Assessment, treatment, and prognostic implications of CAD in patients undergoing TAVI

Influence of physiological patterns of coronary disease on fractional flow reserve and instantaneous wave-free ratio changes in patients undergoing TAVI

BACKGROUND

Inconsistent variations of hyperaemic and resting physiology indexes have been reported between pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the predominant physiological pattern of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (SAS) undergoing TAVI and assess its impact on fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) variations between pre- and post-TAVI.

METHODS

Patients with SAS and CAD undergoing FFR and iFR assessment before and after TAVI were included. Vessels were categorized based on FFR and iFR tertiles of change. Longitudinal vessel analysis using Murray's law-based quantitative flow ratio (μFR) was performed. Disease pattern was considered focal with μFR-pullback pressure gradient index (μFR-PPGi) ≥0.78, and local disease severity was stratified by instantaneous μFR gradient per unit length (dμFR/ds) with a value of 0.025/mm.

RESULTS

In total, 136 vessels (67 patients) were assessed with μFR, having paired pre- and post-TAVI FFR and iFR. μFR-PPGi was 0.73 ± 0.13, with 60.3 % showing diffuse CAD. dμFR/ds was 0.03 ± 0.03/mm, with 27.2 % having a major gradient. Vessels with decreased FFR post-TAVI had lower pre-TAVI FFR and higher dμFR/ds compared to stable or increased FFR vessels. iFR changes were unpredictable; both decreased and increased iFR vessels post-TAVI had lower pre-TAVI FFR and iFR values and showed major dμFR/ds gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

In SAS patients undergoing TAVI, diffuse CAD without major gradients was the predominant physiological pattern. Post-TAVI, FFR typically decreased in vessels with major focal gradients, while iFR changes were more unpredictable.

Comparative Analysis of PCI Strategies in Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing TAVI: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been increasingly used in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Since coronary artery disease (CAD) is common among these patients, it is crucial to choose the best method and timing of revascularization. This study aims to compare different timing strategies of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI to clarify whether PCI timing affects the patients' outcomes or not.

METHODS

A frequentist network meta-analysis was conducted comparing three different revascularization strategies in patients with CAD undergoing TAVI. The 30-day all-cause mortality, in-hospital mortality, all-cause mortality at 1 year, 30-day rates of myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major bleeding, and the need for pacemaker implantation at 6 months were analyzed in this study.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis revealed that PCI during TAVI had higher 30-day mortality (RR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.40-4.32) and in-hospital mortality (RR = 1.70, 95% CI = [1.08-2.69]) compared to no PCI. Post-TAVI PCI was associated with higher 1-year mortality compared to other strategies. While no significant differences in major bleeding or stroke were observed, PCI during TAVI versus no PCI (RR = 3.63, 95% CI = 1.27-10.43) showed a higher rate of 30-day MI.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that among patients with severe AS and CAD undergoing TAVI, PCI concomitantly with TAVI seems to be associated with worse 30-day outcomes compared with no PCI. PCI after TAVI demonstrated an increased risk of 1-year mortality compared to alternative strategies. Choosing a timing strategy should be individualized based on patient characteristics and procedural considerations.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention before or after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Involving 1531 Patients

Background: The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is not well established. In this meta-analysis, we aimed to compare the outcomes of patients undergoing PCI before versus after TAVR. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was performed including Medline, Embase, and Cochrane electronic databases up to 5 April 2024 for studies that compared PCI before and after TAVR reporting at least one clinical outcome of interest (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023470417). The analyzed outcomes were mortality, stroke, and myocardial infarction (MI) at follow-up. Results: A total of 3 studies involving 1531 patients (pre-TAVR PCI n = 1240; post-TAVR PCI n = 291) were included in this meta-analysis following our inclusion criteria. Mortality was higher in the pre-TAVR PCI group (OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.19-5.20; p = 0.02). No differences were found between PCI before and after TAVR for the risk of stroke (OR: 3.58; 95% CI: 0.70-18.15; p = 0.12) and MI (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.30-1.42; p = 0.29). Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed in patients with stable CAD undergoing TAVR that PCI after TAVR is associated with lower mortality compared with PCI before TAVR.

