Mahowald, Madeline

AbstractBackgroundTranscatheter edge‐to‐edge repair with MitraClip is only approved for treatment of mitral regurgitation but is increasingly used to treat concomitant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) due to its common coexistence and association with poor outcomes. This study aimed to describe the learning curve associated with the challenge of off‐label treatment of concomitant TR.MethodsThis is a retrospective review of initial and consecutive patients who underwent combined edge‐to‐edge repair of mitral and tricuspid valves (TVs) at our institution from August 2017 to October 2019.ResultsRepair of both valves with MitraClip was performed in 22 patients (median age 81.5 years, 32% female). Mean procedure time was 176 ± 47 min; mean fluoroscopy time was 65 ± 24 min. Procedure duration in the first tertile was significantly longer (223 ± 13 min) than in the third tertile (143 ± 23 min, p = .0003). Median number of total clips placed per case was 3; in 15 patients (68%), the anterior and septal leaflets of the TV were clipped. The average changes in mean right atrial (RA) and left atrial (LA) pressures were −1.7 ± 2.5 mmHg (p = .0080) and −3.2 ± 4.6 mmHg (p = .0045), respectively. The average changes in RA and LA V‐wave heights were −3.3 ± 4.0 mmHg (p = .0009) and −8.1 ± 9.9 mmHg (p = .038), respectively. There was a significant trend toward decreasing residual TR over the course of the series (p = .046). At 30 days, survival was 100% and mean NYHA class decreased from 2.8 to 1.8 (p < .0001).ConclusionsCombined edge‐to‐edge tricuspid and mitral valve repair is safe and feasible. With experience, procedure duration and residual TR decreased.

Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to describe management of recurrent pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) and determine if stenting is superior to balloon angioplasty (BA) in preventing subsequent restenosis. Background PVS is a serious complication of atrial fibrillation ablation. BA and stenting are effective therapies; however, restenosis frequently occurs. Here we report management of recurrent stenosis. Methods This was a prospective observational study performed from 2000 to 2014. Results One hundred and thirteen patients with severe PVS underwent intervention in 88 veins treated with BA and 81 treated with stenting. Forty‐two patients experienced restenosis. Restenosis was more common in veins treated with BA (RRR 53% [95% CI 32–70%, p = .008]). A second intervention was performed in 41 patients. In the 34 vessels treated with initial BA, 24 were treated for restenosis with a stent and 10 were treated with a second BA. The recurrence rate was 46% in those treated with BA followed by stenting and 50% in those treated with two BA procedures. In the 22 veins treated with initial stenting, 9 were treated with another stent and 13 were treated with BA. The recurrence rate was 44% in those treated with a second stent and 46% for those treated with a stent followed by BA. The risk of a third stenosis was the same among all groups (Analysis of variance [ANOVA] p = .99). Limited sample size precluded analysis of outcome by stent size. Conclusions Restenosis occurred in 44% of patients overall. Management is challenging; stenting does not appear to be superior to BA.