A Multicenter, Randomized, Controlled Study to Assess Mitral vAlve reconsTrucTion for advancEd Insufficiency of Functional or iscHemic ORigiN

Overview

Study to assess mitral valve therapy for advanced insufficiency of functional or ischemic origin in patients with moderate-to-severe mitral regurgitation (MR) of primarily functional pathology and reduced left ventricular function considered to be at high surgical risk

Secondary or functional mitral regurgitation (MR) results from a geometrical distortion of a dysfunctional left ventricle leading to tethering of mitral valve leaflets by papillary muscle displacement, annular dilatation and/or reduced closing forces in a structurally normal mitral valve. It occurs in over 30% of patients with systolic heart failure. Despite optimal medical care it is associated with increased mortality and hospitalization rates leaving elimination of MR as the only therapeutic option. Nevertheless, traditionally, mitral valve surgery has been the therapy of choice in this setting. As mitral valve surgery has so far been only investigated in retrospective single center registries, which have shown conflicting results. it has a class IIb recommendation, level of evidence C, in these patients without indication for coronary revascularization in the current guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. In recent years percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip (PMVR) has evolved as an important therapeutic option in this type of patient with widespread use particularly in Europe, where the device was CE-marked in 2008. PMVR has been compared to mitral valve surgery (repair and replacement) in the randomized, controlled EVEREST II trial in patients with primary MR, which were good candidates for surgery, and was shown to be less effective than surgery in this context. However, no randomized, controlled data are available comparing PMVR and mitral valve surgery in patients with depressed left ventricular function and secondary MR, who have a considerably higher perioperative risk than the EVEREST II population. Like mitral valve surgery it has a class IIb, level of evidence C, recommendation in current guidelines.

Conditions

Interventions

Eligibility

Locations (1)

Outcomes

Central Contacts