Meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves

Raphe-Type Bicuspid Aortic Valve as a Risk Factor for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Failure: Improving Outcomes Using the LIRA Method and the Medtronic FX Prosthesis

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and raphe-type bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is still associated with poor outcomes in terms of increased risk of paravalvular regurgitation, stroke, and permanent pacemaker implantation. There is no definitive consensus on the optimal sizing method for prosthesis selection in this setting. The LIRA method is a supra-annular tailored sizing method specifically designed for bicuspid anatomy that might increase accuracy of prosthesis choice in BAV patients and improve TAVR outcomes. This is the first report of the combination of the novel LIRA method for prosthesis sizing together with the adoption of the technological improvements introduced by the Evolut FX prosthesis as a useful tool for improving outcomes in this high risk subgroup of patients.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis-We Need a Well-Designed Randomized Control Trial

Bicuspid aortic stenosis is a common pathology, typically seen in patients a decade younger than those with tricuspid valves. Surgical aortic valve replacement has been the mainstay treatment for bicuspid disease, especially considering the prevalence of concomitant aortic aneurysmal pathology. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has shown equivalent results in bicuspid compared to tricuspid pathology in highly selected patient populations in single-arm registries and observational studies. For older patients with favorable bicuspid pathology, TAVR is reasonable. However, as younger patients with longer life expectancy are now being treated with TAVR, what is "best" is a question only answered by a well-designed randomized controlled trial. Herein, we describe the current evidence for treating bicuspid aortic stenosis and provide a framework for future trials. Yet, the question of equipoise remains, and who will we enroll?

ESC/EACTS vs. ACC/AHA guidelines for the management of severe aortic stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a serious and complex condition, for which optimal management continues to evolve rapidly. An understanding of current clinical practice guidelines is critical to effective patient care and shared decision-making. This state of the art review of the 2021 European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery Guidelines and 2020 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Guidelines compares their recommendations for AS based on the evidence to date. The European and American guidelines were generally congruent with the exception of three key distinctions. First, the European guidelines recommend intervening at a left ventricular ejection fraction of 55%, compared with 60% over serial imaging by the American guidelines for asymptomatic patients. Second, the European guidelines recommend a threshold of ≥65 years for surgical bioprosthesis, whereas the American guidelines employ multiple age categories, providing latitude for patient factors and preferences. Third, the guidelines endorse different age cut-offs for transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement, despite limited evidence. This review also discusses trends indicating a decreasing proportion of mechanical valve replacements. Finally, the review identifies gaps in the literature for areas including transcatheter aortic valve implantation in asymptomatic patients, the appropriateness of Ross procedures, concomitant coronary revascularization with aortic valve replacement, and bicuspid AS. To summarize, this state of the art review compares the latest European and American guidelines on the management of AS to highlight three areas of divergence: timing of intervention, valve selection, and surgical vs. transcatheter aortic valve replacement criteria.

Patients with Bicuspid Aortopathy and Aortic Dilatation

(1) Background: Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most frequent congenital cardiac disease. Alteration of ascending aorta diameter is a consequence of shear stress alterations due to haemodynamic abnormalities developed from inadequate valve cusp coaptation. (2) Objective: This narrative review aims to discuss anatomical, pathophysiological, genetical, ultrasound, and radiological aspects of BAV disease, focusing on BAV classification related to imaging patterns and flux models involved in the onset and developing vessel dilatation. (3) Methods: A comprehensive search strategy was implemented in PubMed from January to May 2022. English language articles were selected independently by two authors and screened according to the following criteria. (4) Key Contents and Findings: Ultrasound scan is the primary step in the diagnostic flowchart identifying structural and doppler patterns of the valve. Computed tomography determines aortic vessel dimensions according to the anatomo-pathology of the valve. Magnetic resonance identifies hemodynamic alterations. New classifications and surgical indications derive from these diagnostic features. Currently, indications correlate morphological results, dissection risk factors, and genetic alterations. Surgical options vary from aortic valve and aortic vessel substitution to aortic valve repair according to the morphology of the valve. In selected patients, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has an even more impact on the treatment choice. (5) Conclusions: Different imaging approaches are an essential part of BAV diagnosis. Morphological classifications influence the surgical outcome.

Safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in stenotic bicuspid aortic valve compared to tricuspid aortic valve: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to surgical replacement for tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis. However, utilization of TAVI for aortic stenosis in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) compared to TAV remains controversial.

METHODS

We queried online databases with various keywords to identify relevant articles. We compared major cardiovascular events and procedural outcomes using a random effect model to calculate odds ratios (OR).

RESULTS

We included a total of 22 studies comprising 189,693 patients (BAV 12,669 vs. TAV 177,024). In the pooled analysis, there were no difference in TAVI for BAV vs. TAV for all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), vascular complications, acute kidney injury (AKI), coronary occlusion, annulus rupture, and reintervention/reoperation between the groups. The incidence of stroke (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.1-1.39), paravalvular leak (PVLR) (OR 1.42; 95% CI 1.26-1.61), and the need for pacemaker (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.06-1.26) was less in the TAV group compared to the BAV group, while incidence of life-threatening bleeding was higher in the TAV group. Subgroup analysis mirrored pooled outcomes except for all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSION

The use of TAVI for the treatment of aortic stenosis in selective BAV appears to be safe and effective.

Emergency TAVI in cardiogenic shock and cardiorenal syndrome secondary to severe bicuspid aortic stenosis

A 78-year man with severe aortic stenosis awaiting elective surgical aortic valve replacement presented with worsening New York Heart Association IV shortness of breath. Despite appropriate heart failure treatment, he deteriorated and developed cardiogenic shock and cardiorenal syndrome which progressed despite inotropic support. A non-contrast-gated CT coronary angiogram was arranged in light of acute renal failure which revealed a bicuspid aortic valve. Three-dimensional transoesophageal echocardiography guidance was used to assist annulus sizing. An emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement (eTAVI) was carried out 5 days into admission with a 34 mm Core Valve Evolut Pro valve with a no contrast technique. The patient's blood pressure and urine output improved and no procedural complications were encountered. He was discharged after 21 days and has remained well subsequently. This case highlights the utility of eTAVI and demonstrates the feasibility of a no contrast approach.

Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Stenotic Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valve

Most of the trials investigating the role of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) across various strata of risk categories have excluded patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis (BAS) due to its anatomical complexities. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis with meta-regression of studies comparing clinical, procedural, and after-procedural echocardiographic outcomes in BAS versus tricuspid aortic stenosis (TAS) patients who underwent TAVI. We searched the PubMed and Cochrane databases for relevant articles from the inception of the database to October 2019. Continuous and categorical variables were pooled using inverse variance and Mantel-Haenszel method, respectively, using the random-effect model. To rate the certainty of evidence for each outcome, we used the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) approach. Nineteen articles were included in the final analysis. There was no difference in the risk of 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, 30-day cardiovascular mortality, major and/or life-threatening bleeding, major vascular complications, acute kidney injury, permanent pacemaker implantation, device success, annular rupture, after-procedural aortic valve area, and mean pressure gradient between the 2 groups. BAS patients who underwent TAVI had a higher risk of 30-day stroke, conversion to surgery, need for second valve implantation, and moderate to severe paravalvular leak. In conclusion, the present meta-analysis supports the feasibility of TAVI in surgically ineligible patients with BAS. However, the incidence of certain procedural complications such as stroke, conversion to surgery, second valve implantation, and paravalvular leak is higher among BAS patients compared with TAS patients, which must be discussed with the patient during the decision-making process.

2020 ACC/AHA Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

This executive summary of the valvular heart disease guideline provides recommendations for clinicians to diagnose and manage valvular heart disease as well as supporting documentation to encourage their use.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from January 1, 2010, to March 1, 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Reports, and other selected database relevant to this guideline. Structure: Many recommendations from the earlier valvular heart disease guidelines have been updated with new evidence and provides newer options for diagnosis and treatment of valvular heart disease. This summary includes only the recommendations from the full guideline which focus on diagnostic work-up, the timing and choice of surgical and catheter interventions, and recommendations for medical therapy. The reader is referred to the full guideline for graphical flow charts, text, and tables with additional details about the rationale for and implementation of each recommendation, and the evidence tables detailing the data considered in developing these guidelines.

