Comparison of Outcomes of Edge-to-Edge Mitral Valve Repair Versus Surgical Mitral Valve Repair for Functional Mitral Regurgitation

Aims

Patients affected by functional mitral regurgitation represent an increasingly high-risk population. Edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TEER) has emerged as a promising treatment option for these patients. However, there is limited research on the comparative outcomes of TEER versus surgical mitral valve repair (SMVr). This study seeks to compare the demographics, complications, and outcomes of TEER and SMVr based on a real-world analysis of the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database.

Methods and Results

In the NIS database, from the years 2016 to 2018, a total of 6233 and 2524 patients who underwent SMVr and TEER were selected, respectively. The mean ages of the patients were 65.68 years (SMVr) and 78.40 years (TEER) (p < 0.01). The mortality rate of patients who received SMVr was similar to that of patients who were treated with TEER (1.7% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.603). Patients who underwent SMVr more likely suffered from perioperative complications including cardiogenic shock (2.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001), cardiac arrest (1.7% vs. 1.1%, p = 0.025), and cerebrovascular infarction (0.9% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.013). The average length of hospital stay was longer (8.59 vs. 4.13 days, p < 0.001) for SMVr compared to TEER; however, the average cost of treatment was higher ($218 728.25 vs. $215 071.74, p = 0.031) for TEER compared to SMVr. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that SMVr was associated with worse adjusted cardiogenic shock (OR, 7.347 [95% CI, 3.574−15.105]; p < 0.01) and acute kidney injury (OR, 2.793 [95% CI, 2.356−3.311]; p < 0.01).

Conclusion

Patients who underwent TEER demonstrated a notable decrease in postoperative complications and a shorter hospitalization period when compared to those who underwent SMVr.