Skip to content

MitraClip REPAIR MR Study

Percutaneous MitraClip Device or Surgical Mitral Valve REpair in PAtients With PrImaRy MItral Regurgitation Who Are Candidates for Surgery (REPAIR MR)

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04198870
Enrollment
500
Registered
2019-12-13
Start date
2020-07-21
Completion date
2035-12-01
Last updated
2026-05-15

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Mitral Valve Regurgitation

Keywords

MitraClip

Brief summary

The objective of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) is to compare the clinical outcome of MitraClip™ device versus surgical repair in patients with severe primary MR who are at moderate surgical risk and whose mitral valve has been determined to be suitable for correction by MV repair surgery by the cardiac surgeon on the local site heart team.

Interventions

DEVICEMitraClip™ device implantation

Transcatheter repair of the mitral valve using MitraClip™ device

PROCEDUREMitral Valve Repair Surgery

Surgical repair of the mitral valve

Sponsors

Abbott Medical Devices
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

1. Subject has severe (Grade III or greater per the ASE criteria, which includes severity grades of 3+ and 4+) primary MR (mixed etiology is acceptable provided the principal mechanism of action is a degenerative mitral valve) as assessed by the ECL. 2. The cardiac surgeon of the Site Heart Team (consisting of at least one interventionalist, and one cardiac surgeon) has confirmed that the subject is a candidate for mitral valve surgery and the EC have confirmed that the subject's mitral valve anatomy is suitable for percutaneous repair with the MitraClip™ device with high certainty of achieving MR ≤ mild 3. Subject is symptomatic (NYHA Class II/III/IV) or asymptomatic with LVEF ≤ 60%, pulmonary artery systolic pressure \> 50 mmHg, or LVESD \> 40 mm 4. Subject is at moderate surgical risk defined as being at least 75 years of age at the time of EC review. If younger than 75 years, then the subject should have: 1. Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) Repair Score ≥ 2%, OR 2. Presence of other comorbidities which may introduce a potential surgery-specific impediment 5. Subject provides written informed consent 6. Subject is ≥ 18 years of age

Exclusion criteria

1. Subject is currently participating in another clinical investigation 2. Presence of other anatomic or comorbid conditions, or other medical, social, or psychological conditions that, in the investigator's opinion, could limit the subject's ability to participate in the clinical investigation or to comply with follow-up requirements, or impact the scientific soundness of the clinical investigation results. 3. Subject has ischemic or non-ischemic secondary MR 4. Concomitant severe tricuspid valve regurgitation 5. Ejection fraction \<30% 6. Severe mitral annular calcification 7. Acute myocardial infarction in the past 12 weeks 8. Need for cardiac surgery to correct pulmonary valve disease, aortic valve disease, or tricuspid valve disease 9. Subjects who have concurrent coronary artery disease that needs to be treated may be included provided the subjects are eligible for both percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass surgery. Subjects randomized to the device group, must undergo PCI before the MitraClip™ device procedure. Subjects randomized to the surgical (control) arm may undergo coronary artery revascularization during mitral valve repair surgery 10. Surgical procedure performed in the past 30 days 11. Femoral vein cannot accommodate a 24 F catheter or presence of IVC filter would interfere with the catheter or ipsilateral DVT 12. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is contraindicated. 13. Hemodynamic instability: systolic pressure ≤ 90 mmHg without afterload reduction, cardiogenic shock, or the need for inotropic support or IABP 14. Need for emergency surgery for any reason 15. Prior mitral valve surgery, valvuloplasty, mechanical prosthetic valve or VAD 16. Systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve 17. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy 18. Renal insufficiency requiring dialysis 19. Active infections requiring current antibiotic therapy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
All-cause mortality, stroke, cardiac hospitalization, or acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy at 2 years (any cardiac hospitalizations in the first 30 days post treatment will be excluded)2 YearsThe proportion of subjects who are alive, without stroke, CV hospitalization or acute kidney injury requiring renal replacement therapy at 2 years in the Device and Control groups, respectively
Proportion of subjects with moderate or less MR (≤2+), without mitral valve replacement, and without recurrent mitral valve intervention (surgical or percutaneous)2 YearsProportion of subjects with moderate or less MR (≤2+), without mitral valve replacement, and without recurrent mitral valve intervention (surgical or percutaneous) from the time of index procedure through 2 years in the Device and Control groups, respectively

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Proportion of subjects with MR ≤ mild at 30 days post index procedure among survivors30 DaysThe proportion of subjects with MR ≤ mild at 30 days post index procedure among survivors will be compared between the Device and Control groups
Number of days at hospital from index procedure to home dischargeAt Discharge (≤ 14 days following index procedure)Hospital length of stay from index procedure to home discharge (days) in Device group compared to the Control group
Proportion of subjects discharged to home post index hospitalizationAt Discharge (≤ 14 days following index procedure)The proportion of subjects who are discharged to home post index hospitalization will be compared between the Device and Control groups
Quality of life improvement assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) of at least 10 points at 2 years compared to baseline among survivors.2 YearsThe proportion of subjects who have at least a 10 point improvement in KCCQ at 2 years post index procedure from baseline among survivors will be compared between the Device and Control groups for non-inferiority. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire is a 23-item, self-administered questionnaire used for quantifying patient's health status including the symptoms (frequency and burden), physical and social limitations, and quality of life impact due to the heart failure syndrome. Validity, reproducibility, responsiveness and interpretability of the scores have been independently established for each of these health status domains, and overall summary scores are reported in a range of 0-100, in which higher scores reflect better health status.
Severe symptomatic mitral stenosis at 1 year1 YearThe proportion of subjects who have severe symptomatic mitral stenosis at 1 year post index procedure will be compared between the Device and Control groups

Countries

Canada, Germany, Switzerland, United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORPatrick McCarthy, MD

Northwestern Memorial Hospital

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORSaibal Kar, MD

Los Robles Regional Medical Center

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: May 16, 2026