Editorial
“Actual perspective on off-pump transapical artificial chord
implantation ”
M. Saccocci MD1, A. Colli MD PhD2
1Operative Unit of Cardiac Surgery - Cardiovascular
Department, Poliambulanza Foundation Hospital – Brescia, IT
2 Department of Surgical, Medical and Molecular
Pathology and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy
Words count: 1322
Keywords: mitral valve repair, transcatheter, MVR, mitral regurgitation,
neochord implantation, Mitralstitch, Harpoon, Neochord
Correspondence:
Andrea Colli
Department of Surgical, Medical and Molecular Pathology and Critical
Care Medicine
University of Pisa, Via Paradisa 2, 50127 Pisa, Italy.
Email: andrea.colli@unipi.it
ABSTRACT
Mitral valve repair (MVR) is undisputedly associated with better
clinical and functional outcomes than any other type of valve
substitute. Conventional mitral valve surgery in dedicated high-volume
centers can assure excellent results in terms of mortality and freedom
from mitral regurgitation (MR) recurrence but requires cardiopulmonary
bypass (CPB) and cardioplegic heart arrest. Trying to replicate the
percentage of success of surgical MVR is the aim of all new
transcatheter mitral dedicated devices. In particular transapical
beating-heart mitral valve repair by artificial chordae implantation
with transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) guidance is an expanding
field. The safety and feasibility of the procedure have already been
largely demonstrated with Neochord and more recently with Harpoon
systems. Wang et al. present the outcomes of the first-in-human
experience using a novel artificial chordae implantation device, the
Mitralstitch system. Despite a quite small cohort of only 10 patients
treated, 1-year results are satisfying and comparable to the early
experience with former devices (4 patients with moderate or more MR
recurrence). The comparison with surgical MVR is still unfavorable and
requires further studies and significant procedure improvement. However,
the device permits the treatment of anterior and posterior leaflets
prolapse and performs quite easily edge-to-edge reparation.
It will be interesting to evaluate longer follow-up in larger cohorts of
patients as well as the possibility to shift to the transfemoral
approach.
Results of surgical reparation in mitral valve disease are outstanding,
particularly for degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR), where
perioperative mortality tends to zero and freedom from reoperation is
extremely high even at long-term follow-up. Nowadays, most high-volume
centers have solid and extensive minimally invasive surgery programs for
the treatment of DMR patients.
Nevertheless, the constant desire to minimize the procedural impact on
the patient has driven the development of various transcatheter
solutions that could achieve a surgical-like result without the need of
a cardioplegic arrested heart and cardiopulmonary bypass . Unlike
surgery, which can address and solve mitral insufficiency contemporarily
treating all the components of mitral valve apparatus, the transcatheter
devices, actually present on the market, work on leaflet or annulus
separately. In their interesting paper Wang et al. present the initial
experience with the MitralStitchTM System (Hangzhou DeJin Medtech Co.,
Ltd., Hangzhou, China). This relatively new device , follows the
footsteps of Neochord (Neochord, Inc, Minneapolis, MN, USA) and Harpoon
(Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, USA) and permits the positioning of
polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) artificial chordae through a transapical
off-pump ventricular access. The efficacy and safety of this solution
have already been demonstrated mainly thanks to the worldwide expansion
of Neochord experience.
The market launch of this new device, as the development of many others
under preclinical investigation, demonstrates, if there was still a
need, the importance of a novel and alternative approach in mitral valve
disease treatment. Artificial chordal implantation is an already
validated technique in mitral valve surgery with proven results in acute
and long-term outcomes, usually associated with prosthetic ring
annuloplasty. Trying to replicate surgery results, avoiding
cardiopulmonary bypass and cardioplegic arrest, is ambitious, but it is
worth the effort. Pursuing this aim, many studies have been published to
optimize the Neochord procedure and the patients’ selection , paving the
road to better results for all the new devices entering the clinical
arena. Therefore, the good short-term outcomes reported by Wang et al.
are not surprising and could potentially be confirmed at mid- and
long-term follow-up.
The MitralStitch device presents some new features that could positively
impact the procedure. The Nitinol frame of the retractable arm,
enhancing the echocardiographic visibility of the device tip, it is an
interesting solution to facilitate the leaflet grasping maintaining a
small profile of the device shaft. Unlike Harpoon, actually commercially
approved only for posterior leaflet disease, this new product can be
used to treat both leaflets as the Neochord system. The device has a
small footprint allowing a theoretical relatively smooth transition to
the transfemoral approach.
