Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2026 | Other Grant/Funding Number | Capital Health Development Research Special Project |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
This study is a prospective, randomized, parallel-control, open-label, multicenter clinical trial. Eligible subjects will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to the Device group (Interventional group) or to no Device group (Control Group). The objective is to identify the safety and effectiveness of the TEER for the treatment of moderate-to-severe (3+) or severe (4+) atrial functional mitral regurgitation (aFMR) in patients who are symptomatic despite maximally tolerated guideline directed medical therapy.
Atrial functional mitral regurgitation (AFMR) is a complex cardiovascular condition typified by mitral regurgitation (MR), primarily due to atrial fibrillation-induced or diastolic dysfunction-induced left atrial enlargement, with mitral annular dilation and functional alterations of the mitral valve, rather than intrinsic valvular defects, resulting in regurgitation1. The reported prevalence of AFMR varies across studies, attributable to discrepancies in definitions, diagnostic techniques, research designs, and the specific populations investigated2-8. In a cohort study of hospitalized patients undergoing atrial fibrillation ablation, the prevalence of moderate or severe AFMR was 7%1. Conversely, in a community-based screening cohort of patients with moderate or severe MR, AFMR accounted for 27% of cases, marginally lower than the proportions of ventricular functional mitral regurgitation (VFMR, 38%) and primary mitral regurgitation (PMR, 32%)9. It can be anticipated that with the acceleration of aging in the global population, the proportion of AFMR may witness a considerable expansion in the future.
Compared with PMR, patients with AFMR frequently present with greater symptoms, diminished exercise tolerance, and heightened risk for hospitalization due to heart failure and increased mortality9,10, underscoring AFMR as a challenging therapeutic scenario. The conventional management strategies for mitral regurgitation have proven less effective in cases of AFMR2,11,12, due to its unique pathophysiological mechanisms, highlighting the imperative for customized treatment modalities.
Optimized guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) has been the cornerstone of treatment for heart failure and associated valvular diseases, including AFMR13. GDMT for heart failure with reduced LVEF typically includes a combination of a beta-blockers, ACE inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blockers or ARNI, a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, an SGLT2 inhibitor, and diuretics, along with anticoagulation for atrial fibrillation and cardiac resynchronization therapy for specific patients. However, the effectiveness of GDMT in treating AFMR specifically in whom the LVEF is typically preserved (≥50%) is not well-established14, as most prior studies have focused on PMR or heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. From the pathophysiological perspective of AFMR, strategies that restore sinus rhythm from atrial fibrillation have the potential to improve the prognosis of AFMR. Atrial fibrillation cardioversion may reduce the severity of MR, restore atrial size, enhance cardiac diastolic function, and decrease the incidence of endpoint events15-19. Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) has emerged as a promising intervention for MR, in all patients with ventricular FMR and in those with PMR who are at high or prohibitive surgical risk14,20-22. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of TEER in reducing the severity of MR, improving symptoms, and enhancing quality of life in patients with secondary MR23-25. However, its role in AFMR, a subset of secondary MR, is less clear.
Given the distinct pathophysiology of AFMR and the lack of consensus on optimal management, there is a pressing need for clinical trials comparing the efficacy of TEER versus GDMT in this patient population. Such trials are crucial for informing clinical practice and guiding treatment decisions in AFMR. This clinical trial aims to compare the efficacy and safety of TEER and GDMT in the management of AFMR, filling a significant knowledge gap in current research and potentially influencing future guidelines and patient care strategies.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Device group (Interventional group) | Experimental | Patients will receive transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for atrial functional mitral regurgitation plus maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy for cardiovascular disease |
|
| no Device group (Control Group) | No Intervention | Patients will receive maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy for cardiovascular disease |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair | Device | The intervention to be implemented in this clinical study is Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair (TEER), a minimally invasive, image-guided interventional procedure specifically designed for the treatment of mitral regurgitation (MR) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Time to first occurrence of a composite event of death from any cause, hospitalization for [worsening] heart failure or unplanned outpatient [worsening] heart failure event within 24 months | Time to first occurrence of a composite event of death from any cause, hospitalization for [worsening] heart failure or unplanned outpatient [worsening] heart failure event within 24 months
| From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Number of participants with the primary safety endpoint (device group only) | Primary safety endpoint is the composite of the following events within 30 days
| From enrollment to the end of treatment at 30 days |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of participants with hospitalization for [worsening] heart failure or outpatient [worsening] heart failure events | All hospitalization for [worsening] heart failure or outpatient [worsening] heart failure events at 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Number of participants with all-cause death |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| MR Severity Grade | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years: | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Regurgitant Volume |
Inclusion Criteria:
Age 18 years or older
Echocardiographic core laboratory criteria (all must be present):
The mechanism of the atrial FMR is likely either atrial fibrillation (persistent/permanent or paroxysmal [documented]) and/or HFpEF. If HFpEF, one or both of the following must also be present:
1. Septal e' <7 cm/s or lateral e' <10 cm/s 2. TR Vmax >2.8 m/s (or PASP >35 mmHg if TR jet is adequate) AND/OR b) Invasive hemodynamic evidence (measured prior to randomization) of elevated LV filling pressures (PCWP (or LVEDP) ≥15 mmHg at rest or ≥25 mmHg with exercise; Note: If PCWP is 12 to 15 mmHg, the patient may be given a 7-10 mL/kg (approximately 500 mL) rapid infusion (over 5-10 min) of normal saline; if PCWP rises to ≥18 mmHg, the subject may be randomized.
4. NT-proBNP ≥300 pg/mL (or BNP ≥100 pg/mL) if at the time of the test the patient is in sinus rhythm or NT-proBNP ≥600 pg/mL (or BNP ≥200 pg/mL) if the patient is in atrial fibrillation 5. Subject remains symptomatic (NYHA class II, III or ambulatory IV) despite maximally tolerated doses of societal indicated class I GDMT for ≥2 months
a) Diuretics as needed to treat pulmonary congestion and peripheral edema b) If atrial fibrillation: Rate control medication to ensure heart rate <110 bpm c) If HFpEF: i. SGLT2i for at least 2 months (required) ii. MRAs, e.g., spironolactone or finerenone) and angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs, e.g., sacubitril/valsartan) may be used at the discretion of each center (but should not be changed after randomization) 6. SBP <140 mmHg and HR <100 bpm (<110 bpm if in atrial fibrillation) 7. Atrial fibrillation ablation is determined by the local heart team. If ablation is deemed necessary, it will be performed prior to enrollment; if ablation is considered unsuitable, no ablation will be performed after enrollment.
8. Anatomy suitable for TEER 9. The subject or legal guardian voluntarily agrees to comply with all provisions of this clinical trial, including the possibility of being randomly assigned to the control group, as well as participating in all necessary postoperative follow-ups and provides written informed consent.
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Role | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sanshuai Chang, M.D. | Contact | +8618501369869 | 18501369869@163.com | |
| Guangyuan Song, M.D. | Contact | +8613801120805 | songgy_anzhen@vip.163.com |
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Guangyuan Song, M.D. | Beijing Anzhen Hospital | Principal Investigator |
| Gregg W. Stone, M.D. | Academic Affairs for the Mount Sinai Heart Health System | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Interventional Center of Valvular Heart Disease, Beijing Anzhen Hospital | Beijing | Beijing Municipality | 100000 | China |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008944 | Mitral Valve Insufficiency |
| D001281 | Atrial Fibrillation |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D006349 | Heart Valve Diseases |
| D006331 | Heart Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| D001145 | Arrhythmias, Cardiac |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
All-cause mortality at 24 months |
| From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Degree of MR reduction | MR reduction from baseline to 30 days, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Rate of MR severity of 1+ or less | MR severity of 1+ or less at 30 days, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Rate of MR severity of 2+ or less | Rate of MR severity of 2+ or less at 30 days, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Degree of NYHA functional class change | Degree of NYHA functional class change from baseline to 6 months, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (0-100, higher scores indicate a better outcome) | Improvement in KCCQ score from baseline to 6 months, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 month |
| Improvement in 6-minute walk distance | Improvement in 6-minute walk distance from baseline to 6 months, 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Reduction in left atrial volume index | Reduction in LAVI from baseline to 12 months and 24 months | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
| Number of participants with a secondary safety endpoint (device group only) | Secondary safety endpoint is a composite of stroke, myocardial infraction, non-elective cardiovascular surgery for device related complications, durable LVAD implant or heart transplantation | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 24 months |
The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years
| From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Regurgitant Fraction | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left Ventricle End Diastolic Volume (LVEDV) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left Ventricular End Systolic Volume (LVESV) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left Ventricular End Diastolic Dimension (LVEDD) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left Ventricular End Systolic Dimension (LVESD) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Right Ventricular Systolic Pressure (RVSP) | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Mitral Valve Area | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Mitral Valve Gradient | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left atrial strain | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Left ventricular strain | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Right ventricular strain | The echocardiographic endpoints will be reported at baseline, 30 days, 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| All-cause death | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Cardiovascular death | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Non-cardiovascular death | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Hospitalization for [worsening] heart failure or outpatient worsening heart failure events | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Hospitalizations for [worsening] heart failure | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Outpatient [worsening] heart failure events | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Durable LVAD or heart transplantation | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| NYHA Functional Class | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| 6-minute walk distance (6MWD) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (0-100, higher scores indicate a better outcome) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Mitral valve surgery (including type of surgery) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| New use of CRT | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Durable LVAD implant | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Heart transplantation | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Repeat TEER (including reason for re-intervention) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 30 days and 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Responder analysis for 6 Minutes Walk Distance, where responder is defined as alive and experiencing an improvement of 25 meters and 50 meters (difference in proportion of responders between Device and Control groups). | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Responder analysis for left atrial volume Index, where responder is defined as alive and experiencing an improvement of ≥5 mL/m2 (difference in proportion of responders between Device and Control groups) | The clinical endpoint will be reported at 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Responder analysis for Left Ventricular End Diastolic Volume Index, where responder is defined as alive and experiencing an improvement of ≥12 mL/m2 (difference in proportion of responders between Device and Control groups) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Responder analysis for Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, where responder is defined as alive and experiencing an improvement of ≥5 points (difference in proportion of responders between Device and Control groups) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 6month, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| Each subscale for Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (difference in means between Device and Control groups) | The clinical endpoints will be reported at 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, 3 years and 5 years | From enrollment to the end of treatment at 5 years |
| D010335 |
| Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |