Outcome after percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral repair for functional and degenerative mitral regurgitation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Differences in terms of safety and efficacy of percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral repair between patients with functional and degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR) are not well established. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify these differences. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, Google scholar database and international meeting abstracts were searched for all studies about MitraClip. Studies with <25 patients or where 1-year results were not delineated between MR aetiology were excluded. This study is registered with PROSPERO. RESULTS: A total of nine studies investigating the mid-term outcome of percutaneous edge-to-edge repair in patients with functional versus degenerative MR were included in the meta-analysis (n=2615). At 1 year, there were not significant differences among groups in terms of patients with MR grade≤2 (719/1304 vs 295/504; 58% vs 54%; risk ratio (RR) 1.12; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.47; p=0.40), while there was a significantly lower rate of mitral valve re-intervention in patients with functional MR compared with those with degenerative MR (77/1770 vs 80/818; 4% vs 10%; RR 0.60; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.97; p=0.04). One-year mortality rate was 16% (408/2498) and similar among groups (RR 1.26; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.77; p=0.18). Functional MR group showed significantly higher percentage of patients in New York Heart Association class III/IV (234/1480 vs 49/583; 16% vs 8%; p<0.01) and re-hospitalisation for heart failure (137/605 vs 31/220; 23% vs 14%; p=0.03). No differences were found in terms of single leaflet device attachment (25/969 vs 20/464; 3% vs 4%; p=0.81) and device embolisation (no events reported in both groups) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that percutaneous edge-to-edge repair is likely to be an efficacious and safe option in patients with both functional and degenerative MR. Large, randomised studies are ongoing and awaited to fully assess the clinical impact of the procedure in these two different MR aetiologies.

Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for left main coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite several clinical studies, efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main (LM) disease remains controversial. The objective of this meta-analysis of randomized trials was to evaluate the clinical outcome of CABG versus PCI with drug-eluting stents in LM coronary disease. METHODS: We systematically searched online databases up to March 2017 for randomized trials comparing CABG to PCI with drug-eluting stents. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: We included data from 5 randomized trials and 4595 patients. At 30days, CABG was associated with higher stroke (OR 2.54 [95% CI, 1.02-6.31]) and periprocedural myocardial infarction (OR 1.45 [95% CI, 1.00-2.10]), with no other significant differences compared to PCI. At 1year, CABG reduced repeat revascularization (OR 0.56 [95% CI, 0.40-0.77]), but increased stroke (OR 5.11 [95% CI, 1.62-16.12]). At 3-5years, CABG reduced repeat revascularization (OR 0.55 [95% CI, 0.45-0.67]) and non-periprocedural myocardial infarction (OR 0.45 [95% CI, 0.29-0.70]), without significant differences on other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: From the present updated meta-analysis of available studies on LM coronary disease treatment, there were no differences in mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke rate at 3-5years follow-up after CABG or PCI, but CABG decreased the rate of repeat revascularization and non-periprocedural infarction. However, at short-term follow-up, CABG showed higher rate of stroke and periprocedural myocardial infarction, but these effects attenuated over time. These findings merit further investigation at longer follow-up.

The Blue Coma: The Role of Methylene Blue in Unexplained Coma After Cardiac Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Methylene blue commonly is used as a dye or an antidote, but also can be used off label as a vasopressor. Serotonin toxicity is a potentially lethal and often misdiagnosed condition that can result from drug interaction. Mild serotonin toxicity previously was reported in settings in which methylene blue was used as a dye. The authors report 3 cases of life-threatening serotonin toxicity in patients undergoing chronic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) therapy who also underwent cardiac surgery and received methylene blue to treat vasoplegic syndrome. DESIGN: An observational study. SETTING: A cardiothoracic intensive care unit (ICU) in a teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Three patients who received methylene blue after cardiac surgery, later discovered to be undergoing chronic SSRI therapy. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: All 3 patients received high doses of fentanyl during general anesthesia. They all developed vasoplegic syndrome and consequently were given methylene blue in the ICU. All 3 patients developed serotonin toxicity, including coma, after this administration and diagnostic tests were negative for acute intracranial pathology. Coma lasted between 1 and 5 days. Two patients were discharged from the ICU shortly after awakening, whereas the third patient experienced a complicated postoperative course for concomitant refractory low-cardiac-output syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing chronic SSRI therapy should not be administered methylene blue to treat vasoplegic syndrome.