The durability of transapical artificial chordal can hardly be predicted
at the moment. The results of an extensive large observational registry
based in Germany on the Neochord system (NCTNCT04190602;
The AcChord Study: A Multicenter Post-Market Observational Registry of
the NeoChord Artificial Chordae Delivery System) are expected between
2022 and 2027. Single cases of chordal rupture are reported for both
Harpoon and Neochord systems but seem to be linked more to initial
technical implantation errors at the beginning of the learning curve
than to intrinsic chordal factors.29
As mentioned before, surgical valve reparation has proven to be safe and
effective in the short-, medium, and long term. However, direct
comparison between surgery and transcatheter procedures is not always
straight and easy, especially for mitral valve where solutions like
MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, US) or Pascal (Edwards
Lifescience, Irvine CA- US) are actually reserved for high-risk
patients. Neochord and Harpoon procedures have been used in both high
and low-risk patients; overall results are encouraging but still distant
from surgery. Citing Ilir Hysi and Olivier Fabre in their commentary to
the 1-year results of Harpoon published by Gammie et al. “Where do we
set the limit” for mitral valve repair?. Published results of
transapical chordal implantation show significant percentages of more
than mild residual mitral regurigitation. Gammie et al. introducing
Harpoon results in their series of more than 60 patients show at 30 days
13% of moderate MR and 2% of severe MR. At 1 year, these percentages
increase up to 23% and 2% for moderate and severe MR, respectively;
13% of the patients required reoperations. Lozos et al. publishing the
results of the first experience in Greece with Neochord DS1000,
presented a 16% and 7% of moderate and severe residual MR,
respectively. These results are usually considered acceptable and
encouraging, but if compared to surgery, even if being able to avoid CPB
and cardioplegic arrest, could sound not so brilliant. Even more, if we
note that the enrolled patients are usually affected by single P2
prolapse according to the latest evidence on optimized patients’
selection.
The existence of a learning curve is a well-known phenomenon and could
be accountable for the results of these initial experiences. Colli et
al. calculated that the team required a threshold of 40 Neochord
interventions to optimize all the steps of the procedure. In fact, by
analyzing the results and the mechanisms of recurrent regurgitation,
authors identified three major classes of causes: inappropriate patients
selection, technical issue, and leaflet curling during the procedure.
More than a paper has tried to directly compare the Neochord system and
surgical mitral valve repair. The study by Zorinas et al. on a cohort of
169 pts treated for MR (78 Neochord procedures vs. 91 conventional
mitral surgical repairs) shows a more complicated perioperative course
for patients who underwent surgery which, however, is associated with
significantly better results in terms of postoperative residual MR (0%
for surgical repair versus 11% in the Neochord group).
To have more reliable evidence, in 2016, in the US, it started the
ReChord clinical trial (NCT02803957) in which more than 500 patients
affected by MR have been randomized between surgery and NeoChord. Study
is currently not recruting. It is important to highlight that It is also
very difficult to compare a mature procedure with more than 40years of
practice behind with millions of patients treated overall versus a
procedure that is currently performed only in selected centers with only
1500 cases performed. Moreover it is also difficult to compare a
procedure in which the operator can use different techniques
simultaneously on the leaflet (triangular-quadrangular resection,
chords, edge-to-edge…) and on the annulus (closed, open, rigid,
semirigid annuloplasty device) to increase leaflet coaptation to more
than 5-7mm respect to a procedure that could only reshape the leaflet by
using long ePTFE chords.
The partially unsatisfying results, compared to surgery, cited above
could also be linked to the inherent defect of all the transcatheter
mitral devices actually available and represented by the possibility of
treating only one component at a time of the mitral valve apparatus.
This was also observed with the initial experience of edge-to-edge
surgical repair without concomitant annuloplasty . The possibility of a
combo approach, as successfully presented by Colli et al. (MitraClip and
Amend device; Neochord and Amend device) and by Von Bardeleben et al.
(Edwards Cardioband device + Neochord), is extremely encouraging but
needs a more extensive evaluation. The same needs can be evocated for
all the concomitant procedures described in the literature as
Transapical TAVI and Neochord , off-pump aortocoronary bypass and
Neochord implantation or for artificial chordal transapical implantation
as possible management in case of MR recurrence.
To conclude, the transapical artificial chord implantation with
Mitralstitch device, as presented in their paper by Wang et al., seems
to be safe and effective, with results comparable to the reported
experiences with other devices. The outcomes of transapical chords
implantations will surely benefit from the progressive diffusion of the
procedure, bringing to a better knowledge of the device and to a further
optimization in patients’ selection. The possibility of a future shift
from the transapical to transfemoral approach is not prohibitive, as
recently announced with first successful cases performed. What it is
really required is a significant evolution of the surgeon’s education to
embrace the concept of an ongoing transcatheter surgical procedure
re-evolution.