Figures
Abstract
Background
Patients with diabetes mellitus show a negative outcome in percutaneous coronary intervention, aortic valve replacement and cardiac surgery. The impact of diabetes on patients undergoing treatment of severe mitral regurgitation (MR) using the MitraClip system is not known. We therefore sought to assess whether percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system is safe and effective in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Methods and Results
We included 58 patients with severe and moderate-to-severe MR in an open-label observational single-center study. Ninteen patients were under oral medication or insulin therapy for type II diabetes mellitus. MitraClip devices were successfully implanted in all patients with diabetes and in 97.4% (n = 38) of patients without diabetes (p = 0.672). Periprocedural major cardiac adverse and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) occurred in 5.1% (n = 2) of patients without diabetes whereas patients with diabetes did not show any MACCE (p = 0.448). 30-day mortality was 1.7% (n = 1) with no case of death in the diabetes group. Short-term follow up of three months showed a significant improvement of NYHA class and quality of life evaluated by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire in both groups, with no changes in the 6-minute walk test.
Citation: Hellhammer K, Zeus T, Balzer J, van Hall S, Rammos C, Wagstaff R, et al. (2014) Safety and Efficacy of Percutaneous Mitral Valve Repair Using the MitraClip® System in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus. PLoS ONE 9(11): e111178. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0111178
Editor: Marc W. Merx, KRH Robert Koch Klinikum Gehrden, Germany
Received: June 17, 2014; Accepted: September 22, 2014; Published: November 6, 2014
Copyright: © 2014 Hellhammer et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: The authors confirm that all data underlying the findings are fully available without restriction. All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.
Funding: TR is a Heisenbergprofessor funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG RA969/7-2). This study was supported in part with a restricted grant from the federal state government of North Rhine-Westphalia and the European Union (EFRE-Program "Med in.NRW", support code 005-GW01-235A). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Introduction
Mitral valve regurgitation (MR) is the second common valvular heart disease and severely affects morbidity and mortality [1]–[5]. Surgical treatment for many years used to be the first line treatment for patients with severe symptomatic MR [6]. Percutaneous mitral valve repair (PMVR) with the MitraClip system, however, has emerged to an effective therapeutic alternative for patients who can not undergo surgery due to high surgical risk [7]. Many of the high-risk patients present with diabetes mellitus, which is known to worsen outcome in patients referred to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) [8]–[12], cardiac surgery [13]–[15] or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) [16], [17]. The impact of diabetes on treatment of MR using the MitraClip system is not known. We therefore sought to assess whether percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system is safe and effective in patients with diabetes mellitus.
Methods
The protocol for this trial and supporting CONSORT checklist are available as supporting information; see Checklist S1 and Protocol S1.
Patient selection and study design
A total of 58 Patients with symptomatic severe or moderate-to-severe MR evaluated by trans-thoracic and trans-esophageal echocardiography who underwent PMVR with the MitraClip System at the Heart Center Duesseldorf were included in the study (Figure 1). All patients were discussed in the institutional heart team and declined for surgical treatment due to high operative risk. Patients were included into our registry after informed written consent was obtained. The registry is registered at clinical trials (NCT02033811). In a sub-analysis of this registry, patients were grouped according to the presence of type II diabetes mellitus (oral medication or on insulin therapy). The objective of the study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the MitraClip procedure in patients with diabetes mellitus with a follow-up after 3 months. Study procedures were in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and the institutional Ethics Committee of the Heinrich-Heine University approved the study protocol.
Data collection and definitions
Collected data included patient characteristics, imaging findings, periprocedural in hospital data, laboratory results and follow up data up to three month after PMVR. Blood samples for biochemistry and hematology analysis results were taken before the procedure. Clinical outcome parameters for follow up after three months were NYHA classification, 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and quality of life measured by the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF Q). Trans-thoracic echocardiography (TTE) was performed before the procedure and during follow up. Trans-esophageal echocardiography (TEE) was performed at baseline. Severity of mitral regurgitation was classified by TTE and TEE by measuring vena contracta (VC) and regurgitation volume. A severe mitral regurgitation was defined as a VC ≥0.7 cm and a regurgitation volume ≥60 ml [18], [19].
In-hospital complications were reported for both groups. The definition of MACCE (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event) included death, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, stroke and procedure related re-operation. A significant mitral stenosis after procedure was defined as a mean gradient >10 mmHg. Peripheral vascular complications were defined as minor vascular complication according to VARC II [38]. A major vascular complication was defined according to VARC II as overt bleeding either associated with a drop in hemoglobin level of at least 3.0 g/dL or requiring transfusion of two or three units of whole blood, or causing hospitalization, or permanent injury, or requiring surgery and does not meet criteria of life-threatening or disabling bleeding.
Procedure
The MitraClip procedure was performed either in general anesthesia or deep sedation using TEE and fluoroscopy for guidance. The procedure and the MitraClip System have previously been described in detail [20], [21]. After a femoral venous access and transseptal puncture, the system is positioned in the left atrium. The arms of the clip are aligned perpendicular to the long axis of the leaflet edges and the clip is advanced into the left ventricle. After grasping the leaflets and checking the leaflet insertion the clip is deployed and the system removed.
Statistical Analysis
Continuous data were expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD) and compared with the unpaired student's t-test or Mann-Whitney U test if not normally distributed. Normality was checked with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. Categorical variables were evaluated as percentage and compared with the χ-square test or Fisher's exact test. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS Statistics 22 (IBM) and Prism (GraphPad). A p-value <0.05 was considered to be significant.
Results
We enrolled 58 patients with symptomatic severe and moderate-to-severe MR. Nineteen patients (32.8%) presented with diabetes mellitus type II with either oral medication or insulin therapy. Groups did not differ except for HbA1c and blood glucose levels. Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1.
Primary endpoint – safety
The primary endpoint of this study was related to safety with regard to successful clip implantation, in-hospital complication rate, and 30-day mortality. MitraClips have been implanted successfully in all patients with diabetes, whereas one patient in the non-diabetic group had to undergo surgery for significant mitral stenosis. Complications were defined as MACCE (non-diabetes: 5.1% vs. diabetes: 0.0%), sepsis (non-diabetes: 5.1% vs. diabetes: 0.0%), ventilation >24 hours (non-diabetes: 2.6% vs. diabetes: 0.0%), peripheral vascular complications (non-diabetes: 5.1% vs. diabetes: 5.3%), acute kidney injury stage III (0.0% vs. 0.0%), pacemaker damage (non-diabetes: 2.6% vs. diabetes: 0.0%), stroke (0.0% vs. 0.0%) and major bleeding (non-diabetes: 2.6% vs. diabetes: 0.0%). Thirty-day mortality was 2.6% (n = 1) in non-diabetic patients due to a septic event. No patient died in the diabetes group. At the time of follow up overall survival was 98.3% (n = 57) with no death after discharge from hospital in both groups (Table 2).
Secondary endpoint – efficacy
The secondary endpoints were related to efficacy with regard to procedure duration (non-diabetes: 120±37 min vs. diabetes: 121±43 min; p >0.05), multiple clip implantation (0.0% vs. 0.0%) and radiation time (non-diabetes: 27±11 min vs. diabetes: 30±12 min; p >0.05).
At the time of follow up, significant improvement of NYHA class was seen in both groups from 3.1±0.6 to 2.2±0.5 (p<0.0001) in patients without diabetes and 3.2±0.6 to 2.2±0.5 (p<0.0001) in patients with diabetes. Quality of life measured by the MLHF Questionnaire was improved with a score reduction from 43±15 to 36±14 (p<0.0001) in non-diabetic patients and 45±12 to 36±11 (p<0.001) in patients with diabetes (Figure 2). 6-MWT (296±121.6 m to 300±130.8 m; p = 0.743), left ventricular ejection fraction (45±16% to 44±13%; p = 0.660), and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (59±11 mm to 60±12 mm; p = 0.163) did not change in patients without diabetes. In patients with diabetes 6-MWT (275±90 m to 308±11 m; p = 0.057), ejection fraction (37±13% to 35±13%; p = 0.455) and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (61±14 mm to 63±11 mm; p = 0.243) were also unaffected. MR reduction ≥1 grade was observed in 65.8% (n = 25) of patients without diabetes and in all patients with diabetes (Figure 3).
A NYHA class before and 3 months after MitraClip. B 6-MWT before and 3 months after MitraClip. C Results of MLHF Q before and 3 months after MitraClip. NYHA = New York Heart Association; 6-MWT = 6-minute walk test; MLHF Q = Minnesota Living With Heart Failure Questionnaire. ns = non significant (p≥0.05). *** denotes p<0.0001, ** denotes p<0.001.
