Carassia Claudia, Simonetti Fiorenzo, Alvarez Covarrubias Hector A, Wolf Bernhard, Pellegrini Costanza, Rheude Tobias, Fuchs Patrick, Roski Ferdinand, Kühlein Moritz, Blum Edna, Ndrepepa Gjin, Trenkwalder Teresa, Joner Michael, Kastrati Adnan, Cassese Salvatore, Xhepa Erion
Cardiology Department, Busto Arsizio Hospital, ASST Valle Olona, 21052 Busto Arsizio, Italy.
Klinik für Herz- und Kreislauferkrankungen, TUM Klinkum Deutsches Herzzentrum, Technische Universität München, 80636 Munich, Germany.
J Pers Med. 2025 Aug 16;15(8):383. doi: 10.3390/jpm15080383.
: Several treatment strategies are available for patients with mitral valve regurgitation (MR). However, evidence regarding their comparative effectiveness remains limited. We sought to compare the performance of different treatment strategies for personalized treatment of patients with MR. : We performed a pairwise and network meta-analyses of randomized trials comparing treatment strategies for patients with MR. Patients were divided in two groups: transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR, including edge-to-edge repair and indirect percutaneous annuloplasty) and control (surgery or optimal medical therapy). The primary outcome of this analysis was all-cause death. Main secondary outcomes were re-hospitalization for heart failure and re-intervention. : A total of seven trials with 2324 participants, with mainly functional MR (TMVR, = 1373-control, = 951) were available for the quantitative synthesis. The median follow-up duration was 14 months. Compared to control therapy, TMVR significantly reduced all-cause death (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.65-0.91, = 0.002) and re-hospitalization for heart failure (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.91, = 0.01). Among TMVR strategies, the edge-to-edge repair with MitraClip ranked as possibly the best option to reduce all-cause death. : In symptomatic patients with significant MR, TMVR is associated with a significant reduction of all-cause death, and re-hospitalization for heart failure, mainly in patients with functional MR. Additional comparative studies are needed to investigate the best TMVR treatment option, for patients with degenerative MR.
二尖瓣反流(MR)患者有多种治疗策略可供选择。然而,关于它们相对有效性的证据仍然有限。我们旨在比较不同治疗策略对MR患者进行个性化治疗的效果。
我们对比较MR患者治疗策略的随机试验进行了成对和网状荟萃分析。患者分为两组:经导管二尖瓣修复术(TMVR,包括缘对缘修复和间接经皮瓣环成形术)和对照组(手术或最佳药物治疗)。该分析的主要结局是全因死亡。主要次要结局是因心力衰竭再次住院和再次干预。
共有7项试验、2324名参与者可供定量合成分析,主要为功能性MR(TMVR组1373人,对照组951人)。中位随访时间为14个月。与对照治疗相比TMVR显著降低了全因死亡(RR 0.77,95%CI 0.65 - 0.91,P = 0.002)和因心力衰竭再次住院(RR 0.67,95%CI 0.49 - 0.91,P = 0.01)。在TMVR策略中,使用MitraClip进行缘对缘修复可能是降低全因死亡的最佳选择。
在有症状的重度MR患者中,TMVR与全因死亡和因心力衰竭再次住院的显著降低相关,主要是在功能性MR患者中。需要更多的比较研究来调查对于退行性MR患者最佳的TMVR治疗方案。