Dharam J. Kumbhani

Background There is a paucity of data regarding the comparative efficacy and safety of Mitral valve transcatheter edge‐to‐edge repair (MTEER) using the PASCAL or MitraClip systems for patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). Methods An electronic search was conducted for MEDLINE, COCHRANE, and EMBASE, through February 2023, for studies comparing the clinical outcomes of MTEER using PASCAL versus MitraClip systems among patients with severe MR. The primary study outcome was residual MR ≤ 2 at discharge. Data were pooled using a random‐effects model. Results The final analysis included six studies with a total of 1581 patients, with a weighted follow‐up period of 3.5 months. Two studies only included patients with degenerative MR, while the remaining studies included both degenerative and functional MR. There was no significant difference in procedure duration between MTEER with the PASCAL or MitraClip systems. There was no difference in residual MR ≤ 2 at discharge (94.7% vs. 91.9%; odds ratio [OR]: 1.44; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.92–2.27) or residual MR ≤ 2 at the mid‐term follow‐up (94.6% vs. 91.0%, p = 0.05) among the PASCAL versus MitraClip systems. There was no difference between both groups in residual MR ≤ 1 at discharge (73.1% vs. 63.8%, p = 0.12), while there was greater incidence of residual MR ≤ 1 at midterm follow‐up with the PASCAL system (71.3% vs. 56.2%, p < 0.001). There was no difference between the PASCAL and MitraClip MTEER systems in technical success (97.0% vs. 97.9%, p = 0.15), procedural success (89.1% vs. 87.1%, p = 0.78), single leaflet detachment (1.8% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.55), or all‐cause mortality (3.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.71). Conclusion In this meta‐analysis, we demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety between the PASCAL and MitraClip MTEER systems at short‐ and mid‐term assessments. Randomized trials are warranted to evaluate the comparative long‐term outcomes between both MTEER systems.