Percutaneous mitral valve repair vs. stand-alone medical therapy in patients with functional mitral regurgitation and heart failure

Background: Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is a common finding among patients with heart failure (HF) and it is related to adverse events. Outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) are still a matter of debate. We performed a meta-analysis to assess mid- and long-term outcomes of patients with FMR treated with MitraClip® compared to medical management. Methods: We conducted an electronic database search of all published data PubMed Central, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google Scholar databases. The primary end-point was all-cause mortality. The secondary end-points were hospitalizations for HF, need for heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device, unplanned mitral valve surgery, myocardial infarction and stroke. Results: Five studies (n = 1513 patients) were included in the analysis. The summary estimate including all the available studies showed a statistically significant reduction in all-cause mortality favoring MitraClip® (HR 0.56, CI 95% [0.38–0.84]) and HF hospitalizations (HR 0.65; CI 95% [0.46–0.92]). A significant reduction in the indication for advanced HF therapies (OR 0.48; CI 95% [0.25–0.90]) or the need for unplanned mitral valve surgery (OR 0.20; CI 95% [0.07–0.57]) was also found in the group of patients that underwent TMVR. No differences in the incidence of myocardial infarction or stroke were found between both groups of treatment. No publication bias was detected. Conclusion: TMVR with MitraClip® system was related to a significant reduction in all-cause mortality, hospitalizations for HF and the need for HF transplant, left ventricular assist device or unplanned surgery beyond 1-year follow up.