Prognostic impact of electrocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy following transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) develops with both structural and electrical remodeling in response to elevated afterload due to aortic stenosis (AS). This study evaluated the prognostic value of electrocardiographic LVH (ECG LVH) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS

A retrospective study including 157 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR was conducted. ECG LVH was defined as Sokolow-Lyon voltage (S in V₁ + R in V_5/6) before TAVR was ≥3.5mV. We investigated the association between ECG LVH and the 1-year composite outcome comprising all-cause death and rehospitalization related to heart failure. ECG and echocardiographic measurements at 1, 6, and 12 months after TAVR were assessed.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics were comparable between the ECG LVH (n = 74) and non-ECG LVH groups (n = 83). The ECG LVH was associated with a significantly greater reduction of Sokolow-Lyon voltage and LV mass index than the non-ECG LVH after TAVR. The absence of ECG LVH was an independent predictor of the 1-year composite outcome [adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 2.27; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.01 - 5.60; p = 0.04]. Furthermore, a reduction of Sokolow-Lyon voltage from baseline to 1-month follow-up, but not a reduction of LV mass index, was associated with a lower cumulative composite outcome from 1 month to 1 year (adjusted HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15 - 0.86; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

ECG LVH was associated with a low incidence of adverse clinical outcomes and greater reverse LV remodeling after TAVR. Preprocedural and serial LVH assessment by ECG might be useful in AS patients undergoing TAVR.

Transcatheter aortic valve resection: new mechanical devices

Background

To improve periprocedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), transcatheter mechanical resection devices were tested for prior ablation of the aortic cusps.

Methods

Three mechanical transcatheter resection devices were tested in a series of native porcine (n=30) and reassembled calcified human valves (n=54). The resection time, the resected valve area, the number of released cusps, and the degree of surrounding tissue damage were measured. Afterwards, postmortem transapical-transcatheter-resections of the aortic valve in two humans were performed.

Results

In the native porcine hearts, the Aesculap II device demonstrated significantly shorter resection time compared to the R&R II and the Randstad devices (6.5±2.0 vs. 28.6±24.1 vs. 23.3±14.4 sec; P=0.001). However, it created more lesions in the surrounding tissue (P=0.002). The R&R II achieved a smaller number of resected cusps than the other two devices (2.7±0.7 vs. 1.1±0.7 vs. 2.4±0.5; P<0.001, respectively). It also resected a smaller area of the aortic valve (306.5±149.2 vs. 106.7±29.6 vs. 256.8±81.3 mm2; P=0.09) but a larger mean area of the resected fragments (110.3±41.5 vs. 160.7±29.6 vs. 111.5±43.9 mm2; P=0.01). The resection of the reassembled human valves demonstrated the same results between the devices regarding resection time (P=0.001) and resected area (P=0.016), but not fragment sizes (P=0.610). Finally, transapical-transcatheter-resection of aortic valve was performed in two cadavers.

Conclusions

Transcatheter aortic valve resection is feasible with variable aortic leaflet resection times and mild risk of lesions of the surrounding tissue.

Comparison of Clinical and Echocardiographic Features of Asymptomatic Patients With Stenotic Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valves

The clinical and imaging differences between bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients with medically managed asymptomatic moderate-to-severe aortic stenosis (AS) have not been studied previously. We aim to characterize these differences and their clinical outcomes in this study. A retrospective observational study was conducted on 836 consecutive cases of isolated asymptomatic moderate-to-severe AS, with median follow-up of 3.4 years. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were compared between BAV and TAV patients. Subgroup analysis stratified by AS severity were performed. Survival analysis of all-cause mortality was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model. Compared to BAV patients, TAV patients were older (76 ± 11 vs 55 ± 16 years, p <0.001) and had more co-morbidities including hypertension (78% vs 56%; p <0.001), diabetes (41% vs 24%; p <0.001), and chronic kidney disease (20% vs 3%; p = 0.001). TAV patients had less severe aortic valve disease than BAV patients, with a higher aortic valve area index (0.71 ± 0.20 cm²/m² vs 0.61 ± 0.18 cm²/m², p <0.001) and less aortic dilation (sinotubular junction: 23.7 ± 4.0 mm vs 26.9 ± 4.8 mm, p <0.001; mid-ascending aorta: 31.4 ± 4.7 mm vs 36.3 ± 6.3 mm, p <0.001). TAV patients were more likely to have eccentric left ventricular hypertrophy and less likely to have a normal geometry (p = 0.003). Competing risk analysis identified increased age (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.05, p <0.001) and LVEF (hazard ratio 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.97 to 0.99, p <0.001) as independent risk factors of all-cause mortality. Valve morphology was not a significant independent risk factor for aortic valve replacement or mortality. In conclusion, asymptomatic TAV patients had more cardiovascular risk factors, less severe aortic valve disease, less sinotubular and mid-ascending aortic dilation, more severe LV remodeling.

High-intensity transient signals during transcatheter aortic valve implantation assessed by ultrasonic carotid artery blood-flow monitoring: A single center prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

No reports to date have assessed the procedural patterns of high-intensity transient signals (HITS) by monitoring blood flow in cervical arteries. The aim of this study was to examine the sequential distribution of HITS in each procedural phase and predictive factors for HITS during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) by monitoring blood flow in the common carotid artery.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included 73 patients who underwent TAVI via the transfemoral artery approach. We continuously evaluated and analyzed HITS from administration of heparin to valve implantation.

RESULTS

HITS peaked during balloon valvuloplasty (BAV), amounting to almost 30% of the total HITS count, followed by valve implantation [BAV 141 (73-186) and valve implantation 86 (64-126), respectively]. In univariate and multivariate analysis, the Agatston score of the aortic valve and low-density lipoprotein were confirmed as independent predictors of HITS frequency with logarithmically converted coefficients of 0.00015 (p < 0.001) and 0.0032 (p = 0.027), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These results provide the first evidence that micro-emboli deriving from calcified burden were scattered primally during BAV, followed by valve implantation. The Agatston score may be a predictor for the amount of HITS.

Network Analysis of Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Stenotic Bicuspid Aortic Valves According to Valve Type

BACKGROUND

It is currently unknown if outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) differ according to the prosthetic valve deployed in patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV).

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated valve-specific outcomes post-TAVR in patients with BAV.

METHODS

Literature search was performed using the Cochrane databases, PubMed, ClinicalTrials, SCOPUS and EMBASE databases from inception until July 2018. We computed risk ratios and their 95% confidence intervals for all outcomes of interest. For each outcome, the data were pooled using a multivariate random-effects meta-analysis including multiple treatment as well as direct and indirect comparisons.

RESULTS

Ten studies enrolling a total of 1547 BAV patients undergoing TAVR using 6 different prosthetic valve types were analyzed. There were no significant differences in 30-day all-cause mortality, life-threatening bleeding and device success among the diverse prosthetic valve types implanted. However, 2nd generation balloon-expandable valves had consistently lower risk of moderate-to-severe prosthetic valve regurgitation.

CONCLUSION

In patients with BAV, there were no significant differences in 30-day all-cause mortality after TAVR among the various prosthetic valve types.

Significance of echocardiographic evaluation for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is widely accepted as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS). Existing scientific evidence demonstrates that TAVI is superior to SAVR, and it is expected that indications for the clinical applications of TAVI will be expanded in the future. Echocardiography plays a key role in perioperative assessment of patients undergoing TAVI. Preprocedural echocardiographic evaluation is important to determine the severity of AS in addition to patients' anatomical suitability for TAVI. Furthermore, echocardiography is essential for intraoperative guidance, assessment of complications, postoperative evaluation, and prognostic prediction. Inaccurate echocardiographic measurements and evaluation can lead to less-than-optimal/inappropriate treatment strategies in patients with AS. Therefore, a thorough understanding of the limitations of echocardiographic evaluation is important. This review summarizes the role of echocardiographic evaluation in patients undergoing TAVI.