Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
Percutaneous treatment of mitral regurgitation (MR) remains one of the most important areas of innovation and unmet clinical need in the field of adult structural heart disease. It is also one of the most challenging areas for device development because of the complexity of mitral valve (MV) function and the numerous pathologies that have traditionally required highly individualized surgical corrective therapy. Mitral leaflet mobility and coaptation rely on integrated function of the mitral annulus, chordae tendineae, papillary muscles, left ventricle, and left atrium. Together these structures are referred to as the mitral apparatus ( Figure 10–1 ). MR is an important and often underrecognized entity in which blood regurgitates into the left atrium from the left ventricle during systole. Published guidelines have established indications for surgical MV correction, generally for patients with symptoms, evidence of left ventricular (LV) enlargement or systolic dysfunction, or atrial fibrillation. These guidelines have resulted in approximately 40,000 MV operations annually in the United States and a comparable number in Europe. However, an unmet clinical need exists for a large population of patients with congestive heart failure–associated MR, with comorbidities, or at high surgical risk. Because MR reduction in these patients can improve quality of life and result in favorable LV remodeling, numerous percutaneous approaches for treating MR have been developed in the last decade. This chapter describes existing and emerging therapies that are rapidly assuming importance as therapeutic options for patients with MR.
MR is a heterogeneous disease reflecting multiple underlying etiologies that converge on systolic regurgitation of the MV. Carpentier, Barlow, and others have described three general categories of MR with associated subclassifications ( Figure 10–2 ). Degenerative MR (DMR; Carpentier Type II dysfunction) results from structurally abnormal leaflets or chordae and occurs in fibroelastic deficiency with leaflet prolapse, myxomatous leaflet degeneration, or Barlow disease with diffuse excess tissue and chordal elongation. Over the course of 10 years, 90% of patients with severe MR caused by a flail posterior leaflet will either die or require MV surgery. Surgical MV repair is the preferred treatment for degenerative MR because it is associated with improved postoperative outcomes and survival when compared to MV replacement. Multiple surgical repair techniques exist, including leaflet repair with resection, chordal transfer, use of polytetrafluoroethylene neochordae, and prosthetic ring or band annuloplasty. Novel therapies addressed later in this chapter include percutaneous approaches to these leaflet and chordal repair strategies.
Functional MR (FMR; Carpentier Type I or IIIb) results from underlying LV dysfunction and annular dilation, leading to impaired coaptation of otherwise structurally normal leaflets. Surgical correction of FMR improves functional class and LV remodeling, but it is uncertain whether this is associated with reduced mortality. Even with modern surgical annuloplasty techniques, up to one third of patients with FMR develop recurrent moderate or greater MR within 1 year of surgery. A number of predictors for recurrent MR after restrictive annuloplasty have been identified, including LV end-diastolic diameter greater than 65 mm, posterior leaflet angle of 45 degrees or greater, and MV coaptation depth of 11 mm or more. As many as 500,000 people in North America have clinically significant congestive heart failure–associated MR, but the majority of those patients are not offered any MV intervention. Given that even asymptomatic patients with severe MR have higher 5-year rates of death, heart failure, and atrial fibrillation, a significant need exists for improved FMR therapies. Many of the devices discussed in this chapter attempt to address percutaneous approaches for treatment of FMR, primarily through percutaneous annuloplasty.
From an anatomic and interventional perspective, technologies for addressing MR can be categorized into treatments focused on leaflet repair, annuloplasty, chordal implants, LV remodeling techniques, and percutaneous MV replacement ( Table 10–1 ). The following discussion examines interventional techniques in development for each of these approaches.
Target of Therapy | Device Name (Manufacturer) | Mechanism of Action |
---|---|---|
Leaflet repair | MitraClip (Abbott) | Clip-based edge-to-edge repair |
Percu-Pro (Cardiosolutions) | Space-occupying in regurgitant orifice | |
MOBIUS (Edwards) | Suture-based edge-to-edge repair | |
Chordal implant | NeoChord (NeoChord) | Synthetic chordae tendineae |
Neoleaflet implant | Middle Peak Medical | Synthetic neoleaflet |
Indirect annuloplasty | CARILLON (Cardiac Dimensions) | Coronary sinus reshaping |
MONARC (Edwards) | Coronary sinus reshaping | |
PTMA device (Viacor) | Coronary sinus reshaping | |
Mitral cerclage (NIH) | Coronary sinus-right atrial encircling | |
PS 3 System (MVRx) | Transatrial coronary sinoatrial septal shortening | |
Direct annuloplasty | Mitralign (Mitralign) | 2 × 2 Plicating anchors through posterior annulus |
Accucinch (Guided Delivery Systems) | Plicating anchors on ventricular side of mitral annulus | |
Cardioband (Valtech) | Plicating anchors on atrial side of mitral annulus | |
QuantumCor (QuantumCor) | Radiofrequency energy shrinking annular collagen | |
Millipede (Millipede) | Semirigid circumferential annular ring | |
Left ventricular reshaping | iCoapsys (Edwards) | Transventricular reshaping |
BACE (Mardil) | External basal myocardial reshaping | |
Mitral annular anchor | M-Valve | Percutaneous anchor to allow fixation of transcatheter valve |
Mitral valve replacement | Endovalve-Herrmann (Endovalve) | Valve replacement |
CardiAQ (CardiAQ) | Valve replacement | |
Tiara (Neovasc) | Valve replacement |
MitraClip (Abbott Vascular Structural Heart, Menlo Park, Calif.) therapy has become an important therapeutic option for patients with MR, and important investigations centered on this therapy have given credence and momentum to the entire field of percutaneous MV repair. MitraClip therapy is based on the surgical edge-to-edge repair first described by Alfieri. Because of the wealth of data and clinical experience related to MitraClip therapy, this technique is the subject of a separate chapter in this volume ( Chapter 11 ).
The Cardiosolutions Percu-Pro system (Cardiosolutions Inc., Stoughton, Mass.) is a percutaneously delivered polyurethane-silicone polymer “Mitra-Spacer.” The spacer is balloon-shaped, occupies the regurgitant mitral orifice, and is anchored to the LV apex ( Figure 10–3 ). The spacer has the ability to “self-center” within the regurgitant orifice. Animal studies have shown that the device is not associated with any significant inflammatory response, and early clinical trials are underway.
Middle Peak Medical (Palo Alto, Calif.) is developing a unique solution that involves minimally invasive or transcatheter implantation of a posterior “neoleaflet.” The potential advantage of this approach is that the neoleaflet can restore coaptation with the anterior leaflet despite a variety of underlying degenerative or functional etiologies. Because the device consists only of this thin neoleaflet, the delivery profile is much smaller than a complete transcatheter mitral replacement. Since native posterior leaflet function is rendered inactive by the neoleaflet, no complex repair strategies are required. The implant does not interfere with the mitral support apparatus, so that ventricular–annular mechanical coupling is preserved. At publication, the device is undergoing preclinical development; a schematic of the technology is shown in Figure 10–4 .
The MOBIUS device (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, Calif.) utilized an innovative transseptal catheter that possessed suction capability in order to grasp the leaflets. Once the leaflets were grasped, a suture was delivered to the leaflets to create a double-orifice valve. In the initial in-human experience, the procedure was performed successfully on 15 patients. Nine of the patients had acute reduction of MR by 1 grade or more, and 6 patients had sustained improvement at 30 days. This device is no longer in further development because of the lack of apparent durability in the initial studies.
Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles
If you are a member. Log in here