Background: Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) is an effective therapy for high-risk patients with severe mitral regurgitation (MR) but heart failure (HF) readmissions and death remain substantial on mid-term follow-up. Recently, right ventricular (RV) to pulmonary arterial (PA) coupling has emerged as a relevant prognostic predictor in HF. In this study, we aimed to assess the prognostic value of tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) to PA systolic pressure (PASP) ratio as a non-invasive measure of RV-to-PA coupling in patients undergoing TMVR with MitraClip (Abbott, CA, USA). Methods: Multicentre registry including 228 consecutive patients that underwent successful TMVR with MitraClip. The sample was divided in two groups according to TAPSE/PASP median value: 0.35. The primary combined endpoint encompassed HF readmissions and all-cause mortality. Results: Mean age was 72.5 ± 11.5 years and 154 (67.5%) patients were male. HF readmissions and all-cause mortality were more frequent in patients with TAPSE/PASP ≤ 0.35: Log-Rank 8.844, p = 0.003. On Cox regression, TAPSE/PASP emerged as a prognostic predictor of the primary combined endpoint, together with STS-Score. TAPSE/PASP was a better prognostic predictor than either TAPSE or PASP separately. Conclusions: TAPSE/PASP ratio appears as a novel prognostic predictor in patients undergoing MitraClip implantation that might improve risk stratification and candidate selection.

Background: Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVR) could improve survival in functional mitral regurgitation (FMR), but it is necessary to consider the influence of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Therefore, we compare the outcomes after TMVR with Mitraclip^® between two groups according to LVEF. Methods: In an observational registry study, we compared the outcomes in patients with FMR who underwent TMVR with and without LVEF <30%. The primary endpoint was the combined one-year all-cause mortality and unplanned hospital readmissions due to HF. The secondary end-points were New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class and mitral regurgitation (MR) severity. Propensity-score matching was used to create two groups with the same baseline characteristics, except for baseline LVEF. Results: Among 535 FMR eligible patients, 144 patients with LVEF 30% (group 2) had similar propensity scores and were included in the analyses. The primary study endpoint was significantlly higher in group 1 (33.3% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.002). There was a maintained improvement in secondary endpoints without significant differences among groups. Conclusion: FMR patients with LVEF <30% treated with MitraClip^® had higher mortality and readmissions than patients with LVEF ≥30% treated with the same device. However, both groups improved the NYHA functional class and MR severity.

Background and aim: Recent randomized data comparing percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) versus optimal medical treatment in patients with functional MR (FMR) seemed to highlight the importance of the learning curve not only for procedural outcomes but also for patient selection. The aim of the study was to compare a contemporary series of patients undergoing PMVR using a second-generation Mitraclip device (Mitraclip NT) with previous cohorts treated with a first-generation system. Methods: This multicenter study collected individual data from 18 centers between 2012 and 2017. The cohort was divided into three groups according to the use of the first-generation Mitraclip during the first (control-1) or second half (control-2) or the Mitraclip NT system. Results: A total of 545 consecutive patients were included in the study. Among all, 182 (33.3%), 183 (33.3%), and 180 (33.3%) patients underwent mitral repair in the control-1, control-2, and NT cohorts, respectively. Procedural success was achieved in 93.3% of patients without differences between groups. Major adverse events did not statistically differ among groups, but there was a higher rate of pericardial effusion in the control-1 group (4.3%, 0.6%, and 2.6%, respectively; p = 0.025). The composite endpoint of death, surgery, and admission for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 12 months was lower in the NT group (23.5% in control-1, 22.5% in control-2, and 8.3% in the NT group; p = 0.032). Conclusions: The present paper shows that contemporary clinical outcomes of patients undergoing PMVR with the Mitraclip system have improved over time.

Background: Coronary embolism (CE) is an underrecognized cause of acute myocardial infarction, and limited data exist comparing atrial fibrillation–related CE (AF CE) with CE from other causes. Methods: We conducted the first multicenter study in this challenging setting (NCT06948240). We retrospectively included 489 patients diagnosed with CE across 10 hospitals. CE was diagnosed using Shibata criteria. Patients were classified into AF CE and non‐AF CE groups. Results: A total of 241 patients (49%) had AF CE. Distinctive angiographic features were reported in patients with AF CE: less proximal coronary obstruction (34% versus 46%, P =0.04), lower percutaneous coronary intervention rates (34% versus 45%, P =0.03), more frequent initial thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 0 flow (85% versus 70%, P =0.01), and less final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 3 flow (52% versus 76%, P <0.001). In‐hospital composite outcome occurred in 44% of patients with AF CE versus 25% in patients without AF CE ( P <0.001), including higher mortality (14% versus 6%, P =0.003), heart failure (24% versus 14%, P =0.002), and cardiogenic shock (14% versus 8%, P =0.048). Long‐term adverse events were also more frequent in AF CE (45% versus 16%, P <0.001), with higher rates of stroke (9% versus 3% P =0.02), heart failure (15% versus 5%, P =0.002), and all‐cause mortality (34% versus 11%, P <0.001). In multivariable models, AF CE was independently associated with worse in‐hospital outcomes (odds ratio, 3.3 [95% CI, 1.4–8; P =0.007]) and long‐term events (hazard ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 1.2–5; P =0.01]). Conclusion: AF‐related CE is associated with distinct angiographic patterns and independently predicts poor outcomes, highlighting the need for refined and tailored strategies in AF CE.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a major contributor to cardiovas-cular morbidity and mortality, with ischemic heart disease as the leading etiology. Despite advances in optimal medical treatment (OMT), the additional benefit of coronary revascularization in this population remains uncertain. While some studies describe a potential benefit in revascularization - particularly with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)- this benefit has not been consistently observed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Moreover, in this context, the role of myocardial hibernation has been called into question. Additionally, recent advances in the medical management of heart failure complicate the current interpretation of previous studies and underscores the need for new clinical trials

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) is a major contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, with ischemic heart disease as the leading etiology. Despite advances in optimal medical treatment (OMT), the additional benefit of coronary revascularization in this population remains uncertain. While some studies describe a potential benefit in revascularization—particularly with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)—this benefit has not been consistently observed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Moreover, in this context, the role of myocardial hibernation has been called into question. Additionally, recent advances in the medical management of heart failure complicate the current interpretation of previous studies and underscore the need for new clinical trials. This review synthesizes the current evidence on the potential benefits of coronary revascularization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF).