MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Transcatheter edge to edge repair of functional mitral regurgitation as bridge to heart transplantation: 2-years follow up results from MitraBridge international registry

2023· article· en· W4388595151 on OpenAlexaff
Chiara Marcelli, Andrea Munafò, Rodrigo Estévez‐Loureiro, Marianna Adamo, Patrice Guérin, Dabit Arzamendi, Eu Chin Ho, Anita Asgar, Anna Sonia Petronio, Carmelo Grasso, Nicolas M. Van Mieghem, Giuseppe Tarantini, Luciano Potena, Francesco Saia, Cosmo Godino

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionHeart failureCardiologyClinical endpointInternal medicineMitral regurgitationHeart transplantationTransplantationVentriclePulmonary arteryPulmonary hypertensionSurgeryClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Chronic severe functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is a common finding in patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) who undergo evaluation for heart transplantation (HTx). Nevertheless, access to surgical strategies for AHF could be limited by scarce availability of donors and by temporary or definitive contraindications. MitraBridge registry already proved that transcatheter edge to edge repair (TEER) of FMR performed as a bridge to HTx is an effective and safe treatment strategy at 1-year follow up with 64% of patients free from composite primary endpoint of all-cause death, new admission for HF, urgent HTx or LVAD implantation. Purpose The aim of this study is to determine whether 1-year results of MitraBridge registry were maintained at 2-years follow up. Methods Mitrabridge is a retrospective, multicenter observational study that enrolled 153 adult patients with AHF and moderate-to-severe or severe FMR and considered candidates for HTx who underwent TEER between 2018 and 2021. Depending on the strategy TEER was performed for, patients were classified in bridge to transplant, candidacy or decision. Primary endpoint of the current analysis was the 2-year composite rate of all-cause death, new admission for HF, urgent HTx or LVAD implantation. Results Median age was 59 years old [53-63], most patients were in INTERMACS class 5-6 (47.5%) and mean left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 26.9±7.7%. Baseline right heart catheterization was available for 112 (73%) patients, of them 87.5% had pulmonary hypertension with mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) of 33±10 mmHg. Procedural success was achieved in 89.5% of cases and no deaths at 30 days were reported. At 2-years follow up, freedom from primary endpoint was maintained in 47% of patients. A significant reduction of echocardiographic systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) was observed (from 50 [40-61] mmHg to 43 [33-53] mmHg, p-value<0.001). At the end of follow-up (median time of 26 months, IQR 9-52), elective HTx was successfully performed in 30 cases (21%), 19 patients (13.5%) maintained or obtained the eligibility for transplant, and 32 patients (22.5%) had no longer indication for HTx, due to clinical improvement. Nine patients underwent LVAD implantation for clinical worsening and nine (8%) urgent HTx (15% of already listed population). Conclusions MitraBridge 2-years follow up confirms that TEER is a safe option in AHF population with FMR and shows that haemodynamic and clinical benefits following the procedure are maintained at long term. In particular, it allowed 21% of patients to receive elective HTx reducing need for urgent organ transplantation and helped to expand the candidacy for HTx.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicTransplantation: Methods and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→