Computed tomography imaging in preprocedural planning of transcatheter valvular heart interventions

Cardiac Computed Tomography (CCT) has become a reliable imaging modality in cardiology providing robust information on the morphology and structure of the heart with high temporal and isotropic spatial resolution. For the past decade, there has been a paradigm shift in the management of valvular heart disease since previously unfavorable candidates for surgery are now provided with less-invasive interventions. Transcatheter heart valve interventions provide a real alternative to medical and surgical management and are often the only treatment option for valvular heart disease patients. Successful transcatheter valve interventions rely on comprehensive multimodality imaging assessment. CCT is the mainstay imaging technique for preprocedural planning of these interventions. CCT is critical in guiding patient selection, choice of procedural access, device selection, procedural guidance, as well as allowing postprocedural follow-up of complications. This article aims to review the current evidence of the role of CCT in the preprocedural planning of patients undergoing transcatheter valvular interventions.

Chronological vs Biological Age in Interventional Cardiology: A Comprehensive Approach to Care for Older Adults: JACC Family Series

Aging is the gradual decline in physical and physiological functioning leading to increased susceptibility to stressors and chronic illnesses, including cardiovascular disease. With an aging global population, in which 1 in 6 individuals will be older than 60 years by 2030, interventional cardiologists are increasingly involved in providing complex care for older individuals. Although procedural aspects remain their main clinical focus, interventionalists frequently encounter age-associated risks that influence eligibility for invasive care, decision making during the intervention, procedural adverse events, and long-term management decisions. The unprecedented growth in transcatheter interventions, especially for structural heart diseases at extremes of age, have pushed age-related risks and implications for cardiovascular care to the forefront. In this JACC state-of-the-art review, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the aging process as it relates to cardiovascular interventions, with special emphasis on the difference between chronological and biological aging. The authors also address key considerations to improve health outcomes for older patients during and after their invasive cardiovascular care. The role of "gerotherapeutics" in interventional cardiology, technological innovation in measuring biological aging, and the integration of patient-centered outcomes in the older adult population are also discussed.

A randomised multicentre study of angiography- versus physiologyguided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing TAVI: design and rationale of the FAITAVI trial

The treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AVS) eligible for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is not supported by clinical evidence, and the role of physiology over anatomy as well as the timing of coronary intervention are not defined. FAITAVI (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03360591) is a nationwide prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled study comparing the angiography-guided versus the physiology-guided coronary revascularisation strategy in patients with combined significant CAD and severe AVS undergoing TAVI. Significant CAD will be defined as coronary stenosis ≥50%, as assessed by visual estimation in vessels ≥2.5 mm. Physiology will be tested by fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). The study will be conducted at 15 sites in Italy. In the angiography arm, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) will be performed either before TAVI, during the TAVI procedure - before or after the valve implantation - or within 1 month±5 days of the valve implantation, left to the operator's decision. In the physiology arm, FFR and iFR will be performed before TAVI, and PCI will be indicated for FFR ≤0.80, otherwise the intervention will be deferred. In case of borderline values (0.81-0.85), FFR and iFR will be repeated after TAVI, with PCI performed when needed. With a sample size of 320 patients, the study is powered to evaluate the primary endpoint (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, major bleeding, or ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation). TAVI indication, strategy and medical treatment will be the same in both groups. After discharge, patients will be contacted at 1, 6, 12 and 24 months after the procedure to assess their general clinical status, and at 12 months for the occurrence of events included in the primary and secondary endpoints. FAITAVI is the first randomised clinical trial to investigate "optimal" percutaneous coronary intervention associated with TAVI in patients with severe AVS and CAD.

Effectiveness of Pre-TAVR CTA as a Screening Tool for Significant CAD Before TAVR

BACKGROUND

Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) are routinely performed before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to assess aortic root anatomy and screen for coronary artery disease (CAD), respectively.

OBJECTIVES

This study explored the efficacy of CTA as a screening tool for significant proximal CAD before TAVR.

METHODS

With proper ethical oversight, patients undergoing TAVR at Cleveland Clinic with a preprocedural CTA and invasive coronary angiography (ICA), and no prior percutaneous intervention, were identified from 2015 to 2021. Blinded to ICA results, the authors reviewed the left main, proximal left anterior descending coronary artery, proximal left circumflex coronary artery, and proximal right coronary artery by CTA coronary reconstruction to assess for nonsignificant stenosis (0% to 49%), moderate stenosis (50% to 69%), and severe stenosis (≥70%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Cohen Kappa statistic were analyzed.

RESULTS

2,217 patients (53.4% male, age 79.2 ± 8.5 years) met inclusion criteria. CTA evaluation revealed a sensitivity of 90%, specificity of 92%, PPV of 74%, and NPV of 97% for detecting ≥50% stenosis. Using a ≥70% stenosis cutoff, evaluation revealed a sensitivity of 91%, specificity of 97%, PPV of 83%, and NPV of 99%. Assessment of bypass graft patency revealed a sensitivity of 86%, specificity of 97%, PPV of 84%, and NPV of 98%. Cohen Kappa analysis indicated substantial to near perfect agreement between pre-TAVR CTA and ICA.

