ReviewJournal of cardiovascular and thoracic research2026
Comparing mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair and surgical intervention in mitral regurgitation: A meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of cardiovascular and thoracic research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Surgery remains the standard treatment for severe mitral valve regurgitation (MR), but growing evidence highlights the potential role of mitral valve percutaneous edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER). This meta-analysis aims to compare 12-month all-cause mortality between M-TEER and surgical intervention (SMVI). A systematic search (October 2024) of PubMed, Cochrane, Scopus, and Web of Science identified randomized control trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched observational studies comparing 12-month all-cause mortality in MR patients treated with M-TEER or SMVI. An inverse variance random-effects meta-analysis assessed outcomes using risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Two RCTs (MATTERHORN and EVEREST II) and three observational studies totaling 1,782 patients, were included in the final analysis. A non-significant trend of higher mortality at 30 days was observed in the SMVI group (RR: 0.72; CI: 0.26-2.00), along with higher complication rates mainly due to bleeding. At 12 months follow-up, SMVI was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality (RR: 1.41; CI: 1.11-1.81), while the M-TEER group had more patients with MR grade 3 or higher (RR: 4.05; CI: 1.54-10.67), with a non-significant trend of higher rate of MR reintervention (RR 2.51; CI 0.83-7.66) at 12 months. Based on current evidence, M-TEER should continue to be reserved for patients with prohibitive high surgical risk. While propensity-matched cohorts were pooled for the study estimates, the limited available data from randomized trials, combined with heterogeneity in patient populations, particularly regarding MR etiology, underscores the need for further studies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.