Predictors of mild residual mitral regurgitation severity after transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (mTEER): Implications for patient selection and outcomes from a multicenter cohort study

F. Ausbüttel (Münster)1, G. Chatzis (Marburg)2, H. Schütt (Marburg)3, S. Barth (Bad Neustadt a. d. Saale)4, S. Kerber (Bad Neustadt a. d. Saale)5, B. Schieffer (Marburg)2, C. Wächter (Marburg)3, U. Lüsebrink (Marburg)3
1Universitätsklinikum Münster Klinik für Kardiologie I: Koronare Herzkrankheit, Herzinsuffizienz und Angiologie Münster, Deutschland; 2Universitätsklinikum Giessen und Marburg GmbH Klinik für Kardiologie, Angiologie und internistische Intensivmedizin Marburg, Deutschland; 3Universitätsklinikum Giessen und Marburg GmbH Klinik für Innere Medizin - Schwerpunkt Kardiologie Marburg, Deutschland; 4RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG Campus Bad Neustadt Klinik für Kardiologie II / Interventionelle Elektrophysiologie Bad Neustadt a. d. Saale, Deutschland; 5RHÖN-KLINIKUM AG Campus Bad Neustadt Kardiologie Bad Neustadt a. d. Saale, Deutschland
Background: Transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (mTEER) is an effective treatment modality for patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) at prohibitive risk for surgery. While residual moderate-to-severe residual MR constitutes a marker of diminished long-term survival, the impact of residual moderate MR (II°) on survival remains unclear. Regardless from this, it seems reasonable to aim for the greatest possible reduction in MR to a residual mild or minimal severity (≤I°) in the context of mTEER. However, preliminary predictors of residual MR ≤I° have not yet been investigated yet.

Methods: All patients who underwent mTEER in four german cardiac centers were investigated. Patients were assigned to the respective cohorts with and without residual MR ≤I°. Predictors of residual MR ≤I° were identified via uni- and multivariable logistic regression analyses. Long-term survival was compared via the Kaplan-Meier method between both cohorts after adjustment of confounders via propensity-score-matching (PSM) in a 1:6-ratio. 

Results: A total of 821 patients were enrolled for analysis, 724 (88.2%) of whom achieved residual MR ≤I°, and  97 (11.8%) achieved residual MR of II°. Patients with residual MR II° were younger, more morbid and required longer procedure times, as outlined in Table 1. Univariable logistic regression analysis identified age <65 years (odds ratio [OR] 0.39, 95%-confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.79, p=0.005), prior implantable cardioverter defibrillator therapy (ICD, OR 0.56, 95%-CI 0.36-0.91, p=0.02) and a left ventricular enddiastolic diameter >62 mm (OR 0.52, 95%-CI 0.31-0.88, p=0.01) as inverse predictors of residual MR ≤I°. Within the multivariable logistic regression analysis, age <65 years remained as inverse predictor of residual MR ≤I° (OR 0.39, 95%-CI 0.19-0.84, p=0.01), as presented in Table 2. A balancing of the variables with previously significant differences between both cohorts was achieved through PSM. Nevertheless, survival did not differ significantly between patients with residual MR II° and MR ≤I° before and after PSM, which was further illustrated in Figure 1.

Conclusion: Residual MR of II° was common in 11.8% (97/821) of today’s mTEER patients. While survival was not affected, the identified predictors of residual MR ≤I° can provide guidance in the selection of suitable candidates in the contemporary mTEER era.






Figure 1: Long-term survival between patients with and without residual MR ≤I° after PSM