CONCLUSIONS

Pre-TAVR CTA has a high NPV for high-grade proximal stenosis of each coronary artery. As a result, CTA can be used as a screening tool to rule out significant proximal CAD in patients undergoing TAVR.

Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Long-Term Outcomes

Background

The long-term outcomes of patients undergoing functional assessment of coronary lesions with fractional flow reserve (FFR) while awaiting transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are unknown. Data on the safety of intracoronary adenosine use in this setting are scarce. The objectives of this study were to describe (1) the long-term outcomes based on the coronary artery disease (CAD) assessment strategy used and (2) the safety of intracoronary adenosine in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).

Methods

1023 patients with severe AS awaiting TAVI were included. Patients were classified according to their CAD assessment strategy: angiography guided or FFR guided. Patients were further subdivided according to the decision to proceed with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): angiography-guided PCI (375/1023), angiography-guided no-PCI (549/1023), FFR-guided PCI (50/1023), and FFR-guided no-PCI (49/1023). Patients were followed up for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs).

Results

At a mean follow-up of 33.7 months, we observed no significant differences in terms of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in the angiography-guided group (42.4%) compared with the FFR-guided group (37.4%) (p = 0.333). When comparing outcomes of the FFR-guided no-PCI group (32.7%) with the angiography-guided PCI group (46.4%), no significant difference was noted (p = 0.999). Following intracoronary adenosine, a single adverse event occurred.

Conclusions

In this population, intracoronary adenosine is safe and well tolerated. We found no significant benefit to an FFR-guided strategy compared with an angiography-guided strategy with respect to MACCEs. Although clinically compelling, avoiding the procedural risks of PCI by deferring the intervention in functionally insignificant lesions failed to show a statistically significant benefit.

Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in collaboration with the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery

Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is a frequent finding in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and the management of these two conditions becomes of particular importance with the extension of the procedure to younger and lower-risk patients. Yet, the preprocedural diagnostic evaluation and the indications for treatment of significant CAD in TAVI candidates remain a matter of debate. In this clinical consensus statement, a group of experts from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery aims to review the available evidence on the topic and proposes a rationale for the diagnostic evaluation and indications for percutaneous revascularisation of CAD in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter treatment. Moreover, it also focuses on commissural alignment of transcatheter heart valves and coronary re-access after TAVI and redo-TAVI.

Optimal timing for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The best timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients undergoing TAVI is unknown. Most PCI are performed before TAVI, because of concerns about potential ischemic complications during valve implantation. In this study we aimed to compare short-and long-term outcomes of patients undergoing PCI before or after TAVI.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TAVI and PCI from 2010 to 2021 were analyzed. PCI was defined as high-risk when involving unprotected left main, proximal left anterior descending, proximal dominant right coronary artery or 3-vessel disease. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of any TAVI procedural complication and in-hospital adverse events (VARC-3 criteria).

RESULTS

Out of 1162 patients, 144 underwent PCI, 68% after TAVI, 78.4% of which were at high-risk. The primary endpoint occurred in 28.4% of patients in PCI pre-TAVI group vs 21.4% in PCI post-TAVI group (p = 0.403) and in 34.4% vs 17.3% of patients respectively among high-risk patients (p = 0.075). A higher rate of stroke was observed in the PCI pre-TAVI group regardless of the PCI complexity (6.5% vs 0.0%, p = 0.031; 9.3% vs 0.0% p = 0.025 in the high-risk group). At 24 months, MACCE-free survival was lower in patients who underwent PCI before TAVI (84.4% vs 97.9%, adjusted HR 10.16, 95% CI 1.19-86.57, p = 0.019; and 84.4% vs 97.3%, adjusted HR 7.34 95% CI 0.78-62.28 p = 0.082 in the high-risk group).

CONCLUSIONS

PCI performed after TAVI does not expose patients to higher risks of peri-procedural hazards and provides a trend towards favourable clinical outcome at mid-to-long term.

Impact of extent of coronary artery disease and percutaneous revascularization assessed by the SYNTAX score on outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the study was to analyze the impact of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) assessed by the SYNTAX score (SS) and periprocedural percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

Due to controversial data regarding the effect of CAD on outcomes after TAVR, proper revascularization strategies remain a matter of debate.

