Comparison of alcohol septal ablation and mavacamten in patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy: a propensity-matched large single-center study
Discuss this preprint
Start a discussion What are Sciety discussions?Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background: Obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (oHCM) causes substantial symptom burden and impaired functional capacity. Mavacamten has emerged as a targeted pharmacologic treatment, whereas alcohol septal ablation (ASA) is an established septal reduction therapy (SRT). Direct comparative real-world data remain limited. Methods: In this propensity-controlled observational study, longitudinal registry data from Heidelberg University Hospital were analyzed. Consecutive adults with oHCM, NYHA class ?II symptoms, and a maximum LVOT gradient ?50 mmHg treated with mavacamten or ASA were included. The cohort comprised 107 ASA- and 113 mavacamten-treated patients. Follow-up was performed at 6 and 12 months. The primary endpoint was a composite adverse clinical outcome including cardiovascular death, heart failure hospitalization, SRT, heart transplantation, ventricular assist device implantation, permanent pacemaker implantation for third-degree atrioventricular block, or decline in left ventricular ejection fraction to <40%. Results: Both treatments showed significant improvement in NYHA class and LVOT gradient reduction over 12 months. Mean LVOT gradient decreased from 100.3 to 44.2 mmHg after ASA and from 85.7 to 18.4 mmHg with mavacamten at 12 months (both p<0.001). Between-group differences were not significant at 6 months, whereas residual LVOT gradient was lower with mavacamten at 12 months (p=0.004). NT-proBNP declined in both groups and was lower with mavacamten at both follow-up visits (both p<0.001). Third-degree atrioventricular block occurred more frequently after ASA (6.5% vs 0%, p=0.002). The composite endpoint occurred in 13 ASA- (12.1%) and 4 mavacamten-treated patients (3.5%) (p=0.003), with higher 1-year event-free survival in the mavacamten group (HR 0.19; 95%-CI 0.06-0.60; p=0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world comparative study, both ASA and mavacamten improved symptoms and LVOT obstruction in oHCM. Mavacamten was associated with a more favorable short-term hemodynamic and safety profile at 12 months.