Protection Against Cerebral Embolism During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Computational Investigation of Vessel Injury Due to Catheter Tracking During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Catheter reaction forces during transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) may result in injury to the vessel or plaque rupture, triggering distal embolization or thrombosis. In vitro test methods represent the arterial wall using synthetic proxies to determine catheter reaction forces during tracking, but whether they can account for reaction forces within the compliant aortic wall tissue in vivo is unknown. Moreover, the role of plaque inclusions is not well understood. Computational approaches have predicted the impact of TAVR positioning, migration, and leaflet distortion, but have not yet been applied to investigate aortic wall reaction forces and stresses during catheter tracking. In this study, we investigate the role that catheter design and aorta and plaque mechanical properties have on the risk of plaque rupture during TAVR catheter delivery. We report that, for trackability testing, a rigid test model provides a reasonable estimation of the peak reaction forces experienced during catheter tracking within compliant vessels. We investigated the risk of rupture of both the aortic tissue and calcified plaques. We report that there was no risk of diseased aortic tissue rupture based on an accepted aortic tissue stress threshold (4.2 MPa). However, we report that both the aortic and plaque tissue exceed a rupture stress threshold (300 kPa) with and without the presence of stiff and soft plaque inclusions. We also highlight the potential risks associated with shorter catheter tips during catheter tracking and demonstrate that increasing the contact surface will reduce peak contact pressures experienced in the tissue.

Cerebral Embolic Protection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using the Sentinel Cerebral Protection System: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) plays a vital role in patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. Despite the mortality benefit of TAVI, embolic stroke remains a feared complication. As a result, transcatheter cerebral embolic protection (TCEP) devices have been developed to reduce this risk. Given the ongoing debate of TCEP in TAVI, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials to date to identify outcomes of periprocedural stroke using the Sentinel™ cerebral protection system (CPS).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Scopus databases were utilized from inception until 12/2023. PRISMA criteria was utilized. Keywords included "cerebral embolic protection", "sentinel cerebral protection system", "transcatheter aortic valve implantation", and "transcatheter aortic valve replacement". Primary outcome was periprocedural stroke. Secondary outcomes included periprocedural disabling and non-disabling stroke, all-cause mortality, transient ischemic attack, delirium, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, bleeding, and pacemaker implantation. Risk ratios (RR) were measured via Mantel-Haenszel method with fixed analysis. Heterogeneity was assessed via chi-squared and Higgin's I2 test.

RESULTS

Four trials with 3528 patients were assessed. SAPIEN 3 was the most common bioprosthetic valve used. The average age was 79.4 years with 41.9% of the sample size being females. The most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and coronary artery disease. There was no difference in periprocedural stroke in patients who underwent TAVI with the Sentinel™ CPS compared to no TCEP (RR 0.75, P = 0.12). Periprocedural disabling strokes were less likely in those who underwent TAVI with the Sentinel™ CPS compared to no TCEP (RR 0.41, P = 0.02) with a number needed to treat (NNT) of 123. All other outcomes did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis, there was no difference between TAVI with the Sentinel™ CPS compared to TAVI without TCEP in regard to risk of periprocedural stroke; however, it was associated with a decreased risk of periprocedural disabling stroke.

Stroke reduction by cerebral embolic protection devices in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The use of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been studied in several randomised trials. We aimed to perform a systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of randomised CEP trials, focusing on a clinically relevant reduction in disabling stroke.

METHODS

A systematic search was applied to three electronic databases, including trials that randomised TAVI patients to CEP versus standard treatment. The primary outcome was the risk of disabling stroke. Outcomes were presented as relative risk (RR), absolute risk differences (ARDs), numbers needed to treat (NNTs) and the 95% credible intervals (CrIs). The minimal clinically important difference was determined at 1.1% ARD, per expert consensus (NNT 91). The principal Bayesian meta-analysis was performed under a vague prior, and secondary analyses were performed under two informed literature-based priors.

RESULTS

Seven randomised studies were included for meta-analysis (n=3996: CEP n=2126, control n=1870). Under a vague prior, the estimated median RR of CEP use for disabling stroke was 0.56 (95% CrI 0.28 to 1.19, derived ARD 0.56% and NNT 179, I2=0%). Although the estimated posterior probability of any benefit was 94.4%, the probability of a clinically relevant effect was 0-0.1% under the vague and informed literature-based priors. Results were robust across multiple sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

There is a high probability of a beneficial CEP treatment effect, but this is unlikely to be clinically relevant. These findings suggest that future trials should focus on identifying TAVI patients with an increased baseline risk of stroke, and on the development of new generation devices.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023407006.

Clinical impact of cerebral protection during transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Embolization of debris can complicate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) causing stroke. Cerebral embolism protection (CEP) devices can divert or trap debris.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of CEP during TAVI vs the standard procedure.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, SCOPUS and DOAJ 1/01/2014-04/12/2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized and observational studies comparing CEP versus standard TAVI, according to PRISMA.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

stroke.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

death, bleeding, vascular access complications, acute kidney injury and infarct area.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two investigators independently assessed study quality and extracted data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-six articles were included (540.247 patients). The primary endpoint was significantly lower (RR = 0.800 95%CI:0.682-0.940; p = 0.007) with CEP. Similarly, death rates were significantly lower with CEP (RR = 0.610 95%CI:0.482-0.771; p < 0.001). No difference was found for bleeding (RR = 1.053 95%CI:0.793-1.398; p = 0.721), vascular complications (RR = 0.937 95%CI:0.820-1.070; p = 0.334) or AKI (RR = 0.982 95%CI:0.754-1.279; p = 0.891).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of CEP during TAVI is associated with improved outcomes. Future studies will identify patients who benefit most from CEP.

Complications in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A comprehensive analysis and management strategies

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) marks a significant advancement in treating aortic stenosis (AS), especially for patients with high surgical risks. This concise review outlines TAVR's development, its broader application to include lower-risk patients, and innovations in the device and procedural technology. Clinical trials, notably the PARTNER series, affirm TAVR's efficacy, showing it matches or surpasses surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in mortality reduction, hemodynamic benefits, and symptom alleviation, including heart failure. However, TAVR entails complications such as paravalvular leakage (PVL), conduction disorders, and increased cerebrovascular event risks. We evaluate these issues, their prevalence, causative factors, and clinical consequences, emphasizing improvements in valve design and technique that have significantly lowered PVL rates. The role of aortic valve anatomy and calcification in PVL and conduction issues is analyzed, underlining the necessity for meticulous patient selection and procedural planning. Further, the review delves into cerebrovascular event risks, their origins, and preventative strategies, including cerebral protection devices and the judicious use of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies. TAVR presents a less invasive, promising alternative to SAVR, but requires careful complication management to optimize patient results. Ongoing innovation and research are vital for advancing TAVR's techniques, improving valve designs, and extending its reach, thereby enhancing AS patients' quality of life.

Stroke risk after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with carotid stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Stroke is a feared complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Patients undergoing TAVR typically have multiple comorbidities, such as carotid artery stenosis (CAS). We conducted the present meta-analysis to determine the risk of stroke and mortality following TAVR in patients with CAS.

METHODS

We searched PubMed/Medline, Scopus, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Clinical Trials databases for clinical studies that compared CAS ≥50% and CAS ≥70% versus non-CAS TAVR population. The endpoints included the 30-day incidence of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and 30-day all-cause of mortality.