METHODS

553 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR were included in this study. SS was calculated for each patient at baseline and after PCI. Primary outcome was one-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

60.2% of patients (N = 333) exhibited CAD with a mean SS of 10.8 ± 8.8. Of those, 120 patients (36.0%) received periprocedural PCI. In the treatment group, mean SS was decreased from 14.9 ± 9.1 to 6.3 ± 6.7. Patients with concomitant CAD suffered more frequently from myocardial infarction (MI) post TAVR compared to those without CAD (2.1% vs. 0.0%; P < 0.01). In the CAD cohort, MI rates were comparable between patients with and without PCI (2.2% vs. 2.5%; P = 0.71). Regarding SS, patients with a residual SS < 8 showed significant lower rates of one-year mortality (9.0% vs. 18.2%; P = 0.016) and MACCE (16.5% vs. 32.2%; P = 0.001). Besides left bundle brunch, predictors for an increased one-year mortality were a residual SS ≥ 8 in the CAD group (OR = 3.17; P = 0.011) and a EuroSCORE ≥ 4% in the entire study population (OR = 2.18; P = 0.017).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a residual SS-guided revascularization strategy may improve prognosis after TAVR in patients with concomitant CAD. PCI aiming for a residual SS < 8 was associated with improved one-year clinical outcomes.

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.

Unplanned Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization After TAVR: A Multicenter International Registry

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the incidence and causes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at different time periods following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic stenosis frequently coexist, but the optimal management of CAD following TAVR remains incompletely elucidated.

METHODS

Patients undergoing unplanned PCI after TAVR were retrospectively included in an international multicenter registry.

RESULTS

Between July 2008 and March 2019, a total of 133 patients (0.9%; from a total cohort of 15,325) underwent unplanned PCI after TAVR (36.1% after balloon-expandable bioprosthesis, 63.9% after self-expandable bioprosthesis). The median time to PCI was 191 days (interquartile range: 59 to 480 days). The daily incidence of PCI was highest during the first week after TAVR and then declined over time. Overall, the majority of patients underwent PCI due to an acute coronary syndrome, and specifically 32.3% had non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 15.4% had unstable angina, 9.8% had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and 2.2% had cardiac arrest. However, chronic coronary syndromes are the main indication beyond 2 years. PCI success was reported in almost all cases (96.6%), with no significant differences between patients treated with balloon-expandable and self-expandable bioprostheses (100% vs. 94.9%; p = 0.150).

CONCLUSIONS

Unplanned PCI after TAVR is rare, with an incidence declining over time after TAVR. The main indication to PCI is acute coronary syndrome in the first 2 years after TAVR, and thereafter chronic coronary syndromes become prevalent. Unplanned PCIs are frequently successfully performed after TAVR, with no apparent differences between balloon-expandable and self-expandable bioprostheses. (Revascularization After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation [REVIVAL]; NCT03283501).

Quantitative flow ratio as a new tool for angiography-based physiological evaluation of coronary artery disease: a review

The functional evaluation of coronary stenoses has obtained important clinical results in recent years, resulting in strong guideline recommendations. Nonetheless, the use of coronary wire-based functional evaluation has not yet become part of the routine in catheterization laboratories for several reasons, including the need to advance a wire into the coronary vessel to interrogate the stenosis. Angiography-derived indexes have been introduced to expand the current use of physiology to estimate the functional meaning of a stenosis on the basis of angiographic data only. The most studied and validated angiography-derived index is certainly the quantitative flow ratio. This article will summarize the basics of the quantitative flow ratio, the related validation studies and its current and future applications.

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.

Computed Tomography Angiography for the Diagnosis of Coronary Artery Disease Among Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background

Computed tomography angiography (CTA) is used to plan TAVI procedures. We investigated the performance of pre-TAVI CTA for excluding coronary artery disease (CAD).

Methods

In total 127 patients were included. CTA images were analyzed for the presence of ≥ 50% (significant CAD) and ≥ 70% (severe CAD) diameter stenoses in proximal coronary arteries. Results were compared with invasive coronary angiography (ICA) at vessel and patient levels. Primary endpoint was the negative predictive value (NPV) of CTA for the presence of CAD.

Results

A total of 342 vessels were analyzable. NPV of CTA was 97.5% for significant CAD and 96.3% for severe CAD. Positive predictive value and accuracy were 44.8% and 87.1% for significant CAD and 56.3% and 94.4% for severe CAD. At patient level, NPV for significant CAD was 88.6%.

