Transcatheter Edge-To-Edge Repair in Severe Mitral Regurgitation Following Acute Myocardial Infarction – Aetiology-Based Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the association between transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and outcomes in patients with significant mitral regurgitation (MR) following acute myocardial infarction (MI), focusing on the aetiology of acute post-MI MR in high-risk surgical patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The International Registry of MitraClip in Acute Mitral Regurgitation following Acute Myocardial Infarction (IREMMI) includes 187 patients with severe MR post-MI managed with TEER. Of these, 176 were included in the analysis, 23 (13%) patients had acute papillary muscle rupture (PMR) and 153 (87%) acute secondary MR. The mean age was 70 ± 10 years and 41% were female. PMR patients had fewer cardiovascular risk factors: hypertension (52% vs. 73%, p = 0.04), diabetes (26% vs. 48%, p < 0.01) but a higher left ventricular ejection fraction (45± 15% vs.35± 10%, p < 0.01) compared secondary MR patients. PMR patients were more likely to present in cardiogenic shock (91% vs. 51%, p = 0.001), require mechanical circulatory support (74% vs. 34%, p = 0.01), and had a higher EuroSCORE II (23± 13% vs. 13± 11%, p = 0.011). The median time from MI to TEER was shorter in PMR (6 days) versus secondary MR (20 days) (p < 0.01). Procedural success was similar (87% vs. 92%, p = 0.49) with comparable MR grade reduction. However, PMR patients had significantly higher in-hospital mortality rates (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.15-8.12, p = 0.02), 30-day mortality rates (unadjusted OR 3.99, 95% CI 1.42-11.26, p = 0.01) and a higher rate of conversion to surgical mitral valve replacement (22% vs. 3%, p < 0.01) (unadjusted OR 8.17, 95% CI 2.15-30.96, p < 0.001). Aetiology of MR, cardiogenic shock, and procedure timing significantly impacted in-hospital mortality. After adjusting for EuroSCORE II and cardiogenic shock, MR aetiology remained the strongest predictor (adjusted OR 6.71; 95% CI 2.06-21.86, p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair may be considered a salvage or bridge procedure in decompensated post-MI MR patients of both aetiologies; however, patients with PMR have a higher risk of mortality and conversion to surgery.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".