Contemporary experience of mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair technology in patients with mitral annular calcification.

BACKGROUND: Mitral annular calcification (MAC) has been an exclusion for many of the earlier pivotal trials that were instrumental in gaining device approval and indications for mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER). AIMS: To evaluate the impact of MAC on the procedural durability and success of newer generation MitraClip® systems (G3 and G4 systems). METHODS: Data were collected from Northwell TEER registry. Patients that underwent M-TEER with third or fourth generation MitraClip device were included. Patients were divided into -MAC (none-mild) and +MAC (moderate-severe) groups. Procedural success was defined as ≤ grade 2 + mitral regurgitation (MR) postprocedure, and durability was defined as ≤ grade 2 + MR retention at 1 month and 1 year. Univariate analysis compared outcomes between groups. RESULTS: Of 260 M-TEER patients, 160 were -MAC and 100 were +MAC. Procedural success was comparable; however, there were three patients who required conversion to cardiac surgery during the index hospitalization in the +MAC group versus none in the -MAC group (though this was not statistically significant). At 1-month follow-up, there were no significant differences in MR severity. At 1-year follow-up, +MAC had higher moderate-severe MR (22.1% vs. 7.5%; p = 0.002) and higher mean transmitral gradients (5.3 vs. 4.0 mmHg; p = 0.001) with no differences in mortality, New York Heart Association functional class or ejection fraction. CONCLUSION: In selective patients with high burden of MAC, contemporary M-TEER is safe, and procedural success is similar to patients with none-mild MAC. However, a loss of procedural durability was seen in +MAC group at 1-year follow-up. Further studies with longer follow-ups are required to assess newer mTEER devices and their potential clinical implications in patients with a high burden of MAC.

Clinical outcomes of intravenous iron therapy in patients with heart failure and iron deficiency: Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency in patients with heart failure (HF) is underdiagnosed and undertreated. The role of intravenous (IV) iron is well-established to improve quality of life measures. Emerging evidence also supports its role in preventing cardiovascular events in patients with HF. METHODOLOGY: We conducted a literature search of multiple electronic databases. Randomized controlled trials that compared IV iron to usual care among patients with HF and reported cardiovascular (CV) outcomes were included. Primary outcome was the composite of first heart failure hospitalization (HFH) or CV death. Secondary outcomes included HFH (first or recurrent), CV death, all-cause mortality, hospitalization for any cause, gastrointestinal (GI) side effects, or any infection. We performed trial sequential and cumulative meta-analyses to evaluate the effect of IV iron on the primary endpoint, and on HFH. RESULTS: Nine trials enrolling 3337 patients were included. Adding IV iron to usual care significantly reduced the risk of first HFH or CV death [risk ratio (RR) 0.84; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.75-0.93; I2 = 0 %; number needed to treat (NNT) 18], which was primarily driven by a reduction in the risk of HFH of 25 %. IV iron also reduced the risk of the composite of hospitalization for any cause or death (RR 0.92; 95 % CI 0.85-0.99; I2 = 0 %; NNT 19). There was no significant difference in the risk of CV death, all-cause mortality, adverse GI events, or any infection among patients receiving IV iron compared to usual care. The observed benefits of IV iron were directionally consistent across trials and crossed both the statistical and trial sequential boundaries of benefit. CONCLUSION: In patients with HF and iron deficiency, the addition of IV iron to usual care reduces the risk of HFH without affecting the risk of CV or all-cause mortality.