RESULTS

We identified seven studies that included 12,418 patients in the CAS group and 102,316 in the control group. CAS ≥50% was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day stroke or TIA after TAVR [risk ratio (RR): 1.38; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.95-2.02; p = 0.09]. However, patients with CAS ≥70% had an increased risk of stroke or TIA (RR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.02-2.01; p = 0.04). No difference in 30-day all-cause mortality was observed between CAS ≥50% or CAS ≥70% and control groups (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.79-1.52; p = 0.59 and RR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.85-1.45; p = 0.43, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

CAS ≥70% was associated with an increased risk of stroke or TIA following TAVR compared with patients without CAS.

Cerebral Protection in Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Review and Contemporary Assessment of Randomized Trial Data

As the population has aged and as aortic valve therapies have evolved, the use of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has grown dramatically over the past decade. A well-known complication of percutaneous cardiac intervention is embolic phenomena, and TAVR is among the highest risk procedures for clinical and subclinical stroke. As indications for TAVR expand to lower-risk and ultimately younger patients, the long-term consequences of stroke are amplified. Cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices have taken a on unique preventative role following the Food and Drug Administration approval of the SentinelTM Cerebral Protection System (CPS). More recently, the PROTECTED TAVR study has spurred extensive debate in the neuro-cardiac community. In this review we describe the contemporary literature regarding stroke risk associated with TAVR, the history and role of CEP devices, a PROTECTED TAVR sub-group analysis, and implications for next steps in the field. Lastly, we explore the unique need for CEP in a younger TAVR population, as well as directions for future research.

Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Review of the Literature and Future Perspectives

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been a revolutionary therapy in the treatment of aortic valve stenosis. The risk of stroke associated with TAVR has decreased significantly since its introduction; however, it remains a devastating complication when it does occur.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many of the strokes associated with TAVR occur peri-procedurally and are thought to be due to embolic debris entering the cerebrovascular circulation. A number of different cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) have been developed and are in various stages of testing and use. The results from clinical trials evaluating the role for CEPD to reduce the risk of stroke have been mixed. As a result, their uptake has been very heterogeneous. This review provides a summary of the diverse CEPD devices available for use and outlines the clinical evidence available to date.

Examining the Role of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices in Preventing Postoperative Stroke in Patients with a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic: Insights from the National Inpatient Sample

Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been shown to lower the risk of stroke during the procedure. However, their long-term and clinical effects on neuro-cognition are unknown. Therefore, we hypothesized the benefit of CEPD in TAVR patients with a prior history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). National Inpatient Sample (2019) and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes were used to identify patients undergoing TAVR with prior stroke or TIA. Propensity-matched analysis was performed to adjust for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Primary outcome measures were postoperative stroke and all-cause mortality. Length of stay and hospital cost were secondary outcomes. Of 8450 unmatched TAVR patients with prior stroke or TIA in 2019, 1095 (13%) utilized CEPD. After propensity matching previous myocardial infarction (MI), coronary artery bypass grafting, and drug abuse were higher in the TAVR-only cohort. Postoperative stroke rate (1.4% vs 2.2%; P = 0.081) and odds [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.11-2.17; P = 0.341] were lower in the CEPD group. There was no difference in all-cause in-hospital mortality between the 2 groups (0.9% vs 1.0%). Length of stay (3 vs 2 days, P <0.001) and hospital expenditure ($172,711 vs $162,284; P = 0.002) were higher for the TAVR-only cohort. CEPD in TAVR patients with prior stroke or TIA did not show statistically significant postoperative stroke benefits. However, further larger-scale prospective studies are needed to evaluate the long-term neurocognitive benefits of CEPD in these patients. As the use of TAVR continues to expand, optimizing peri-procedural strategies such as the use of CEPD remains a critical area of research to improve patient outcomes.

The efficacy of different types of cerebral embolic protection device during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a meta-analysis

Aims

Perioperative stroke remains a devastating complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and using a cerebral embolic protection device (CEPD) during TAVI may reduce the occurrence of stroke according to some studies. Therefore, we conducted this meta-analysis to determine whether CEPD should be routinely used during TAVI.

Methods and results

The inclusion criteria for this study were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that examined the outcome of stroke with or without CEPD during TAVI, with a minimum follow-up period of 30 days. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of stroke (including both cerebrovascular accidents and death due to cerebrovascular accidents). The risk of stroke was lower in the CEPD group: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49-0.96, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%. A subgroup analysis was conducted according to the type of CEPD. The risk of stroke was lower in the I&LCCA (filter cover the innominate and the left common carotid arteries) type CEPD group: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.49-0.96, p = 0.03, I2 = 36%. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the risk of stroke in the TMCA [filter cover the three major cerebral arteries (innominate, left common carotid, and subclavian arteries)] type CEPD group: RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.36-1.80, p = 0.60, I2 = 0%.

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, the I&LCCA-type CEPD can reduce the risk of stroke within 30 days following TAVI, but the TMCA type cannot.

Role of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: An Updated Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) capture embolic material in an attempt to reduce ischemic brain injury during transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Prior reports have indicated mixed results regarding the benefits of these devices. With new data emerging, we performed an updated meta-analysis examining the effect of CEPD during transcatheter aortic valve replacement on various clinical, neurological, and safety parameters.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A comprehensive review of electronic databases was performed comparing CEPD and no-CEPD in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Primary clinical outcome was all-cause stroke. Secondary clinical outcomes were disabling stroke and all-cause mortality. Neurological outcomes included worsening of the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score, Montreal Cognitive Assessment score from baseline at discharge, presence of new ischemic lesions, and total lesion volume on neuroimaging. Safety outcomes included major or minor vascular complications and stage 2 or 3 acute kidney injury. Seven randomized controlled trials with 4016 patients met the inclusion criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary clinical outcome of all-cause stroke; secondary clinical outcomes of disabling stroke, all-cause mortality, neurological outcomes of National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score worsening, Montreal Cognitive Assessment worsening, presence of new ischemic lesions, or total lesion volume on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging between CEPD versus control groups. There was no statistically significant difference in major or minor vascular complications or stage 2 or 3 acute kidney injury between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of CEPD in transcatheter aortic valve replacement was not associated with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of clinical, neurological, and safety outcomes.

Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an updated meta-analysis

Background

The use of cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) reveals conflicting data.

Aims

This updated meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the SENTINEL Cerebral Protection System.

Methods

A literature search for relevant studies up to September 2022 was performed. Study outcomes were divided based on time period - overall (up to 30 days) and short (≤7 days). The outcomes studied include stroke (disabling, non-disabling), mortality, neuroimaging findings, transient ischaemic attack, acute kidney injury and major vascular and bleeding complications.

Results

A total of 15 studies involving 294,134 patients were included. Regarding overall outcomes, significant reductions were noted for mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.88; p=0.008), all stroke (OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46-0.88; p=0.006) and disabling stroke (OR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.74; p=0.003) using the SENTINEL device. No significant differences were noted for other outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity across the studies for mortality (p=0.013) and all stroke (p=0.003). Including only randomised data (n=4), there was only significant reduction in the incidence of disabling stroke (OR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17-0.89; p=0.026) in the SENTINEL group. In studies reporting ≤7-day outcomes (n=8), use of the SENTINEL device demonstrated significantly lower rates of all stroke (p<0.001), disabling stroke (p<0.001) and major bleeding complications (p=0.02). No differences in neuroimaging outcomes were noted.

Conclusions

In this updated meta-analysis, use of the SENTINEL Cerebral Protection System was associated with lower rates of mortality, all stroke and disabling stroke, although significant heterogeneity was noted for mortality and all stroke. Including exclusively randomised data, there was only significant reduction in the incidence of disabling stroke. No significant adverse outcomes with device use were noted.

The impact of perioperative stroke and delirium on outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE

The effects of stroke and delirium on postdischarge cognition and patient-centered health outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are not well characterized. Here, we assess the impact of postoperative stroke and delirium on these health outcomes in SAVR patients at 90 days.

METHODS

Patients (N = 383) undergoing SAVR (41% received concomitant coronary artery bypass graft) enrolled in a randomized trial of embolic protection devices underwent serial neurologic and delirium evaluations at postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 and magnetic resonance imaging at day 7. Outcomes included 90-day functional status, neurocognitive decline from presurgical baseline, and quality of life.

RESULTS

By postoperative day 7, 25 (6.6%) patients experienced clinical stroke and 103 (28.5%) manifested delirium. During index hospitalization, time to discharge was longer in patients experiencing stroke (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.94; P = .02) and patients experiencing delirium (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.54-0.86; P = .001). At day 90, patients experiencing stroke were more likely to have a modified Rankin score >2 (odds ratio [OR], 5.9; 95% CI, 1.7-20.1; P = .01), depression (OR, 5.3; 95% CI, 1.6-17.3; P = .006), a lower 12-Item Short Form Survey physical health score (adjusted mean difference -3.3 ± 1.9; P = .08), and neurocognitive decline (OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 2.3-26.4; P = .001). Delirium was associated with depression (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 0.9-5.3; P = .08), lower 12-Item Short Form Survey physical health (adjusted mean difference -2.3 ± 1.1; P = .03), and neurocognitive decline (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.2-4.0; P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Stroke and delirium occur more frequently after SAVR than is commonly recognized, and these events are associated with disability, depression, cognitive decline, and poorer quality of life at 90 days postoperatively. These findings support the need for new interventions to reduce these events and improve patient-centered outcomes.

Long-Term Risk of Stroke After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the SwissTAVI Registry

BACKGROUND

Stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. Predictors of stroke and the long-term risk after TAVR remain incompletely understood.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to investigate the short- and long-term incidence and predictors of stroke after TAVR in the SwissTAVI Registry.

METHODS

Between February 2011 and June 2021, consecutive patients undergoing TAVR were included. Standardized stroke ratios (SSRs) were calculated to compare trends in stroke of TAVR patients with an age- and sex-matched general population in Switzerland derived from the 2019 Global Burden of Disease study.

RESULTS

A total of 11,957 patients (81.8 ± 6.5 years of age, 48.0% female) were included. One-third of the patients (32.3%) had a history of atrial fibrillation, and 11.8% had a history of cerebrovascular accident. The cumulative 30-day incidence rate of stroke was 3.0%, with 69% of stroke events occurring within the first 48 hours after TAVR. The incidence of stroke was 4.3% at 1 year, and 7.8% at 5 years. Compared with an age- and sex-adjusted general population, the risk of stroke was significantly higher in the TAVR population during the first 2 years after TAVR: first year: SSR 7.26 (95% CI: 6.3-8.36) and 6.82 (95% CI: 5.97-7.79) for males and females, respectively; second year: SSR 1.98 (95% CI: 1.47-2.67) and 1.48 (95% CI: 1.09-2.02) for males and females, respectively; but returned to a comparable level to that observed in the matched population thereafter.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with an age- and sex-matched population, TAVR patients experienced a higher risk of stroke for up to 2 years after the procedure, and a comparable risk thereafter. (SwissTAVI Registry; NCT01368250).

First-in-human study of the CAPTIS embolic protection system during transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Stroke and other clinically significant embolic complications are well documented in the early period following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The CAPTIS device is an embolic protection system, designed to provide neurovascular and systemic protection by deflecting debris away from the brain's circulation, capturing the debris and thus avoiding systemic embolisation.

AIMS

We aimed to study the safety and feasibility study of the CAPTIS complete cerebral and full-body embolic protection system during TAVR.

METHODS

A first-in-human study investigated the safety, feasibility and debris capturing ability of CAPTIS during TAVR. Patients were followed for 30 days. The primary endpoints were device safety and cerebrovascular events at 72 hours.

RESULTS

Twenty patients underwent TAVR using balloon-expandable or self-expanding valve systems. CAPTIS was successfully delivered, positioned, deployed, and retrieved in all cases, and TAVR was successfully completed without device-related complications. No cerebrovascular events were observed. High numbers of debris particles were captured in all patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the CAPTIS full-body embolic protection system during TAVR was safe, and it captured a substantial number of debris particles. No patient suffered from a cerebrovascular event. A randomised clinical trial is warranted to prove its efficacy.

Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial evaluating the efficacy of mechanical neuroprotection in reducing the risk of silent brain infarcts associated with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure: study protocol for a LAAC-SBI trial

BACKGROUND

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) procedures prevent cardioembolic stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation who have contraindications to oral anticoagulant medications. However, these procedures carry certain risks of peri-procedural complications. One such complication is silent brain infarcts (SBI), which can lead to cognitive impairment and mood disturbances. The implementation of mechanical neuroprotection systems during LAAC procedures may reduce the risk of SBI and associated cognitive and mood disorders.

METHODS

The LAAC-SBI trial is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, and double-blind interventional study. The study aims to enroll a total of 240 patients, with 120 patients allocated to each group. The study group will evaluate the use of the Sentinel CPS during LAAC, while the control group will undergo LAAC procedures without the Sentinel CPS. The primary endpoint of the study is the number of new SBIs or stroke foci detected by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW MRI). Secondary endpoints include deterioration of cognitive function, development of dementia syndrome, and occurrence of depressive disorders. These endpoints will be assessed using questionnaire tools such as the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), Trail Making Test (TMT), Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The observational period for patients in the study is 2 years.

DISCUSSION

If the study demonstrates a favorable outcome with reduced incidence of SBI and improved cognitive and mood outcomes in patients receiving cerebral protection devices during LAAC, it will have significant implications for clinical management standards. This would support the use of neuroprotection devices not only for LAAC but also in procedures such as atrial fibrillation ablation or transcatheter mitral valve interventions, where the risk of embolic events and subsequent brain injury may also be present.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05369195. Registration on 11.05.2022.

Predictors of Cerebral Embolic Debris During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The SafePass 2 First-in-Human Study

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) generates significant debris, and strategies to mitigate cerebral embolization are needed. The novel Emboliner embolic protection catheter (Emboline, Inc., Santa Cruz, California) is designed to capture all particles generated during TAVR. This first-in-human study sought to assess the safety and feasibility of the device and to characterize the distribution and histopathology of the debris generated during TAVR. The SafePass 2 study was a prospective, nonrandomized, multicenter, single-arm investigation of the Emboliner device. Primary end points included 30-day major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and technical performance. Computed tomography angiography was analyzed by an independent core laboratory, and filters were sent for histopathology of captured debris. Predictors of particle number were identified using >150 µm and >500 µm size thresholds. Of 31 subjects enrolled, technical success was 100%, and 30-day MACCE was 6.5% (2 cerebrovascular accidents, with 1 attributed to subtherapeutic dosing of rivaroxaban along with atrial fibrillation and the other to possible previous small ischemic strokes on magnetic resonance imaging; neither MACCE event had a causal relation to the Emboliner). All filters contained debris, with a median of 191.0 particles >150 µm and 14.0 particles >500 µm. Histopathology revealed mostly acute thrombus and valve or arterial tissue with lesser amounts of calcified tissue. A history of atrial fibrillation predicted a greater number of particles >500 µm (p = 0.0259) and its presence on admission was associated with 4.1 times more particles >150 µm (p = 0.0130) and 8.1 times more particles >500 µm (p = 0.0086). Self-expanding valves were associated with twice the number of particles >150 µm (p = 0.0281). TASK score was positively correlated with number of particles >500 µm (p = 0.0337). The Emboliner device was safe and feasible. Emboli after TAVR appear more numerous than previously documented. Atrial fibrillation, higher TASK score, and self-expanding valve use conferred higher embolic burden. Notably, none of the tested computed tomography angiography features were able to identify with higher embolic risk. Larger-scale studies are needed to identify high-risk patients for selective embolic protection device use.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic insufficiency in a patient with aortic root Thrombus and left ventricular assist device: A risk worth taking?

A 61-year-old man with end-stage ischemic cardiomyopathy post HeartMate 3 (Abbott laboratories, Chicago, Illinois, USA) left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implant was hospitalized after he had recurrent ventricular tachycardia requiring implantable cardioverter-defibrillator shocks. His transthoracic echocardiogram and computed tomography angiography of the chest showed presence of trace aortic insufficiency (AI) and aortic root thrombus (ART) of non-coronary cusp without obstruction of right or left coronary artery ostium despite therapeutic international normalized ratio. He presented again 3 months later with worsening heart failure signs and symptoms. Transesophageal echocardiogram showed progression to severe AI and persistent ART. Despite hemodynamically guided LVAD speed optimization, inotropic support, and diuresis, the patient continued to deteriorate with worsening renal function. The patient was not a transplant candidate due to frailty. After multi-disciplinary discussion he underwent successful 29-Sapien S3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) transcatheter aortic valve replacement utilizing distal protection filters in bilateral internal carotid arteries for stroke prevention. This case provides novel insight to physicians treating LVAD patients regarding management of severe AI in the setting of ART.

Learning objective

We report a rare approach employed for management of aortic insufficiency (AI) in a patient who also had an aortic root thrombus and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) that traditionally requires cardiac transplantation. Our patient had a favorable outcome with a minimally invasive transcatheter aortic valve replacement. With this case, we hope to generate awareness amongst physicians treating patients about management alternatives and approach of a commonly encountered, life-threatening complication of AI in patients with LVAD.

Site Variability in Cerebral Embolic Protection for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Association With Outcomes

Background

The effectiveness of cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) in mitigating stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains uncertain, and therefore CEPD may be utilized differently across US hospitals. This study aims to characterize the hospital-level pattern of CEPD use during TAVI in the US and its association with outcomes.

Methods

Patients treated with nontransapical TAVI in the 2019 Nationwide Readmissions Database were included. Hospitals were categorized as CEPD non-users and CEPD users. The following outcomes were compared: the composite of in-hospital stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA), in-hospital ischemic stroke, death, and cost of hospitalization. Logistic regression models were used for risk adjustment of clinical outcomes.

Results

Of 41,822 TAVI encounters, CEPD was used in 10.6% (n = 4422). Out of 392 hospitals, 65.8% were CEPD non-user hospitals and 34.2% were CEPD users. No difference was observed between CEPD non-users and CEPD users in the risk of in-hospital stroke or TIA (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 0.99 [0.86-1.15]), ischemic stroke (adjusted OR = 1.00 [0.85-1.18]), or in-hospital death (adjusted OR = 0.86 [0.71-1.03]). The cost of hospitalization was lower in CEPD non-users.

Conclusions

Two-thirds of hospitals in the US do not use CEPD for TAVI, and no significant difference was observed in neurologic outcomes among patients treated at CEPD non-user and CEPD user hospitals.

Implications of Renal Disease in Patients Undergoing Structural Interventions

Percutaneous structural interventions have a major impact on the morbidity, mortality, and quality of life of patients by providing a lower-risk alternative to cardiac surgery. However, renal disease has a significant impact on outcomes of these interventions. This review explores the incidence, outcomes, pathophysiology, and preventative measures of acute kidney injury and chronic kidney disease on transcatheter aortic valve replacement, transcatheter mitral valve repair, and percutaneous balloon mitral valvuloplasty. Given the expanding indications for percutaneous structural interventions, further research is needed to identify ideal patients with chronic kidney disease or end-stage renal disease who would benefit from intervention.

Regional differences in the utilization and outcomes of cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: an analysis of the National Inpatient Sample from 2017 through 2019

Aim: To evaluate the utilization and outcomes of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) by USA region, using discharge data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS), Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Patients & methods: All TAVR discharge encounters from June 2017-2019 were included in the analysis. Discharge encounters with bicuspid anatomy were excluded. Regional CEP utilization rates were reported. For TAVR cases performed with the Sentinel CEP device (Boston Scientific, MA, USA), multivariable logistic regression was performed to model regional differences in TAVR outcomes including: stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), stroke/TIA combined, and in-hospital all-cause mortality. Generalized linear regression models were used to assess regional differences in length of stay (LOS) and hospital charges. Results: The Northeast had the greatest overall CEP utilization rate (11.3%), followed by the Midwest (11.1%), West (8.7%), then South (3.1%). Compared with the Northeast, the South was associated with a lower risk of stroke (OR: 0.267, 95% CI: 0.106-0.673; p = 0.005), and the West a higher risk of stroke (OR: 1.583, 95% CI: 1.044-2.401; p = 0.031). Compared with the Northeast, the West was associated with a higher risk of stroke/TIA combined (OR: 1.618, 95% CI: 1.107-2.364; p = 0.013). Compared with the Northeast, the Midwest (OR: 4.501, 95% CI: 2.229-9.089; p < 0.001) and West (OR: 5.316, 95% CI: 2.611-10.824; p < 0.001) were associated with a higher risk of in-hospital all-cause mortality. Adjusted charges and LOS were highest in the West. Conclusion: Within the USA, there are regional differences in the utilization and outcomes of CEP use during TAVR. To prevent regional disparities and ensure consistent quality of care in the USA, further research is needed to determine what variable(s) may be responsible for regional differences in TAVR outcomes, with or without CEP.

Cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter heart interventions

Stroke remains a devastating complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), with the incidence of clinically apparent stroke seemingly fixed at around 3% despite TAVR's significant evolution during the past decade. Embolic showers of debris (calcium, atheroma, valve material, foreign material) are captured in the majority of patients who have TAVR using a filter-based cerebral embolic protection device (CEPD). Additionally, in systematic brain imaging studies, the majority of patients receiving TAVR exhibit new cerebral lesions. Mechanistic studies have shown reductions in the volume of new cerebral lesions using CEPDs, yet the first randomised trial powered for periprocedural stroke within 72 hours of a transfemoral TAVR failed to meet its primary endpoint of showing superiority of the SENTINEL CEPD. The present review summarises the clinicopathological rationale for the development of CEPDs, the evidence behind these devices to date and the emerging recognition of cerebral embolisation in many non-TAVR transcatheter procedures. Given the uniqueness of each of the various CEPDs under development, specific trials tailored to their designs will need to be undertaken to broaden the CEPD field, in addition to evaluating the role of CEPD in non-TAVR transcatheter heart interventions. Importantly, the cost-effectiveness of these devices will require assessment to broaden the adoption of CEPDs globally.

Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Stroke is a feared complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), which embolic protection devices (EPDs) may mitigate. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to evaluate the effect of EPDs in TAVR.

Methods

All RCTs comparing EPDs with control during TAVR were systematically identified. Prespecified primary end points were all stroke, disabling stroke, nondisabling stroke, and all-cause mortality. Safety and neuroimaging parameters were assessed. Sensitivity analyses were stratified by EPD type. Study registration was a priori (CRD42022377939).

Results

Eight trials randomizing 4043 patients were included. There was no significant difference between EPDs and control for all stroke (relative risk [RR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.65-1.18; P = .39; I2 = 0%), disabling stroke (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.31-1.46; P = .32; I2 = 8.6%), nondisabling stroke (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.71-1.40; P = .97; I2 = 0%), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.43-1.78; P = .71; I2 = 2.3%). There were no differences in safety end points of bleeding, vascular complications, or acute kidney injury. EPDs did not result in differences in total lesion volume or the number of new lesions. The Sentinel EPD significantly reduced the risk of disabling stroke (RR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.88; P = .022; I2 = 0%) but did not affect all stroke, nondisabling stroke, or all-cause mortality.

Conclusions

The totality of randomized data for EPDs during TAVR demonstrated no safety concerns or significant differences in clinical or neuroimaging end points. Analyses restricted to the Sentinel EPD demonstrated large, clinically meaningful reductions in disabling stroke. Ongoing RCTs may help validate these results.

Fighting Cardiac Thromboembolism during Transcatheter Procedures: An Update on the Use of Cerebral Protection Devices in Cath Labs and EP Labs

Intraprocedural stroke is a well-documented and feared potential risk of cardiovascular transcatheter procedures (TPs). Moreover, subclinical neurological events or covert central nervous system infarctions are concerns related to the development of dementia, future stroke, cognitive decline, and increased risk of mortality. Cerebral protection devices (CPDs) were developed to mitigate the risk of cardioembolic embolism during TPs. They are mechanical barriers designed to cover the ostium of the supra-aortic branches in the aortic arch, but newer devices are able to protect the descending aorta. CPDs have been mainly designed and tested to provide cerebral protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but their use in both Catheterization and Electrophysiology laboratories is rapidly increasing. CPDs have allowed us to perform procedures that were previously contraindicated due to high thromboembolic risk, such as in cases of intracardiac thrombosis identified at preprocedural assessment. However, several concerns related to their employment have to be defined. The selection of patients at high risk of thromboembolism is still a subjective choice of each center. The aim of this review is to update the evidence on the use of CPDs in either Cath labs or EP labs, providing an overview of their structural characteristics. Future perspectives focusing on their possible future employment are also discussed.

The Evolving Role of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Transcatheter Valvular Procedures

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has long been the standard treatment for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). However, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative; it was initially intended for high-risk patients and has now expanded its use to patients of all risk groups. While TAVR has demonstrated promising outcomes in diverse patient populations, uncertainties persist regarding its long-term durability and potential complications, raising the issue of the ideal lifetime management strategy for patients with AS. Therefore, SAVR continues to play an important role in clinical practice, particularly in younger patients with longer life expectancies, those with complex aortic anatomy who are unsuitable for TAVR, and those requiring concomitant surgical procedures. The choice between TAVR and SAVR warrants personalized decision-making, considering patient characteristics, comorbidities, anatomical considerations, and overall life expectancy. A multidisciplinary approach involving an experienced heart team is crucial in the preoperative evaluation process. In this review, we aimed to explore the current role of surgical management in addressing aortic valve stenosis amidst the expanding utilization of less invasive transcatheter procedures.

Meta-Analysis of the Prognostic Significance of Carotid Artery Stenosis in Patients Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Stroke is a known complication of both transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and carotid artery stenosis (CAS). Whether CAS is a predictor of worse prognosis after TAVI is unclear. We performed a meta-analysis to assess the impact of CAS on the incidence of neurovascular complications and mortality after TAVI. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases from inception to January 2023. CAS was defined by ≥50% stenosis of at least 1 carotid artery. Studies comparing CAS versus non-CAS TAVI populations were included. Patients' baseline characteristics and 30-day clinical outcomes were extracted. End points included the 30-day incidence of neurovascular complications (stroke or transient ischemic attack) and 30-day all-cause mortality. We identified six studies, totaling 6,763 patients in the CAS group and 23,861 patients in the non-CAS group. Patients with CAS had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes mellitus, dyslipidemia, previous myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, peripheral artery disease, previous neurovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. There was no significant difference in the rates of 30-day neurovascular complications between CAS and non-CAS groups (relative risk 1.23, 95% confidence interval 0.63 to 2.40, p = 0.54). CAS was associated with a higher risk of 30-day all-cause mortality (relative risk 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.47, p <0.001), not found in a sensitivity analysis. In conclusion, patients with CAS presented with a significantly higher co-morbidity burden. CAS was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day neurovascular complications. 30-day mortality was higher in the CAS group but that may be a surrogate of the heavy co-morbidity burden of patients with CAS.

Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.

Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection devices for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated meta-analysis

Background and Aims

Cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices are employed to capture embolic debris and reduce the risk of stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Evidence is mixed regarding the safety and efficacy of CEP. We aimed to summarize the safety and effectiveness of CEP use during TAVR.

Methods

Electronic databases, including PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase, were searched using relevant search terms for articles relating to CEP. All relevant data from 20 studies were extracted into a standardized form. Statistical analyses were performed using Revman 5.4. Odds ratio (OR) or mean differences (MDs) were used to estimate the desired outcome with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Twenty studies (eight randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 210,871 patients (19,261 in the CEP group and 191,610 in TAVR without the CEP group) were included. The use of CEP was associated with a lower odds of 30-day mortality by 39% (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.70) and stroke by 31% (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92). Comparing devices, benefit in terms of mortality and stroke was observed with the use of the Sentinel device (Boston Scientific), but not among other devices. No differences were observed in the outcomes of acute kidney injury, major or life-threatening bleeding events, or major vascular complications between groups. When only RCTs were included, there were no observed differences in the primary or secondary outcomes for CEP versus no CEP use during TAVR.

Conclusions

The totality of evidence suggests a net benefit for the use of CEP, weighted by studies in which the Sentinal device was used. However, given the RCT subanalysis, additional evidence is needed to identify patients at the highest risk of stroke for optimal decision-making.

Cerebral Embolic Protection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment option for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis across the entire spectrum of surgical risk. Recent trial data have led to the expansion of TAVR into lower-risk patients. With iterative technological advances and successive increases in procedural experience, the occurrence of complications following TAVR has declined. One of the most feared complications remains stroke, and patients consider stroke a worse outcome than death. There has therefore been great interest in strategies to mitigate the risk of stroke in patients undergoing TAVR. In this paper, we will discuss mechanisms and predictors of stroke after TAVR and describe the currently available cerebral embolic protection devices, including their design and relevant clinical studies pertaining to their use. We will also review the current overall evidence base for cerebral embolic protection during TAVR and ongoing randomized controlled trials. Finally, we will discuss our pragmatic recommendations for the use of cerebral embolic protection devices in patients undergoing TAVR.

An Updated Meta-Analysis on Cerebral Embolic Protection in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Intervention Stratified by Baseline Surgical Risk and Device Type

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) can lead to the embolization of debris. Capturing the debris by cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices may reduce the risk of stroke. New evidence has allowed us to examine the effects of CEP in patients undergoing TAVI. We aimed to assess the effects of CEP overall and stratified by the device used (SENTINEL or TriGuard) and the surgical risk of the patients.

Methods

We selected randomized controlled trials using electronic databases through September 17, 2022. We estimated random-effects risk ratios (RR) with (95% confidence interval) and calculated absolute risk differences at 30 days across baseline surgical risks derived from the TAVI trials for any stroke (disabling and nondisabling) and all-cause mortality.

Results

Among 6 trials (n = 3921), CEP vs. control did not reduce any stroke [RR: 0.95 (0.50-1.81)], disabling [RR: 0.75 (0.18-3.16)] or nondisabling [RR: 0.99 (0.65-1.49)] strokes, or all-cause mortality [RR: 1.23 (0.55-2.77)]. However, when analyzed by device, SENTINEL reduced disabling stroke [RR: 0.46 (0.22-0.95)], translating into 6 fewer per 1000 in high-risk, 3 fewer per 1000 in intermediate-risk, and 1 fewer per 1000 in low surgical-risk patients. CEP vs. control did not reduce the risk of any bleeding [RR: 1.03 (0.44-2.40)], major vascular complications [RR: 1.41 (0.57-3.48)], or acute kidney injury [RR: 1.36 (0.57-3.28)].

Conclusions

This updated meta-analysis showed that SENTINEL CEP might reduce disabling stroke in patients undergoing TAVI. Patients with high and intermediate surgical risks were most likely to derive benefits.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Elderly Patients: Opportunities and Challenges

Over the past two decades, the rapid evolution of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the management of severe aortic stenosis (AS) in the elderly. The prevalence of comorbidities in elderly AS patients presents a considerable challenge to the effectiveness and prognosis of patients after TAVR. In this article, we aim to summarize some of the clinical aspects of the current use of TAVR in elderly patients and attempt to highlight the challenges and issues that need further consideration.

Cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score matched and randomized controlled trials using the Sentinel cerebral embolic protection device

BACKGROUND

The Sentinel cerebral embolic protection device (CEP) aims to reduce the risk of stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of propensity score matched (PSM) and randomized controlled trials (RCT) investigating the effect of the Sentinel CEP to prevent strokes during TAVR.

METHODS

Eligible trials were searched through PubMed, ISI Web of science databases, Cochrane database, and proceedings of major congresses. Primary outcome was stroke. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, major or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications and acute kidney injury at discharge. Fixed and random effect models were used to calculate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and absolute risk difference (ARD).

RESULTS

A total of 4066 patients from 4 RCTs (3'506 patients) and 1 PSM study (560 patients) were included. Use of Sentinel CEP was successful in 92% of patients and was associated with a significantly lower risk of stroke (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48-0.95, p = 0.02. ARD: -1.3%, 95% CI: -2.3 - -0.2, p = 0.02, number needed to treat (NNT) = 77), and a reduced risk of disabling stroke (RR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.17-0.65. ARD: -0.9%, 95% CI: -1.5 - -0.3, p = 0.004, NNT = 111). Use of Sentinel CEP was associated with a lower risk of major or life-threatening bleeding (RR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.16-0.87, p = 0.02). Risk for nondisabling stroke (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.62-1.40, p = 0.73), all-cause mortality (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.35-1.40, p = 0.31), major vascular complications (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.33-1.67, p = 0.47) and acute kidney injury (RR: 0.74, 95% CI: 0.37-1.50, p = 0.40) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of CEP during TAVR was associated with lower risks of any stroke and disabling stroke with an NNT of 77 and 111, respectively.

Outcomes of Cerebral Embolic Protection for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Background There was limited high-quality evidence that illuminated the efficiency of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) use during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis. Methods and Results In this retrospective cohort study, patients with BAV stenosis undergoing TAVR with or without CEP were identified by querying the National Inpatient Sample database. The primary end point was any stroke during the hospitalization. The composite safety end point included any in-hospital death and stroke. We applied propensity score-matched analysis to minimize standardized mean differences of baseline variables and compare in-hospital outcomes. From July 2017 to December 2020, 4610 weighted hospitalizations with BAV stenosis undergoing TAVR were identified, of which 795 were treated with CEP. There was a significant increase in the CEP use rate for BAV stenosis (P-trend <0.001). A total of 795 discharges with CEP use were propensity score matched to 1590 comparable discharges but without CEP. CEP use was associated with a lower incidence of in-hospital stroke (1.3% versus 3.8%; P<0.001), which in multivariable regression was also independently associated with the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio=0.38 [95% CI, 0.18-0.71]; P=0.005) and the safety end point (adjusted odds ratio=0.41 [95% CI, 0.22-0.68] P=0.001). Meanwhile, no significant difference was found in the cost of hospitalization ($46 629 versus $45 147; P=0.18) or the risk of vascular complications (1.9% versus 2.5%; P=0.41). Conclusions This observational study supported CEP use for BAV stenosis, which was independently associated with less in-hospital stroke without burdening the patients with a high hospitalization cost.

Year in Review 2022: Noteworthy Literature in Cardiac Anesthesiology

Last year researchers made substantial progress in work relevant to the practice of cardiac anesthesiology. We reviewed 389 articles published in 2022 focused on topics related to clinical practice to identify 16 that will impact the current and future practice of cardiac anesthesiology. We identified 4 broad themes including risk prediction, postoperative outcomes, clinical practice, and technological advances. These articles are representative of the best work in our field in 2022.

Outcomes and predictors of periprocedural stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Risk factors for stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are currently incompletely understood.

PURPOSE

To identify possible predictors of early post-TAVI stroke and explore its short-term outcomes.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients (pts) submitted to TAVI between 2009 and 2020 in a tertiary center. Baseline characteristics, procedural information and stroke in first 30 days after TAVI were collected. In-hospital and 12 months outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 512pts (56,1% female, mean age of 82 ± 6years.) were included. In the first 30 days after TAVI 19pts (3,7%) had a stroke. In univariate analysis stroke was associated with higher body mass index (29 vs 27kg/m², p=0.035), higher triglyceridemia (> 117,5mg/dL, p=0,002), lower high-density lipoprotein (< 38,5mg/dL, p=0,009) and porcelain aorta (36,8% vs 15,5%, p=0,014) and more frequent use of post-dilatation (58,8% vs 32%, p=0,021). In multivariate analysis, triglycerides > 117,5mg/dL (p=0,032, OR = 3,751) and post-dilatation (p=0,019, OR = 3,694) were the independent predictors. Stroke after TAVI was associated with longer intensive care unit stay (12 vs 4 days, p<0,001) and post-TAVI hospital stay (25 vs 10 days, p<0,0001), higher intra-hospital mortality (21,1% vs 4,3%, p=0,003), cardiovascular 30-day mortality (15,8% vs 4,1%, p=0,026) and 1-year stroke (13,2% vs 1,1%, p=0,003).

CONCLUSION

Periprocedural and 30-day stroke is a relatively uncommon but potentially devastating complication after TAVI. In this cohort, 30-day stroke rate after TAVI was 3.7%. Hypertriglyceridemia and post-dilatation were found to be the only independent risk predictors. Outcomes after stroke, including 30-day mortality, were significantly worse.

Utility of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices in Transcatheter Procedures: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

With the emergence of the largest randomized control trial to date - the Stroke Protection With Sentinel During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (PROTECTED TAVR) study- we sought to conduct an updated meta-analyses to evaluate the utility of CEP devices on both clinical outcomes and neuroimaging parameters.

METHODS

Electronic databases were queried through November 2022 for clinical trials comparing the utility of Cerebral Embolic Protection (CEP) devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) with non-CEP TAVR procedures. Meta-analyses were performed using the generic inverse variance technique, and a random-effects model, and results are presented as weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous outcomes, and hazard ratios (HR) for dichotomous outcomes. Outcomes of interest included stroke, disabling stroke, non-disabling stroke, bleeding, mortality, vascular complications, new ischemic lesions, acute kidney injury (AKI) and total lesion volume.

RESULTS

13 studies (8 RCTs, 5 observational studies) consisting of 128,471 patients were included in the analysis. Results from our meta-analyses showed a significant reduction in stroke (OR: 0.84 [0.74 - 0.95]; P < 0.01; I² = 0%), disabling stroke (OR: 0.37 [0.21 - 0.67]; P < 0.01; I² = 0%) and bleeding events (OR: 0.91 [0.83 - 0.99]; P = 0.04; I² = 0%) through CEP device use in TAVR. The use of CEP devices had no significant impact on non-disabling stroke (OR: 0.94 [0.65 - 1.37]; P < 0.01; I² = 0%), mortality (OR: 0.78 [0.53 - 1.14]; P < 0.01; I² = 17%), vascular complications (OR: 0.99 [0.63 - 1.57]; P < 0.01; I² = 28%), AKI (OR: 0.78 [0.46 - 1.32]; P < 0.01; I² = 0%), new ischemic lesions (MD: -1.72 [-4.01, 0.57]; p < 0.001; I² = 95%) and total lesion volume (MD: -46.11 [-97.38, 5.16]; p < 0.001; I² = 81%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that CEP device use was associated with a lower risk of disabling stroke and bleeding events in patients undergoing TAVR.

TAVR in 2023: Who Should Not Get It?

Since the first transcatheter delivery of an aortic valve prosthesis was performed by Cribier et al in 2002, the picture of aortic stenosis (AS) therapeutics has changed dramatically. Initiated from an indication of inoperable to high surgical risk, extending to intermediate and low risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now an approved treatment for patients with severe, symptomatic AS across all the risk categories. The current evidence supports TAVR as a frontline therapy for treating severe AS. The crucial question remains concerning the subset of patients who still are not ideal candidates for TAVR because of certain inherent anatomic, nonmodifiable, and procedure-specific factors. Therefore, in this study, we focus on these scenarios and reasons for referring selected patients for surgical aortic valve replacement in 2023.

Vascular Access in Patients With Peripheral Arterial Disease Undergoing TAVR: The Hostile Registry

BACKGROUND

The optimal access route in patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains undetermined.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare clinical outcomes with transfemoral access (TFA), transthoracic access (TTA), and nonthoracic transalternative access (TAA) in TAVR patients with severe PAD.

METHODS

Patients with PAD and hostile femoral access (TFA impossible, or possible only after percutaneous treatment) undergoing TAVR at 28 international centers were included in this registry. The primary endpoint was the propensity-adjusted risk of 30-day major adverse events (MAE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), or main access site-related Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 major vascular complications. Outcomes were also stratified according to the severity of PAD using a novel risk score (Hostile score).

RESULTS

Among the 1,707 patients included in the registry, 518 (30.3%) underwent TAVR with TFA after percutaneous treatment, 642 (37.6%) with TTA, and 547 (32.0%) with TAA (mostly transaxillary). Compared with TTA, both TFA (adjusted HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.75) and TAA (adjusted HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) were associated with lower 30-day rates of MAE, driven by fewer access site-related complications. Composite risks at 1 year were also lower with TFA and TAA compared with TTA. TFA compared with TAA was associated with lower 1-year risk of stroke/TIA (adjusted HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.98), a finding confined to patients with low Hostile scores (P_interaction = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with PAD undergoing TAVR, both TFA and TAA were associated with lower 30-day and 1-year rates of MAE compared with TTA, but 1-year stroke/TIA rates were higher with TAA compared with TFA.

A Referral Center Experience with Cerebral Protection Devices: Challenging Cardiac Thrombus in the EP Lab

BACKGROUND

Cerebral protection devices (CPD) are designed to prevent cardioembolic stroke and most evidence that exists relates to TAVR procedures. There are missing data on the benefits of CPD in patients that are considered high risk for stroke undergoing cardiac procedures like left atrial appendage (LAA) closure or catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) when cardiac thrombus is present.

PURPOSE

This work aimed to examine the feasibility and safety of the routine use of CPD in patients with cardiac thrombus undergoing interventions in the electrophysiology (EP) lab of a large referral center.

METHODS

The CPD was placed under fluoroscopic guidance in all procedures in the beginning of the intervention. Two different CPDs were used according to the physician's discretion: (1) a capture device consisting of two filters for the brachiocephalic and left common carotid arteries placed over a 6F sheath from a radial artery; or (2) a deflection device covering all three supra-aortic vessels placed over an 8F femoral sheath. Retrospective periprocedural and safety data were obtained from procedural reports and discharge letters. Long-term safety data were obtained by clinical follow-up in our institution and telephone consultations.

RESULTS

We identified 30 consecutive patients in our EP lab who underwent interventions (21 LAA closure, 9 VT ablation) with placement of a CPD due to cardiac thrombus. Mean age was 70 ± 10 years and 73% were male, while mean LVEF was 40 ± 14%. The location of the cardiac thrombus was the LAA in all 21 patients (100%) undergoing LAA-closure, whereas, in the 9 patients undergoing VT ablation, thrombus was present in the LAA in 5 cases (56%), left ventricle (n = 3, 33%) and aortic arch (n = 1, 11%). The capture device was used in 19 out of 30 (63%) and the deflection device in 11 out of 30 cases (37%). There were no periprocedural strokes or transitory ischemic attacks (TIA). CPD-related complications comprised the vascular access and were as follows: two cases of pseudoaneurysm of the femoral artery not requiring surgery (7%), 1 hematoma at the arterial puncture site (3%) and 1 venous thrombosis (3%) resolved by warfarin. At long-term follow-up, 1 TIA and 2 non-cardiovascular deaths occurred, with a mean follow-up time of 660 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of a cerebral protection device prior to LAA closure or VT ablation in patients with cardiac thrombus proved feasible, but possible vascular complications needed to be taken into account. A benefit in periprocedural stroke prevention for these interventions seemed plausible but has yet to be proven in larger and randomized trials.

Continued non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists during transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

One-third of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have an indication for long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC).

AIMS

We aimed to investigate whether continued non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC) therapy compared with continued vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy during TAVI is equally safe and effective.  Methods: Consecutive patients on OAC with either NOAC or VKA undergoing transfemoral TAVI at five European centres were enrolled. The primary outcome measure was a composite of major/life-threatening bleeding, stroke, and all-cause mortality at 30 days.

RESULTS

In total, 584 patients underwent TAVI under continued OAC with 294 (50.3%) patients receiving VKA and 290 (49.7%) patients receiving NOAC. At 30 days, the composite primary outcome had occurred in 51 (17.3%) versus 36 (12.4%) patients with continued VKA and with continued NOAC, respectively (odds ratio [OR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43-1.07; p=0.092). Rates of major/life-threatening bleeding (OR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.52-1.47; p=0.606) and stroke (OR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.29-3.59; p=0.974) were not different between groups. In a multivariate Cox regression analysis, continued NOAC, compared with continued VKA, was associated with a lower risk for all-cause 1-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61, 95% CI: 0.37-0.98; p=0.043). The analysis of the propensity score-matched cohort revealed similar results.

CONCLUSIONS

Continued NOAC compared with continued VKA during TAVI led to comparable outcomes with regard to the composite outcome measure indicating that continued OAC with both drugs is feasible. These hypothesis-generating results need to be confirmed by a dedicated randomised controlled trial.

Iatrogenic Strokes and Covert Brain Infarcts After Percutaneous Cardiac Procedures: An Update

Millions of cardiac procedures are performed worldwide each year, making the potential complication of periprocedural iatrogenic stroke an important concern. These strokes can occur intraoperatively or within 30 days of a procedure and can be categorised as either overt or covert, occurring without obvious acute neurologic symptoms. Understanding the prevalence, risk factors, and strategies for preventing overt and covert strokes associated with cardiac procedures is imperative for reducing periprocedural morbidity and mortality. In this narrative review, we focus on the impacts of perioperative ischemic strokes for several of the most common interventional cardiac procedures, their relevance from a neurologic standpoint, and future directions for the care and research on perioperative strokes. Depending on the percutaneous procedure, the rates of periprocedural overt strokes can range from as little as 0.01% to as high as 2.9%. Meanwhile, covert brain infarctions (CBIs) occur much more frequently, with rates for different procedures ranging from 10%-84%. Risk factors include previous stroke, atherosclerotic disease, carotid stenosis, female sex, and African race, as well as other patient- and procedure-level factors. While the impact of covert brain infarctions is still a developing field, overt strokes for cardiac procedures lead to longer stays in hospital and increased costs. Potential preventative measures include screening and vascular risk factor control, premedicating, and procedural considerations such as the use of cerebral embolic protection devices. In addition, emerging treatments from the neurologic field, including neuroprotective drugs and remote ischemic conditioning, present promising avenues for preventing these strokes and merit investigation in cardiac procedures.

Clinical outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with TriGUARD 3™ cerebral embolic protection device

OBJECTIVE

Periprocedural stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a highly feared adverse event. The TriGUARD 3 cerebral embolic protection device (CEPD) may have the potential benefit of reduction of embolic events, but it still remains unclear whether it reduces the incidence of periprocedural stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). We aimed to investigate whether the latest TriGUARD 3 CEPD reduces the incidence of clinically overt stroke within 72 h or at discharge after TAVR.

METHODS

In this prospective single-center study 117 patients (mean age 80.3 years, 53.8 % male) were included from July 2020 to December 2021.

RESULTS

The primary efficacy endpoint of this study, periprocedural clinically overt stroke or TIA, within 72 h or at discharge after TAVR with the TriGUARD 3 CEPD occurred in 1/117 pts (0.8 %). Secondary endpoints (device related issues such as life-threatening or disabling bleeding, acute kidney injury, major vascular complications) were reported in 4/117 pts (3.4 %).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the use of the latest TriGUARD 3™ CEPD in transfemoral TAVR seems to be associated with a low rate of clinically overt stroke and a low rate of device related adverse events, reflecting "real world" TAVR practice. However these results should be hypothesis generating and confirmed in a large RCT.

Factors predicting the occurrence of aortic valve calcification in patients with coronary artery calcification in China

OBJECTIVES

In patients with coronary artery calcification (CAC), a predictor of adverse cardiovascular events, coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) also shows valvular calcification. In this study, we evaluated common clinical indicators in CAC patients with aortic (AoVC) and mitral valve (MVC) calcification.

METHODS

CAC and valvular calcification were quantified using the Agatston score in 636 hospitalised patients with CAC who underwent CCTA.

RESULTS

Valvular calcification was found in 30.5% of patients, with 25.2% (160 patients) showing AoVC. Age was an independent predictor of AoVC in both men (odds ratio (OR), 1.086; 95% confidence interval (CI), [1.054-1.119]; p < 0.001) and women (OR, 1.109; CI, [1.066-1.154]; p < 0.001). In men, we also found that a history of cerebral infarction was an independent predictor of AoVC (OR, 2.402; CI, [1.177-4.902]; p < 0.05). The independent predictors of AoVC in the 60- to 69-years age group were BMI (OR, 1.181; CI, [1.061-1.316]; p < 0.01) and history of cerebral infarction (OR, 3.187; CI, [1.283-7.919]; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Age is a key independent predictor of AoVC in CAC patients. History of cerebrovascular disease was also an independent predictor of AoVC, but only in men and patients aged 60-69 years. Our results indicate that a history of cerebral infarction may be used as a risk factor when identifying AoVC in patients with CAC.

The search for optimal antithrombotic therapy in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: facts and uncertainties

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive procedure, which is used frequently in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis. Most patients undergoing TAVI are over 80 years of age with a high bleeding as well as thrombotic risk. Despite the increasing safety of the procedure, thromboembolic events [stroke, (subclinical) valve thrombosis] remain prevalent. As a consequence, antithrombotic prophylaxis is routinely used and only recently new data on the efficacy and safety of antithrombotic drugs has become available. On the other hand, these antithrombotic drugs increase bleeding in a population with unique aortic stenosis-related bleeding characteristics (such as acquired von Willebrand factor defect and angiodysplasia). In this review, we discuss the impact of thromboembolic and bleeding events, the current optimal antithrombotic therapy based on registries and recent randomized controlled trials, as well as try to give a practical guide how to treat these high-risk patients. Finally, we discuss knowledge gaps and future research needed to fill these gaps.

A 20-year journey in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Evolution to current eminence

Since the first groundbreaking procedure in 2002, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis (AS). Through striking developments in pertinent equipment and techniques, TAVI has now become the leading therapeutic strategy for aortic valve replacement in patients with severe symptomatic AS. The procedure streamlining from routine use of conscious sedation to a single arterial access approach, the newly adapted implantation techniques, and the introduction of novel technologies such as intravascular lithotripsy and the refinement of valve-bioprosthesis devices along with the accumulating experience have resulted in a dramatic reduction of complications and have improved associated outcomes that are now considered comparable or even superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). These advances have opened the road to the use of TAVI in younger and lower-risk patients and up-to-date data from landmark studies have now established the outstanding efficacy and safety of TAVI in patients with low-surgical risk impelling the most recent ESC guidelines to propose TAVI, as the main therapeutic strategy for patients with AS aged 75 years or older. In this article, we aim to summarize the most recent advances and the current clinical aspects involving the use of TAVI, and we also attempt to highlight impending concerns that need to be further addressed.