A Ejection fraction before and 3 months after MitraClip. B Left ventricular end-diastolic diameter before and 3 months after MitraClip. C Grade of reduction of mitral regurgitation 3 months after MitraClip. EF = ejection fraction; LVEDD = left ventricular end-diastolic diameter. ns = non significant (p≥0.05).
Discussion
The key findings of our study are: i) mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system is safe and effective in patients with diabetes mellitus. ii) This is associated with an improvement in functional status after three months follow up.
Patients with diabetes are at higher risk when undergoing PCI or cardiac surgery [8]–[15]. The underlying mechanisms are multifarious and involve an increased platelet activity, endothelial dysfunction [22], [23], impaired wound healing, and a higher risk for infections caused by hyperglycemia [24], [25]. Patients with diabetes moreover often present with comorbidities such as impaired renal function or coronary artery disease, which increase the surgical risk. PMVR with the MitraClip system has been shown to be safe and feasible and an alternative for surgical mitral valve repair in high-risk patients [7], [20]. The role of diabetes in those patients, however, has not been investigated so far.
In our study population none of the diabetic patients died within 3 months follow-up. However, slightly higher mortality rates have been described [26]–[28]. These high mortality rates may reflect the morbidity of the patients who are referred to MitraClip procedure - sometimes as palliative therapy - and the importance of careful patient selection and risk stratification. Successful clip implantation was 100% in the diabetic group and 97.4% in the non-diabetic group. Overall complication rate was low in our study population, which has also been proved in other studies [29], [30] and confirms the safety of the procedure. Diabetic patients did not present with a higher complication rate.
Previous studies have identified diabetes mellitus to be a risk factor for early and late mortality after surgical mitral valve repair [31], [32], [35]. Therefore it has been included in risk models like the Euroscore II or the STS score. Hospital mortality rates for mitral valve repair have been described from 1.5% to 6.5% [36], [37]. Complications like deep sternal wound infection, stroke or acute renal failure after cardiac surgery are more likely in diabetic patients [33], [34], [35]. A less invasive treatment option like the MitraClip procedure in diabetic patients therefore seems to be an good alternative. Clinical outcome was improved after three months follow up in patients with diabetes and in non-diabetic patients. NYHA class was reduced and quality of life improved. These findings consist with other reports [26], [28]. No improvement was observed in the 6-MWT in both groups, which may be due to the short-term follow up of three months in our study. In previous studies 6MWT was improved after 12 months [26], [29]. Echocardiographic evaluation after three months showed a good result with an MR reduction ≥1 grade in 93.1% (n = 54) of the patients. All patients in the diabetes group did benefit from PMVR with an MR reduction ≥1 grade. There were no relevant changes in ejection fraction and LVEDD in our study population, which may be due to the short term period of follow up. Baseline ejection fraction was moderately to severely reduced in both groups and left ventricular end-diastolic diameter enlarged. Recovery might be seen after a longer period. In contrast, a previously published study reported a reduction of left ventricular end-diastolic volume after short-term follow up of 30 days and one year probably due to early reverse remodeling [28].
Our study has limitations. PMVR using the MitraClip system is safe and event rates are low. Therefore, a prospective randomized study with more patients and longer follow-up time is needed. Furthermore, patients should be classified concerning the duration of diabetes and diabetes-induced comorbidities.
Conclusion
We here show that the MitraClip procedure can be performed safely and effectively in patients with type II diabetes mellitus. Our short-term follow up shows an improvement in functional status in our patients with no negative influence on 3-month-mortality.
Acknowledgments
All authors take responsibility for all aspects of the reliability and freedom from bias of the data presented and their discussed interpretation.
Author Contributions
Conceived and designed the experiments: TR MK TZ JB. Performed the experiments: KH RW CR SvH. Analyzed the data: CR RW KH SvH TR MK. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: TR KH MK TZ JB. Wrote the paper: KH TZ JB CR SvH RW MK TR.
References
- 1. Iung B, Baron G, Butchart EG, Delahaye F, Gohlke-Bärwolf C, et al. (2003) A prospective survey of patients with valvular heart disease in Europe: The Euro Heart Survey on Valvular Heart Disease. Eur Heart J 24: 1231–43.
- 2. Nkomo VT, Gardin JM, Skelton TN, Gottdiener JS, Scott CG, et al. (2006) The burden of valvular heart diseases: a population-based study. Lancet 368: 1005–11.
