs..

  56. Greenbaum AB, Condado JF, Eng M, et al. Long or redundant leaflet complicating transcatheter mitral valve replacement: case vignettes that advocate for removal or reduction of the anterior mitral leaflet. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2017.

  57. Babaliaros VC, Greenbaum AB, Khan JM, et al. Intentional percutaneous laceration of the anterior mitral leaflet to prevent outflow obstruction during Transcatheter mitral valve replacement: first-in-human experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:798–809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Guerrero M, Wang DD, Himbert D, et al. Short-term results of alcohol septal ablation as a bail-out strategy to treat severe left ventricular outflow tract obstruction after transcatheter mitral valve replacement in patients with severe mitral annular calcification. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;90:1220–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Cheung A, Webb JG, Barbanti M, et al. 5-year experience with transcatheter transapical mitral valve-in-valve implantation for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1759–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ye J, Cheung A, Yamashita M, et al. Transcatheter aortic and mitral valve-in-valve implantation for failed surgical bioprosthetic valves: an 8-year single-center experience. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:1735–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Whisenant B, Jones K, Miller D, Horton S, Miner E. Thrombosis following mitral and tricuspid valve-in-valve replacement. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2015;149:e26–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Eng MH, Greenbaum A, Wang DD, et al. Thrombotic valvular dysfunction with transcatheter mitral interventions for postsurgical failures. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;90:321–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Butnaru A, Shaheen J, Tzivoni D, Tauber R, Bitran D, Silberman S. Diagnosis and treatment of early bioprosthetic malfunction in the mitral valve position due to thrombus formation. Am J Cardiol. 2013;112:1439–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Korber MI, Silwedel J, Friedrichs K, et al. Bleeding complications after percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip. Am J Cardiol. 2018;121:94–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Ben-Avi R, Orlov B, Sternik L, et al. Short- and long-term results after prosthetic mitral valve implantation in patients with severe mitral annulus calcification. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2017;24:876–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Guerrero M, Urena M, Himbert D, et al. 1-year outcomes of Transcatheter mitral valve replacement in patients with severe mitral annular calcification. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1841–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Structural Heart Disease, Henry Ford Hospital, 2799 W. Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, 48202, USA

    Marvin H. Eng & Dee Dee Wang

Authors
  1. Marvin H. Eng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dee Dee Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marvin H. Eng.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Marvin H. Eng is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences. Dee Dee Wang is a co-inventor of 3D-imaging software for anatomic analysis in structural heart procedures assigned to Henry Ford Hospital Health System. Dr. Wang also reports consultancy with Edwards Lifesciences and Materialize.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Interventional Cardiology

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Eng, M.H., Wang, D.D. Transcatheter Mitral Valve Therapy: Defining the Patient Who Will Benefit. Curr Cardiol Rep 20, 107 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-018-1058-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11886-018-1058-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation