Table 3.
Similarities and differences between MITRA-FR and COAPT with respect to study outcomes
| MITRA-FR | COAPT | |
|---|---|---|
| Procedural characteristics and outcomesa | ||
| Procedural success, %a | 96 | 98 |
| Procedural complications, %a | 14.6 | 8.5 |
| Number of clips, %b | ||
| 1 Clip | 46 | 36 |
| 2 Clips | 45 | 55 |
| 3 Clips | 9 | 8 |
| 4 Clips | 0 | 0.3 |
| Post-procedural MR ≥ moderate-to-severe (3+), %a | ||
| End of procedure | 9 | 5 |
| 1 year post-procedure | 17 | 5 |
| 2 years post-procedure | 0.9 | |
| 1-Year outcomes | ||
| 1-Year mortality, % | ||
| Intervention | 24.2 | 19.1 (P < 0.001) |
| Control | 22.4 | 23.2 |
| 1-Year heart failure hospitalization, % | Primary outcome | |
| Intervention | 48.7 | 35.8 (P < 0.001)c |
| Control | 47.4 | 67.9c |
| 1-Year mortality or heart failure hospitalization | Primary outcome | |
| Intervention | 54.6 (P = 0.53) | 33.9 (P < 0.001) |
| Control | 51.3 | 46.5 |
Abbreviations as in Table 1.
a
Data are from the intervention group only.
b
Data are from the intervention group with procedural success.
c
Annualized rate (in % per year) within 2-year follow-up.