The Prognostic Effects of Coronary Disease Severity and Completeness of Revascularization on Mortality in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Age Differences in Aortic Stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a significant and growing concern, with a prevalence of 2-3% in individuals aged over 65 years. Moreover, with an aging global population, the prevalence is anticipated to double by 2050. Indeed, AS can arise from various etiologies, including calcific trileaflets, congenital valve abnormalities (e.g., bicuspid and unicuspid valves), and post-rheumatic, whereby each has a distinct influence that shapes the onset and progression of the disease. The normal aortic valve has a trilaminar structure comprising the fibrosa, spongiosa, and ventricularis, which work together to maintain its function. In calcific AS, the disease begins with early calcification starting in high mechanical stress areas of the valve and progresses slowly over decades, eventually leading to extensive calcification resulting in impaired valve function. This process involves mechanisms similar to atherosclerosis, including lipid deposition, chronic inflammation, and mineralization. The progression of calcific AS is strongly associated with aging, with additional risk factors including male gender, smoking, dyslipidemia, and metabolic syndrome exacerbating the condition. Conversely, congenital forms of AS, such as bicuspid and unicuspid aortic valves, result in an earlier disease onset, typically 10-20 years earlier than that observed in patients with a normal tricuspid aortic valve. Rheumatic AS, although less common in developed countries due to effective antibiotic treatments, also exhibits age-related characteristics, with an earlier onset in individuals who experienced rheumatic fever in their youth. The only curative therapies currently available are surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, these options are sometimes too invasive for older patients; thus, management of AS, particularly in older patients, requires a comprehensive approach that considers age, disease severity, comorbidities, frailty, and each patient's individual needs. Although the valves used in TAVR demonstrate promising midterm durability, long-term data are still required, especially when used in younger individuals, usually with low surgical risk. Moreover, understanding the causes and mechanisms of structural valve deterioration is crucial for appropriate treatment selections, including valve selection and pharmacological therapy, since this knowledge is essential for optimizing the lifelong management of AS.

What Are SAVR Indications in the TAVI Era?

While surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has traditionally been regarded as the gold standard for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS), transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a compelling less invasive alternative for patients with severe AS across the entire surgical risk spectrum. Despite TAVI's increasing utilization and promising outcomes, SAVR continues to be an essential treatment modality for certain patient populations, including individuals with complex aortic anatomies unsuitable for TAVI, patients presenting with significant aortic regurgitation, individuals requiring concomitant surgical procedures, and cases involving infective endocarditis. Furthermore, concerns regarding the long-term durability and complication profile of transcatheter valves underscore the importance of individualized patient assessment, especially for younger patients requiring optimal lifetime management strategies. This review examines the evolving role of SAVR amidst the growing adoption of TAVI and highlights key considerations for selecting the most appropriate treatment strategy for patients with aortic valve disease, incorporating insights from recent advancements in transcatheter technologies and the latest clinical trial evidence.

Combined Minimally Invasive Surgical and Percutaneous Approaches for a Patient on Hemodialysis With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Complex Coronary Artery Disease

Patients on hemodialysis with concomitant severe aortic stenosis (AS) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) are at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Transsubclavian-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TSc-TAVI) is a well-established alternative approach to transfemoral TAVI for patients with unfavorable femoral access. Herein, we report a case in which minimally invasive surgical treatment and TSc-TAVI were performed simultaneously in a patient with severe AS and multivessel CAD undergoing hemodialysis. An 85-year-old man undergoing hemodialysis for end-stage renal disease owing to severe AS (mean pressure gradient, 46 mmHg; aortic valve area, 0.75 cm2; and left ventricular ejection fraction, 59%) presented to our hospital with chest pain on exertion. Preoperative coronary angiography revealed significant stenosis of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery and right coronary artery (RCA), requiring revascularization. However, the patient was not a good candidate for transfemoral TAVI because of a porcelain ascending aorta and a shaggy descending aorta observed on computed tomography. He was scheduled for concomitant right TSc-TAVI and minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS)-CABG after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the RCA. The treatment was successful. Simultaneous TSc-TAVI and MICS-CABG with PCI may be applied as a minimally invasive surgical treatment modality for patients with AS and CAD undergoing hemodialysis.

Management of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Review

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a viable treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis among all risk subsets. As TAVR use becomes more prevalent and patients live longer with their transcatheter valve, an increasing number of these patients can be expected to present with ACS. Overall, there is a paucity of high-quality data detailing incidence, pathophysiology, and management of ACS in this subset. While most ACS cases post-TAVR are Type II myocardial infarctions (MI), the incidence of Type I MI and ST-elevation myocardial infarction is not negligible. Additionally, ACS in TAVR patients is associated with poor outcomes. While medical management is similar in this cohort to non-TAVR patients, procedural issues pose a unique challenge, especially as related to coronary access in the presence of valve prosthesis. Despite the proven benefit of invasive therapies in the management of ACS in non-TAVR patients, administrative databases suggest a lower utilization of invasive therapies in this cohort, which may highlight a disparity in care and potential for improvement. In this review, we summarize available data regarding the incidence, pathophysiology, and management of ACS in TAVR patients as well as strategies for coronary access post-TAVR.

Timing and Outcomes of PCI in Conjunction With TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Valves

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is debatable.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes based on the timing of PCI in stable coronary artery disease patients undergoing TAVR.

METHODS

Leveraging the STS/ACC TVT Registry and Medicare Linkage, we analyzed patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing PCI and TAVR between 2015 and 2023 using the SAPIEN 3 balloon-expandable valve platform. This analysis included patients who underwent PCI within ±90 days of the index TAVR procedure. All-cause mortality, stroke, and a composite of mortality and stroke were analyzed up to 3 years using Medicare Linkage.

RESULTS

Of the 51,480 patients who underwent PCI and TAVR with SAPIEN 3 platforms during the study period, 84.7% had PCI within 90 days before TAVR, 13.9% had concomitant PCI, and 1.4% had PCI within 90 days after TAVR. In the propensity-matched analysis, patients undergoing PCI before TAVR had better outcomes in terms of all cause-mortality (38.1% vs 38.8%; P = 0.013) and a composite of mortality and stroke (42.8% vs 43.5%; P = 0.012) compared with the ones undergoing concomitant PCI at 3-year follow-up. Major vascular complications were higher in patients undergoing concomitant PCI and TAVR (2% vs 1.4%; P = 0.003) CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing concomitant PCI and TAVR had higher major vascular complications, and slightly higher composite of all-cause mortality and stroke compared with those who underwent PCI within 90 days before the TAVR procedure.

Clinical impact of complex percutaneous coronary intervention in the pre-TAVR workup

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the workup pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the clinical impact of coronary revascularization complexity remains unknown. This study sought to examine the impact of PCI complexity on clinical outcomes after TAVR in patients undergoing PCI in the preprocedural workup.

METHODS

This was a multicenter study including consecutive patients scheduled for TAVR with concomitant significant coronary artery disease. Complex PCI was defined as having at least 1 of the following features: 3 vessels treated, ≥ 3 stents implanted, ≥ 3 lesions treated, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, total stent length >60mm, or chronic total occlusion. The rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularization were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 1550 patients were included, of which 454 (29.3%) underwent complex PCI in the pre-TAVR workup. After a median follow-up period of 2 [1-3] years after TAVR, the incidence of MACE was 9.6 events per 100 patients-years. Complex PCI significantly increased the risk of cardiac death (HR, 1.44; 95%CI, 1.01-2.07), nonperiprocedural myocardial infarction (HR, 1.52; 95%CI, 1.04-2.21), and coronary revascularization (HR, 2.46; 95%CI, 1.44-4.20). In addition, PCI complexity was identified as an independent predictor of MACE after TAVR (HR, 1.31; 95%CI, 1.01-1.71; P=.042).

CONCLUSIONS

In TAVR candidates with significant coronary artery disease requiring percutaneous treatment, complex revascularization was associated with a higher risk of MACE. The degree of procedural complexity should be considered a strong determinant of prognosis in the PCI-TAVR population.

Aortic Stenosis and Coronary Artery Disease: Decision-Making Between Surgical and Transcatheter Management

Aortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist and share pathophysiological mechanisms. The proportion of patients with AS and CAD requiring revascularization varies widely because of uncertainty about best clinical practices. Although combined surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting has been the standard of care, management options in patients with AS and CAD requiring revascularization have expanded with the advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Potential alternative treatment pathways include revascularization before TAVR, concomitant TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention, percutaneous coronary intervention after TAVR and deferred percutaneous coronary intervention or hybrid procedures. Selection depends on underlying disease severity, antithrombotic treatment strategies, clinical presentation, and symptom evolution after TAVR. In patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement, the addition of coronary artery bypass grafting has been associated with improved long-term mortality, especially if CAD is complex. although it is associated with higher periprocedural risk. The therapeutic impact of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with TAVR is less well-established. The multitude of clinical permutations and remaining uncertainties do not support a uniform treatment strategy for patients with AS and CAD. Therefore, to provide the best possible care for each individual patient, heart teams need to be familiar with the available data on AS and CAD. Herein, we provide an in-depth review of the evidence supporting the decision-making process between transcatheter and surgical approaches and the key elements of treatment selection in patients with AS and CAD.

Coronary Artery Disease and Severe Aortic Stenosis: Contemporary Treatment Options for Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Approximately 50% of individuals eligible for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have coronary artery disease (CAD). The influence of CAD, both its prevalence and severity, on post-TAVI clinical results has yielded conflicting findings. Recent research has shown positive results for the use of computed tomography angiography and functional percutaneous evaluation of coronary lesions in the pre-TAVI assessment, besides the classic coronary angiography. As we anticipate the outcomes of current randomized studies, it has become common practice to perform invasive revascularization on TAVI patients with obstructive CAD. Furthermore, there is a lack of comprehensive data about the occurrence, features, and treatment of coronary incidents after TAVI. There is also growing concern about the possible difficulties in accessing the coronary arteries in patients who need coronary angiography with or without intervention after TAVI. This review presents a comprehensive analysis of the contemporary treatment options of CAD in patients undergoing TAVI. In this context, it examines the incidence of CAD in TAVI candidates; its clinical significance; the assessment and management of CAD before, concomitant, and after the procedure, including patients' unresolved concerns; and possible future aspects.

Eight-Year Outcomes of Patients With Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With a Self-Expanding Bioprosthesis

Data deriving from patients who underwent TAVR between 2007 and 2017 in 13 Italian centers were prospectively collected. Patients were stratified in those with normal LVEF and reduced LVEF. The latter was further classified according to ischemic or nonischemic etiology. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and rehospitalizations; the secondary end points were the isolated composers of the primary end point and cardiac death. Overall, 2,626 patients were included in the analysis: 68.1% with normal LVEF and 31.9% with reduced LVEF. At 8 years, reduced LVEF was significantly associated with the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.29). Consistent findings were evident for the composite end point. No differences in these trends were found at the 30-day landmark analyses. Compared with nonischemic etiology, ischemic reduced LVEF was associated with an increased risk of cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 2.02). In conclusion, patients with reduced LVEF who underwent TAVR are exposed to a progressively increased risk of death and rehospitalizations, even at very long-term follow-up.

Preprocedural assessment of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Rationale and design of the EASE-IT CT registry

BACKGROUND

Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the standard for pre-procedural assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, it requires hospitalization and can be associated with complications. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) may be a viable alternative to rule out prognostically relevant CAD.

METHODS

The EASE-IT CT Registry is an investigator-initiated, prospective, observational, multicentre pilot registry involving patients aged ≥75 years with severe aortic stenosis (AS) intended to implant a transcatheter heart valve (THV) of the SAPIEN family. A total of 150 patients will be recruited from four sites in Germany and Austria. The registry will consist of two prospective cohorts: the investigational CTA-only cohort and the CTA + ICA control cohort. The CTA-only cohort will enrol 100 patients in whom significant (≥50%) left main (LM) and/or proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) stenosis are ruled out on CTA. The CTA + ICA control cohort will enrol 50 patients who have undergone both CTA and ICA before TAVI and in whom ≥50% LM/proximal LAD stenosis has been ruled out by CTA. Three composite endpoints will be assessed at 3 months post-TAVI: CAD-specific endpoints, VARC-3-defined device success and early safety.

CONCLUSION

The EASE-IT CT Registry evaluates whether TAVI can be carried out safely without performing ICA if prognostically relevant CAD of the LM/proximal LAD is ruled out with CTA. If so, the omission of ICA would help streamline the pre-procedural workup of TAVI patients.

Prognostic implications of pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement computed tomography-derived coronary plaque characteristics and stenosis severity

OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) computed tomography angiography (CTA) in assessing physiological stenosis severity (CTA-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR)) and high-risk plaque characteristics (HRPC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Among TAVR patients who underwent pre-procedure CTA, the presence and number of HRPCs (minimum lumen area of < 4 mm2, plaque burden ≥ 70%, low-attenuating plaques, positive remodeling, napkin-ring sign, or spotty calcification) as well as CT-FFR were assessed. The risk of vessel-oriented composite outcome (VOCO, a composite of vessel-related ischemia-driven revascularization, vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death) was compared according to the number of HRPC and CT-FFR categories.

RESULTS

Four hundred and twenty-seven patients (68.4% were male) with 1072 vessels were included. Their mean age was 70.6 ± 10.6 years. Vessels with low CT-FFR (≤ 0.80) (41.7% vs. 15.8%, adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) 1.96; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.28-2.96; p = 0.001) or lesions with ≥ 3 HRPC (38.7% vs. 16.0%, HRadj 1.81; 95%CI 1.20-2.71; p = 0.005) demonstrated higher VOCO risk. In the CT-FFR (> 0.80) group, lesions with ≥ 3 HRPC showed a significantly higher risk of VOCO than those with < 3 HRPC (34.7% vs. 13.0%; HRadj 2.04; 95%CI 1.18-3.52; p = 0.011). However, this relative increase in risk was not observed in vessels with positive CT-FFR (≤ 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

In TAVR candidates, both CT-FFR and the presence of ≥ 3 HRPC were associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events. However, the value of HRPC differed with the CT-FFR category, with more incremental predictability among vessels with negative CT-FFR but not among vessels with positive CT-FFR.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

In transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates, pre-TAVR CTA provided the opportunity to assess coronary physiological stenosis severity and high-risk plaque characteristics, both of which are associated with worse clinical outcomes.

KEY POINTS

• The current study investigated the prognostic value of coronary physiology significance and plaque characteristics in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients. • The combination of coronary plaque vulnerability and physiological significance showed improved accuracy in predicting clinical outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients. • Pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement CT can be a one-stop-shop tool for coronary assessments in clinical practice.

Diagnostic accuracy of Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Murray law-based quantitative flow ratio (μQFR) is a novel computational method that enables accurate estimation of fractional flow reserve (FFR) using a single angiographic projection. However, its diagnostic value in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) remains unclear.

METHOD

We included 25 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe AS with intermediate or greater (30-90%) coronary artery disease (CAD). Pre- and post-TAVR μQFR, QFR, instantaneous flow reserve (iFR), and post-TAVR invasive FFR values were measured. We evaluated the diagnostic performance of pre-TAVR μQFR, QFR, and iFR using post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.80 as a reference standard of ischemia.

RESULT

Pre-TAVR μQFR was significantly correlated with post-TAVR FFR (r = 0.73, p < 0.0001). The area under the curve of pre-TAVR μQFR on post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.8 was 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-0.98), comparable to that of pre-TAVR iFR (0.86 [95% CI 0.71-0.98], p = 0.97). The accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values of pre-TAVR μQFR on post-TAVR FFR ≤ 0.8 were 84.2% (95% CI 68.7-93.4), 61.6% (95% CI 31.6-86.1), 96.0% (95% CI 79.6-99.9), 88.9% (95% CI 52.9-98.3), and 82.8% (95% CI 70.6-90.6), respectively. For pre-TAVR iFR, these values were 76.5% (95% CI 58.8-89.3), 90.9% (95% CI 58.7-99.8), 69.6% (95% CI 47.1-86.8), 58.8% (95% CI 42.8-73.1), and 94.1% (95% CI 70.8-99.1), respectively.