- 3. Rossi A, Dini FL, Faggiano P, Agricola E, Cicoira M, et al. (2011) Independent prognostic value of functional mitral regurgitation in patients with heart failure. A quantitative analysis of 1256 patients with ischaemic and non-ischaemic dilated cardiomyopathy. Heart 97: 1675–80.
- 4. Trichon BH, Felker GM, Shaw LK, Cabell CH, O'Connor CM (2003) Relation of frequency and severity of mitral regurgitation to survival among patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction and heart failure. Am J Cardiol 91: 538–43.
- 5. Patel JB, Borgeson DD, Barnes ME, Rihal CS, Daly RC, et al. (2004) Mitral regurgitation in patients with advanced systolic heart failure. J Card Fail 10: 285–91.
- 6. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, et al. (2008) 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol 52: e1–142.
- 7. Feldman T, Foster E, Glower DD, Kar S, Rinaldi MJ, et al. (2011) Percutaneous repair or surgery for mitral regurgitation. N Engl J Med 364: 1395–406.
- 8. Ellis SG, Vandormael MG, Cowley MJ, DiSciascio G, Deligonul U, et al. (1990) The Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study Group. Coronary morphologic and clinical determinants of procedural outcome with angioplasty for multivessel coronary disease: implications for patient selection. Circulation 82: 1193–1202.
- 9. Barsness GW, Peterson ED, Ohman EM, Nelson CL, DeLong ER, et al. (1997) Relationship between diabetes mellitus and long-term survival after coronary bypass and angioplasty. Circulation 96: 2551–6.
- 10. Cutlip DE, Chhabra AG, Baim DS, Chauhan MS, Marulkar S, et al. (2004) Beyond restenosis: five-year clinical outcomes from second-generation coronary stent trials. Circulation 110: 1226–30.
- 11. Malmberg K, Yusuf S, Gerstein HC, Brown J, Zhao F, et al. (2000) Impact of diabetes on long-term prognosis in patients with unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction: results of the OASIS (Organization to Assess Strategies for Ischemic Syndromes) registry. Circulation 102: 1014–9.
- 12. Hillegass WB, Patel MR, Klein LW, Gurm HS, Brennan JM, et al. (2012) Long-term outcomes of older diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary stenting in the United States: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry, 2004 to 2008. J Am Coll Cardiol 60: 2280–9.
- 13. Koch CG, Weng YS, Zhou SX, Savino JS, Mathew JP, et al. (2003) Prevalence of risk factors, and not gender per se, determines short- and long-term survival after coronary artery bypass surgery. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 17: 585–93.
- 14. Olsen MA, Lock-Buckley P, Hopkins D, Polish LB, Sundt TM, et al. (2002) The risk factors for deep and superficial chest surgical-site infections after coronary artery bypass graft surgery are different. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 124: 136–45.
- 15. Halkos ME, Kilgo P, Lattouf OM, Puskas JD, Cooper WA, et al. (2010) The effect of diabetes mellitus on in-hospital and long-term outcomes after heart valve operations. Ann Thorac Surg 90: 124–130.
- 16. Conrotto F, D'Ascenzo F, Giordana F, Salizzoni S, Tamburino C, et al. (2014) Impact of diabetes mellitus on short-term and mid-term outcome after transcather aortic valve replacement (from a multicenter registry). Am J Cardiol 113: 529–534.
- 17. Pilgrim T, Stortecky S, Luterbacher F, Windecker S, Wenaweser P (2013) Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and bleeding: incidence, predictors and prognosis. J Thromb Thrombolysis 35: 456–462.
- 18. Bonow RO, Carabello BA, Chatterjee K, de Leon AC Jr, Faxon DP, et al. (2008) 2008 focused update incorporated into the ACC/AHA 2006 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to revise the 1998 guidelines for the management of patients with valvular heart disease). Endorsed by the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 52: e1–142.
- 19. Zoghbi WA, Enriquez-Sarano M, Foster E, Grayburn PA, Kraft CD, et al. (2003) Recommendations for evaluation of the severity of native valvular regurgitation with two-dimensional and doppler echocardiography. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 16: 777–802.
- 20. Feldman T, Wasserman HS, Herrmann HC, Gray W, Block PC, et al. (2005) Percutaneous mitral valve repair using the edge-to edge technique: six-month results of the EVEREST Phase 1 Clinical Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 46: 2134–2140.
- 21. Feldman T, Kar S, Rinaldi M, Fail P, Hermiller JT, et al. (2009) Percutaneous mitral repair with the MitraClip system: safety and midterm durability in the initial EVEREST (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge REpair Study) cohort. J Am Coll Cardiol 54: 686–694.
- 22. Jain SK, Nagi DK, Slavin BM, Lumb PJ, Yudkin JS (1993) Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetic subjects suppresses plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI-1) activity and proinsulin-like molecules independently of glycaemic control. Diabetes Med 10: 27–32.
- 23. Williams SB, Goldfine AB, Timimi FK, Ting HH, Roddy MA, et al. (1998) Acute hyperglycemia attenuates endothelium-dependent vasodilation in humans in vivo. Circulation 97: 1695–1701.
- 24. Bitkover CY, Gardlund B (1998) Mediastinitis after cardiovascular operations: a case-control study of risk factors. Ann Thorac Surg 65: 36–40.
- 25. Salomon NW, Page US, Okies JE, Stephens J, Krause AH, et al. (1983) Diabetes mellitus and coronary artery bypass: short-term risk and long-term prognosis. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 85: 264–271.
- 26.
Taramasso M, Maisano F, Denti P, Latib A, La Canna G, et al.. (2014) Percutaneous edge-to-edge repair in high-risk and elderly patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation: Midterm outcomes in a single-center experience. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2014.03.036. In press.
- 27. Reichenspurner H, Schillinger W, Baldus S, Hausleiter J, Butter C, et al. (2013) Clinical outcomes through 12 months in patients with degenerative mitral regurgitation treated with the MitraClip® device in the ACCESS-EUrope Phase I trial. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg 44: e280–8.
- 28. Whitlow PL, Feldman T, Pedersen WR, Lim DS, Kipperman R, et al. (2012) Acute and 12-month results with catheter-based mitral valve leaflet repair: the EVEREST II (Endovascular Valve Edge-to-Edge Repair) High Risk Study. J Am Coll Cardiol 59: 130–139.
- 29. Maisano F, Franzen O, Baldus S, Schäfer U, Hausleiter J, et al. (2013) Percutaneous mitral valve interventions in the real world: early and one year results from the ACCESS-EU, a prospective, multicenter, non-randomized post-approval study of the MitraClip® therapy in Europe. J Am Coll Cardiol 62: 1052–1061.
- 30. Bakker AL, Swaans MJ, van der Heyden JA, Eefting FD, Rensing BJ, et al. (2013) Complications during percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair. Herz 38: 484–9.
- 31. Crabtree TD, Bailey MS, Moon MR, Munfakh N, Pasque MK, et al. (2008) Recurrent mitral regurgitation and risk factors for early and late mortality after mitral valve repair for functional ischemic mitral regurgitation. Ann Thorac Surg 85: 1537–43.
- 32. Nowicki ER, Birkmeyer NJ, Weintraub RW, Leavitt BJ, Sanders JH, et al. (2004) Multivariable prediction of in-hospital mortality associated with aortic and mitral valve surgery in Northern New England. Ann Thorac Surg 77: 1966–77.
- 33. Parolari A, Pesce LL, Pacini D, Mazzanti V, Salis S, et al. (2012) Risk factors for perioperative acute kidney injury after adult cardiac surgery: role of perioperative management. Ann Thorac Surg 93: 584–91.
- 34. Ariyaratnam P, Bland M, Loubani M (2010) Risk factors and mortality associated with deep sternal wound infections following coronary bypass surgery with or without concomitant procedures in a UK population: A basis for a new risk model? Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg 11: 543–546.
- 35. Brown JR, Edwards FH, O'Connor GT, Ross CS, Furnary AP (2006) The diabetic disadvantage: historical outcomes measures in diabetic patients undergoing cardiac surgery — the pre-intravenous insulin era. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 18: 281–8.
- 36. Craver JM, Cohen C, Weintraub WS (1990) Case-matched comparison of mitral valve replacement and repair. Ann Thorac Surg 49: 964–9.
- 37. Fremes SE, Goldman BS, Ivanov J, Weisel RD, David TE, et al. (1989) Valvular surgery in the elderly. Circulation 80: I77–90.
- 38. Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Généreux P, Piazza N, van Mieghem NM, et al. (2013) Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 145: 6–23.