CONCLUSION

μQFR could be useful for the physiological evaluation of patients with severe AS with concomitant CAD.

Percutaneous coronary intervention before transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) who subsequently undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains uncertain. Therefore, we conducted this study to assess the association of PCI before TAVR with mortality and cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

We used the TriNetX database (Jan 2012 - Aug 2022) and grouped patients into PCI (3 months or less) before TAVR and no PCI. We performed propensity score matched (PSM) analyses for outcomes at 30 days and 1 year.

RESULTS

Of 17,120 patients undergoing TAVR, 2322 (14 %) had PCI, and 14,798 (86 %) did not have PCI before TAVR. In the PSM cohort (2026 patients in each group), PCI was not associated with lower all-cause mortality at 30 days (HR: 1.25, 95 % CI: 0.82-1.90) or 1 year (HR: 1.02, 95 % CI: 0.83-1.24). Frequency of repeat PCI after TAVR was low in both no PCI vs. PCI (2.4 % vs. 1.2 %) at 1 year; PCI was associated with a lower rate of repeat PCI (HR: 0.49, 95 % CI: 0.30-0.80). Sensitivity analysis revealed an E-value of 3.5 for repeat PCI (E-value for lower CI for HR: 1.81). PCI was not linked to reductions in MI, heart failure exacerbation, all-cause hospitalization, major bleeding, or permanent pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator.

CONCLUSION

This analysis showed that PCI prior to TAVR was not associated with improvement in all-cause mortality. However, PCI was associated with a reduced rate of repeat PCI at 1 year.

Natural History of Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The Role of Quantitative Flow Ratio

BACKGROUND

The prognostic impact of functionally significant coronary artery disease, as assessed with quantitative flow ratio (QFR), in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement is unknown.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study with blind analysis of angiographic data, enrolling consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement at 4 Italian centers. None of the patients enrolled received pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement or concomitant coronary revascularization, either for the absence of significant coronary stenoses or by clinical decision. Visual estimation of diameter stenosis and QFR analysis were performed in all coronary arteries. The end point was all-cause mortality at a 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 318 patients were enrolled. At visual estimation, 140 patients (44%) presented a diameter stenosis ≥50% in at least 1 coronary artery, whereas 78 patients (24.5%) had at least 1 vessel with QFR <0.80 and, therefore, included in the positive QFR group. Overall, 69 (21.7%) patients died during the follow-up. In the Kaplan-Meier analysis, patients with positive QFR experienced significantly higher rates of death during follow-up compared with those without (51.1% versus 12.1%; P<0.001), whereas no significant difference was evident in terms of death between patients with or without significant coronary artery disease according to angiographic evaluation (24.3% versus 19.7%; P=0.244). In a multivariate regression model, positive QFR was an independent predictor of all-cause death during follow-up (hazard ratio, 5.31 [95% CI, 3.21-8.76]).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary QFR can predict mortality in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement without revascularization.

Diagnostic performance of deep learning to exclude coronary stenosis on CT angiography in TAVI patients

We evaluated the diagnostic performance of a deep-learning model (DLM) (CorEx®, Spimed-AI, Paris, France) designed to automatically detect > 50% coronary stenosis on coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) images. We studied inter-observer variability as an additional aim. CCTA images obtained before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) were assessed by two radiologists and the DLM, and the results were compared to those of invasive coronary angiography (ICA) used as the reference standard. 165 consecutive patients underwent both CCTA and ICA as part of their TAVI work-up. We excluded the 42 (25.5%) patients with a history of stenting or bypass grafting and the 23 (13.9%) patients with low-quality images. We retrospectively subjected the CCTA images from the remaining 100 patients to evaluation by the DLM and compared the DLM and ICA results. All 25 patients with > 50% stenosis by ICA also had > 50% stenosis by DLM evaluation of CCTA: thus, the DLM had 100% sensitivity and 100% negative predictive value. False-positive DLM results were common, yielding a positive predictive value of only 39% (95% CI, 27-51%). Two radiologists with 3 and 25 years' experience, respectively, performed similarly to the DLM in evaluating the CCTA images; thus, accuracy did not differ significantly between each reader and the DLM (p = 0.625 and p = 0.375, respectively). The DLM had 100% negative predictive value for > 50% stenosis and performed similarly to experienced radiologists. This tool may hold promise for identifying the up to one-third of patients who do not require ICA before TAVI.

Evaluation of coronary disease among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: propensity score matching analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) is common among elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Current guidelines recommend performance of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of any > 70% proximal coronary lesions prior to TAVI.

AIMS

To evaluate the outcomes of two diagnostic approaches for CCS clearance pre-TAVI and to determine the reduction in the need of invasive angiography (IA).

METHODS

We investigated 2219 patients undergoing TAVI for severe aortic stenosis at two large centers with different pre-procedural strategies for CCS assessment: pre-TAVI computed tomography angiography (CTA) with selective invasive angiography according to CTA results or mandatory IA. We preformed propensity score matching analysis using a 1:1 ratio. The final study cohort included 870 matched patients. Peri-procedural complications were documented according to the VARC-2 criteria. Mortality rates were prospectively documented.

RESULTS

Mean age of the study population was 82 ± 7, of whom 55% were female. Patients in the IA group had significantly higher rates of pre-TAVI PCI compared to the CTA group (39% vs. 22%, p < 0.001). Following TAVI, peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI) rates were similar between the two groups (0.3% vs. 0.7%, p value = 0.41), but spontaneous MI were significantly lower among the IA group (0% vs. 1.3%, p value = 0.03). Kaplan-Meier's survival analysis found that the cumulative probability of 1-year morality was similar between the two groups (p value log rank = 0.65). Cox regression analysis did not find association between CCS clearance strategy and outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

In elderly patients, CTA-driven approach for CCS evaluation pre-TAVI is a valid strategy with similar outcome as compared to invasive approach. CTA strategy significantly reduces invasive procedures rates without compromising patient's outcome.

Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The importance of revascularisation of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unclear. Despite the lack of randomised controlled trials comparing different revascularisation strategies, guidelines currently recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with significant proximal CAD undergoing TAVI.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a systematic search was conducted to identify studies comparing TAVI with and without PCI in patients with significant CAD on pre-TAVI coronary angiography. Endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, stroke, myocardial infarction and major bleeding.

RESULTS

In total, 14 studies were included, involving 3838 patients, of whom 1806 (47%) underwent PCI before TAVI. All-cause mortality did not differ significantly between TAVI with and without preceding PCI at 30 days, 1 year and > 1 year. There were no significant differences in risk of cardiac death, stroke or myocardial infarction between the groups. However, TAVI performed with PCI resulted in a higher risk of major bleeding within 30 days after TAVI (odds ratio: 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.46-0.94).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with concomitant significant CAD who were treated with TAVI with and without preceding PCI at both short- and long-term follow-up. However, there was a higher risk of major bleeding at 30 days in patients undergoing TAVI with preceding PCI. In the context of serious risk of bias in the included studies, results of randomised controlled trials are warranted.

The Management of Coronary Artery Disease in TAVR Patients

About half of the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) recipients exhibit some degree of coronary artery disease (CAD), and controversial results have been reported regarding the impact of the presence and severity of CAD on clinical outcomes post-TAVR. In addition to coronary angiography, promising data has been recently reported on the use of both cardiac computed tomography angiography and the functional invasive assessment of coronary lesions whether by FFR or iFR in the work-up pre-TAVR. Despite mitigated available data, percutaneous revascularization of significant coronary lesions has been the routine strategy in TAVR candidates with CAD. Additionally, scarce data exists on the incidence, characteristics and management of coronary events post-TAVR, and increasing interest exists on the potential coronary access challenges in patients requiring coronary angiography/intervention post-TAVR. This review provides an updated overview of the knowledge of CAD in TAVR recipients, focusing on its prevalence, clinical impact, pre- and post-procedural evaluation and management.

Simultaneous hybrid off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting and transcatheter aortic valve implantation in elderly patients

Purpose

Optimal strategy for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) is unresolved. We evaluated the surgical outcomes of hybrid coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and TAVI in elderly patients.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated patients who underwent simultaneous TAVI and CABG at Wakayama Medical University, Japan. All patients underwent off-pump CABG (OPCAB) including minimally invasive cardiac surgery (MICS-CABG). In an earlier period, OPCAB + transfemoral TAVI (TF-TAVI) was the only method used, while in a later period, we introduced MICS-CABG and alternative approaches for TAVI.

Results

Twenty-seven patients were enrolled, the average age was 83.6 ± 5.1 years. In the MICS-CABG and TAVI group, average patient age was higher (87.0 ± 3.1 years) than in the earlier group. Thirty-day and in-hospital mortalities were zero. Incomplete revascularization rate was 33.3% and one patient required percutaneous coronary intervention after the operation. Graft patency rate was 100%. In MICS-CABG group, the number of distal anastomoses was smaller (1.29, range 1-2), but the number of days required to re-starting walking and postoperative hospital stay were shorter, and the rate of discharge to home was higher (100%) than in the other groups.

Conclusions

Although 33.3% of patients did not achieve complete revascularization, there was no 30-day or in-hospital mortality. TAVI and hybrid OPCAB, including MICS-CABG, were suggested to be feasible treatment in elderly patients.

Prognostic impact of coronary lesions and its revascularization in a 5-year follow-up after the TAVI procedure

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a common finding in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, its prognostic significance and its management remains controversial.

AIMS

This study sought to determine whether the presence of CAD, its complexity, and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are associated with outcomes after TAVI.

METHODS

All patients undergoing TAVI at a tertiary referral center between 2008 and 2018 were included in a prospective observational study. Baseline SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (SS) and a residual SS after PCI were calculated. The endpoints on the 5 year follow-up were all-cause mortality and a composite of mayor cardiovascular adverse events (MACE).

RESULTS

In 379 patients, the presence of CAD and its complexity were not significantly associated with worse 5-year survival after TAVI, with a mortality for SS0 of 45%; for SS 1-22 of 36.5% (HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.53-1.11, p = 0.15) and for SS > 22 of 42.1% (HR 1.24; 95% CI 0.59-2.63, p = 0.57). Regarding the combined event of MACE, there were also no statistically significant differences between patients with CAD and without CAD (56.8% in patients without CAD and 54.9% in patients with CAD; HR 1.06; 95% CI 0.79-1.43, p = 0.7). Angiography-guided PCI or completeness of revascularization was not associated with different outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

In the present analysis, neither the presence nor the extent of CAD, nor the degree of revascularization, was associated with a prognostic impact in patients undergoing TAVI at 5-year follow-up.

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.

TAVR Interventions and Coronary Access: How to Prevent Coronary Occlusion

Due to technological advancements during the past 20 years, transcatheter aortic valve replacements (TAVRs) have significantly improved the treatment of symptomatic and severe aortic stenosis, significantly improving patient outcomes. The continuous evolution of transcatheter valve models, refined imaging planning for enhanced accuracy, and the growing expertise of technicians have collectively contributed to increased safety and procedural success over time. These notable advancements have expanded the scope of TAVR to include patients with lower risk profiles as it has consistently demonstrated more favorable outcomes than surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). As the field progresses, coronary angiography is anticipated to become increasingly prevalent among patients who have previously undergone TAVR, particularly in younger cohorts. It is worth noting that aortic stenosis is often associated with coronary artery disease. While the task of re-accessing coronary artery access following TAVR is challenging, it is generally feasible. In the context of valve-in-valve procedures, several crucial factors must be carefully considered to optimize coronary re-access. To obtain successful coronary re-access, it is essential to align the prosthesis with the native coronary ostia. As part of preventive measures, strategies have been developed to safeguard against coronary obstruction during TAVR. One such approach involves placing wires and non-deployed coronary balloons or scaffolds inside an at-risk coronary artery, a procedure known as chimney stenting. Additionally, the bioprosthetic or native aortic scallops intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction (BASILICA) procedure offers an effective and safer alternative to prevent coronary artery obstructions. The key objective of our study was to evaluate the techniques and procedures employed to achieve commissural alignment in TAVR, as well as to assess the efficacy and measure the impact on coronary re-access in valve-in-valve procedures.

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.

Management of coronary artery disease in patients with aortic stenosis in the era of transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common valve disorder among the elderly, and these patients frequently have concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). Risk factors for calcific AS are similar to those for CAD. Historically, the treatment of these conditions involved simultaneous surgical replacement of the aortic valve (AV) with coronary artery bypass grafting. Since the advancement of transcatheter AV therapies, there have been tremendous advancements in the safety, efficacy, and feasibility of this procedure with expanding indications. This has led to a paradigm shift in our approach to the patient with AS and concomitant CAD. Data regarding the management of CAD in patients with AS are largely limited to single-center studies or retrospective analyses. This article aims to review available literature around the management of CAD in patients with AS and assist in the current understanding in approaches toward management.

Gender Differences in the Impact of Coronary Artery Disease and Complete Revascularization on Long-Term Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

In this study, we compare gender-specific clinical outcomes. We show that outcomes among women after transcatheter aortic valve implantation are significantly influenced by co-existing coronary artery disease (CAD) and its complexity, whereas in men, this is less pronounced. Moreover, we identified a subgroup of women with complex CAD who are at particularly high risk for fatal cardiovascular events, even when compared with men with similar CAD.

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.

New adverse coronary events in valve-in-valve TAVR and native TAVR—A 2-year matched cohort

Objective

To assess the incidence of new adverse coronary events (NACE) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and valve-in-valve TAVR (ViV-TAVR).

Background

ViV-TAVR is an accepted treatment for degenerative prostheses among patients with high surgical-risk. TAVR studies have suggested an increased risk of coronary artery obstruction and flow stasis causing thrombus formation. Whether contemporary ViV-TAVR is associated with higher rate of coronary events compared to TAVR is unknown.

Methods

We used data from 1,224 TAVR patients between 2016 and 2021. We propensity-matched patients following ViV-TAVR and TAVR by significant predictors to overcome confounders in patients' baseline characteristics and procedural factors.

Results

The matched population included 129 patients in each group. In line with prior reports, there was a higher in-hospital coronary artery obstruction rate with ViV-TAVR (3.1 vs. 1.6%; p = 0.23). Despite this, 2-year cumulative NACE rates were similar between groups (4.7 vs. 6.2%, respectively, p = 0.79), with no difference between its components: myocardial infarction (MI) (p = 0.210), unplanned coronary catheterization (p = 0.477), or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (p = 0.998). Moreover, hypoattenuated leaflets thickening (HALT) at 30-day CT was observed in nearly a quarter of the patients with no difference between groups (23.9 vs. 23.1%, HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.50–1.28, p = 0.872). The progression rate of the coronary artery calcium score (CACS), assessed in a third of patients, was similar between groups (p log-rank = 0.468, 95% CI 0.12–1.24). Low coronary artery height was an unfavorable predictor for in-hospital coronary obstruction and 2-year NACE rate (HR 1.20 and HR 1.25, p = 0.001 and p < 0.0001, respectively).

Conclusion

At 2-year follow-up, ViV-TAVR was not associated with a higher rate of myocardial infarction, unplanned catheterization, coronary artery bypass grafting, or hypoattenuated leaflet thickening.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients undergoing robotic totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass: A case series

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been utilized to treat patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Recent trials suggest comparable efficacy compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Robotic off-pump totally endoscopic coronary artery bypass graft surgery (TECAB) had been shown to be a minimally invasive revascularization strategy with clinical results comparable to traditional coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG). Traditionally, pre-surgical coronary evaluation is considered necessary to optimize coronary revascularization at the time of AVR. The 2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients with Valvular Disease gives a moderate recommendation, based on limited data, for CABG at the time of AVR in patients with significant coronary artery disease (CAD). This paper presents two patients with known significant CAD awaiting robotic TECAB who were treated with TAVR, prior to surgical revascularization. Robotic TECAB is unique in that it offers patients the ability to have complete coronary revascularization without a sternotomy and with early ambulation, discharge, and recovery. The case series demonstrates a hybrid approach that offers complete sternotomy sparing cardiovascular care to treat severe symptomatic AS and CAD. Since patients with severe aortic stenosis are at high risk of developing cardiac arrest and cardiogenic shock upon induction of anesthesia, the ability to treat severe symptomatic AS with TAVR under conscious sedation prior to TECAB can be considered as a safe an effective treatment.

The Effect of Coronary Lesion Complexity and Preprocedural Revascularization on 5-Year Outcomes After TAVR

BACKGROUND

Aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coincide. However, the management of coexisting CAD in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine whether the presence of CAD, its complexity, and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are associated with outcomes after TAVR.

METHODS

All patients undergoing TAVR at a tertiary referral center between 2008 and 2020 were included in a prospective observational study. Baseline SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score (SS) and, whenever applicable, a residual SS after PCI were calculated. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the effect of CAD, stratified according to complexity, and PCI on 5-year outcomes.

RESULTS

In 604 patients, the presence of CAD and its complexity were significantly associated with worse 5-year survival (SS 0: 67.9% vs SS 1-22: 56.1% vs SS >22: 53.0%; log-rank P = 0.027) and increased cardiovascular mortality (SS 0: 15.1% vs SS 1-22: 24.0% vs SS >22: 27.8%; log-rank P = 0.024) after TAVR. Having noncomplex CAD (SS 1-22) was an independent predictor for increased all-cause mortality (HR: 1.43; P = 0.046), while complex CAD (SS >22) increased cardiovascular mortality significantly (HR: 1.84; P = 0.041). Angiography-guided PCI or completeness of revascularization was not associated with different outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of CAD and its anatomical complexity in patients undergoing TAVR are associated with significantly worse 5-year outcomes. However, angiography-guided PCI did not improve outcomes, highlighting the need for further research into physiology-guided PCI.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Pre-TAVR: Current State of the Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review intends to give an up-to-date overview of the current state of evidence in the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), focusing on percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) pre-TAVR.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recently published ACTIVATION trial is the 1st randomized trial comparing coronary revascularization (PCI) versus medical treatment in patients with significant CAD undergoing TAVR. With the caveat of several major limitations of the trial, the results of this study raised the question about the appropriateness of the common practice to routinely revascularize coronary stenosis before TAVR. Aortic valve stenosis is the most common valvular heart disease among the elderly and it often co-occurs with CAD. TAVR is increasingly considered an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement not only in the elderly population but also in younger and lower-risk patients. The impact of co-existing CAD on clinical outcomes as well as the optimal timing of PCI in TAVR candidates is still unclear and the subject of ongoing randomized trials. Meanwhile, it is common practice in many centers to routinely perform invasive coronary angiography and PCI for significant coronary disease as part of the TAVR workup. While computed tomography angiography has emerged as a possible alternative to the invasive coronary angiography in patients with low pre-test probability for CAD, the value of functional invasive assessment of coronary lesions in the pre-TAVR setting has still to be clarified. Also, there is an increasing interest in the clinical relevance and optimal management of the potentially challenging coronary access post-TAVR, requiring further research.

Antithrombotic Therapy Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Due to a large technical improvement in the past decade, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded to lower-surgical-risk patients with symptomatic and severe aortic stenosis. While mortality rates related to TAVR are decreasing, the prognosis of patients is still impacted by ischemic and bleeding complications, and defining the optimal antithrombotic regimen remains a priority. Recent randomized control trials reported lower bleeding rates with an equivalent risk in ischemic outcomes with single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) when compared to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients without an underlying indication for anticoagulation. In patients requiring lifelong oral anticoagulation (OAC), the association of OAC plus antiplatelet therapy leads to a higher risk of bleeding events with no advantages on mortality or ischemic outcomes. Considering these data, guidelines have recently been updated and now recommend SAPT and OAC alone for TAVR patients without and with a long-term indication for anticoagulation. Whether a direct oral anticoagulant or vitamin K antagonist provides better outcomes in patients in need of anticoagulation remains uncertain, as recent trials showed a similar impact on ischemic and bleeding outcomes with apixaban but higher gastrointestinal bleeding with edoxaban. This review aims to summarize the most recently published data in the field, as well as describe unresolved issues.

Coronary Artery Disease in Patients Undergoing Transvalvular Aortic Valve Implantation

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is common in patients with severe aortic stenosis. With the advent of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) as a therapeutic option, management of CAD in such patients has undergone a revolution. Younger patients are now candidates for treatment, and have a greater life-time probability of requiring post-TAVI coronary access. Considerations include pre-procedural assessment and revascularisation, procedural planning to avoid coronary obstruction as well as optimisation of post-procedural coronary access. The authors review the challenges of managing CAD in TAVI patients, shed light on the evidence base, and provide guidance on how to optimise management.

Revascularization in the Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Population

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a standard treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Management of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) in these patients remains controversial with no randomized clinical trials to guide decision making in this cohort. The role of CAD in TAVR has been difficult to evaluate given the current heterogeneity in defining CAD, and the used methods to assess CAD. Subsequently, the role of coronary revascularization remains individualized and assessed on a case-by-case basis by the heart team. In this article, the authors discuss the rationale and prognostic role of CAD in patients undergoing TAVR.

Variation of computed tomographic angiography-based fractional flow reserve after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify the impact of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on changes of fractional flow reserve computed tomography (FFR_CT) values and the associated clinical impact.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was done with CT obtained pre-TAVI, prior to hospital discharge and at 1-year follow-up, which provided imaging sources for the calculation of FFR_CT values based on an online platform.

RESULTS

A total of 190 patients were enrolled. Patients with pre-procedural FFR_CT value > 0.80 (i.e., negative) and ≤ 0.80 (i.e., positive) demonstrated a significantly opposite change in the value after TAVI (0.8798 vs. 0.8718, p < 0.001 and 0.7634 vs. 0.8222, p < 0.001, respectively). The history of coronary artery disease (CAD) was identified as an independent predictor for FFR_CT changing from negative to positive after TAVI (odds ratio [OR] 2.927, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.130-7.587, p = 0.027), with lesions more severely stenosed (OR 1.039, 95% CI 1.003-1.076, p = 0.034) and in left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) (OR 3.939, 95% CI 1.060-14.637, p = 0.041) being prone to change.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI directly brings improvement in FFR_CT values in patients with compromised coronary flow. Patients with a history of CAD, especially with lesions more severely stenosed and in LAD, were under risk of FFR_CT changing from negative to positive after TAVI.

KEY POINTS

•The effect of TAVI on coronary hemodynamics might be influenced by different ischemic severity and coronary territories reflected by FFR_CT values. •As different FFR_CT variations did not impact outcomes of TAVI patients, AS, but not coronary issues, may be the primary problem to affect, which needs further validation.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Patients: Overview and Practical Management

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is present in 40-75% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Currently, the indication for TAVI is expanding toward younger patients at lower surgical risk. Given the progressive nature of CAD, the necessity for coronary angiography (CA), including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), will subsequently increase as in the future TAVI patients will be younger and have a longer life expectancy. Data on the impact of PCI in patients with severe CAD scheduled for TAVI are controversial, and although European and US guidelines recommend PCI before TAVI, the optimal timing for PCI remains unclear due to a lack of evidence. Depending on the valve type, position, and axial alignment of the implanted device, CA and/or PCI after TAVI can be challenging. Hence, every interventionalist should be familiar with the different types of transcatheter heart valves and their characteristics and technical issues that can arise during invasive coronary procedures. This review provides an overview of current data regarding the prevalence and clinical implications of CAD and PCI in TAVI patients and includes useful guidance for practical management in the clinical routine.

Outcome of Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Normal Coronary Arteries Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Coronary artery disease and severe aortic stenosis (AS) often coexist. This study sought to investigate the impact of normal coronary arteries as negative risk marker in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Consecutive patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI were dichotomized according to the presence or absence of normal coronary arteries, defined as absence of coronary lesions with diameter stenosis ≥30% in vessels ≥1.5 mm in diameter on coronary angiogram in patients without prior coronary revascularization. The primary end point was 1-year mortality. Out of 987 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI, 258 (26%) patients had normal coronary arteries. These patients were younger, more likely women, and had lower EuroSCORE II and STS risk scores. Although mortality at 30 days was similar in the normal coronary artery and the coronary atherosclerosis groups (3.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.11), it was lower in those with normal coronary arteries at 1 year (8.9% vs 17%, p = 0.003). In multivariable analysis, the presence of normal coronary arteries on coronary angiogram independently predicted 1-year mortality (adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.90, p = 0.02). In conclusion, this study defined normal coronary arteries as negative risk marker in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI.

Aortic Valve Disease and Associated Complex CAD: The Interventional Approach

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is highly prevalent in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). The management of CAD is a central aspect of the work-up of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but few data are available on this field and the best percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice is yet to be determined. A major challenge is the ability to elucidate the severity of bystander coronary stenosis independently of the severity of aortic valve stenosis and subsequent impact on blood flow. The prognostic role of CAD in patients undergoing TAVI is being still debated and the benefits and the best timing of PCI in this context are currently under evaluation. Additionally, PCI in the setting of advanced AS poses some technical challenges, due to the complex anatomy, risk of hemodynamic instability, and the increased risk of bleeding complications. This review aims to provide a comprehensive synthesis of the available literature on myocardial revascularization in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI. This work can assist the Heart Team in individualizing decisions about myocardial revascularization, taking into account available diagnostic tools as well as the risks and benefits.

The International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery Expert Consensus Statement on Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Propensity-Matched Studies

OBJECTIVE

There is an increasing amount of evidence supporting use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for treatment of aortic stenosis in patients at low or intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). TAVR is now approved for use in all patient cohorts. Despite this, there remains debate about the relative efficacy of TAVR compared with SAVR in lower-risk cohorts and various subgroups of patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched trials to guide a consensus among expert cardiologists and surgeons.

METHODS

Studies comparing TAVR and SAVR in low- and intermediate-risk patients were identified by a thorough search of the major databases. Mortality, stroke, and other perioperative outcomes were assessed at 30 days and 1 year.

RESULTS

Early mortality was lower in TAVR compared to SAVR in RCTs, but not propensity-matched studies in low-risk cohorts (0.66% vs 1.5%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20 to 0.98, I² = 0%). No difference in mortality between TAVR and SAVR was identified in intermediate-risk patients at early or later time points. Incidence of perioperative stroke in 3 low-risk RCTs was significantly lower in TAVR (0.4%) than SAVR (1.4%; OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.81, I² = 0%). There was no difference in stroke for intermediate-risk patients between TAVR and SAVR. The expert panel of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons provided recommendations for TAVR and SAVR in various clinical scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

In RCTs comparing TAVR and SAVR in low-risk patients, early mortality and stroke were lower in TAVR, but did not differ at 1 year. There was no difference in mortality and stroke in intermediate-risk patients. The Multidisciplinary Heart Team must consider individual patient characteristics and preferences when recommending TAVR or SAVR. The decision must consider the long-term management of each patient's aortic valve disease.