Conclusion

Pre-TAVI CTA shows good performance for ruling out CAD and could be used as a gatekeeper for ICA in selected patients.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12265-021-10099-8.

Utility of Routine Invasive Coronary Angiography Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Despite the high prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), the optimal management of concomitant CAD, including revascularization before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), remains controversial. Contemporary, real-world practice patterns have not yet been described. We aimed to characterize the burden of CAD in contemporary TAVR patients and evaluate revascularization practices at a high-volume center.

METHODS/MATERIALS

We retrospectively analyzed all adult patients referred for TAVR at our center between January 2019 and January 2020. Presence of significant CAD and subsequent management were recorded. Presenting symptoms, use of non-invasive and invasive ischemia testing, and pre-TAVR computed tomography (CT) imaging were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 394 patients with severe AS were referred for TAVR. Thirty-nine patients (9.9%) instead underwent surgery, of whom only 5 (1.3%) received coronary artery bypass grafting. Of the remaining 355 patients, 218 patients (61.4%) had insignificant CAD. Of the 137 patients (38.6%) with significant CAD, only 30 (8.5%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Of these, less than half had anginal symptoms, a third had CAD in proximal segments, and a third underwent ischemia testing before PCI. Pre-TAVR CT accurately identified significant CAD in 28/30 patients (93.3%) who underwent PCI.

CONCLUSIONS

Only 1 in 25 contemporary TAVR patients had significant CAD and angina requiring intervention, calling into question the utility of routine invasive coronary angiography before TAVR. A Heart Team approach integrating anginal symptoms, ischemia testing and possibly pre-TAVR CT is needed to guide the need, timing, and strategy of revascularization.

Overview of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Optical Flow Ratio in the Assessment of Intermediate Coronary Lesions

Fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves clinical outcome compared with angiography-guided PCI. Advances in computational technology have resulted in the development of solutions, enabling fast derivation of FFR from imaging data in the catheterization laboratory. The quantitative flow ratio is currently the most validated approach to derive FFR from invasive coronary angiography, while the optical flow ratio allows faster and more automation in FFR computation from intracoronary optical coherence tomography. The use of quantitative flow ratio and optical flow ratio has the potential for swift and safe identification of lesions that require revascularization, optimization of PCI, evaluation of plaque features, and virtual planning of PCI.

Management of Coronary Artery Disease in the Setting of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently co-exist, as they share a common pathophysiology and risk factors. Due to lack of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and exclusion of significant CAD in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) trials, the optimal method of revascularisation of CAD in patients undergoing TAVR remains unknown. Observational studies and meta-analyses have shown varied results in outcomes for patients with CAD undergoing TAVR, and no significant difference in post-TAVR outcomes in patients who underwent revascularisation either prior to or during TAVR versus those who did not. However, some observational studies have shown that patients with lower residual SYNTAX score (rSS) post-revascularisation have better outcomes post-TAVR compared to those with higher rSS. RCTs are needed to clearly understand whether revascularisation is beneficial in these patients. Until then, management of CAD in patients undergoing TAVR must be individualised based on discussion with the heart team.

Impact of Coronary Artery Severity and Revascularization Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

The prevalence of coexisting coronary artery disease (CAD) is high in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Our objective was to first determine if the severity of CAD before TAVI had an important impact on post-TAVI outcomes and second, if revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) before TAVI modified this relation. In this retrospective population-based study in Ontario, Canada, we identified all patients with obstructive CAD who underwent TAVI from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017. Our primary outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality within 30-day and 1-year post-TAVI procedure. Secondary outcomes included 30-day and 1-year all-cause readmissions. We developed multivariable Cox proportional hazard models, with a robust sandwich-type variance estimator to account for clustering within TAVI centers. These models included an interaction term between severity of CAD and PCI before TAVI. The study cohort included 888 of whom 444 (50%) patients underwent PCI before TAVI procedure. In the Cox models, we found that severity of CAD before TAVI was not significantly associated with post-TAVI outcomes. The only exception was 1 to 2 vessel/s disease which was a significant predictor of 1-year readmission. Pre-TAVI PCI was not significantly associated with outcomes, nor did it modify the relation between severity of CAD pre-TAVI and outcomes. In conclusion, we did not find a consistent relation between severity of CAD and revascularization with post-TAVI outcomes.

[The optimal work-up before TAVI]

The number of TAVI procedures is rapidly increasing owing to the extension of indications. Procedural and long-term success warrant appropriate patient selection and rigorous preparation of the procedure during the pre-TAVI work-up. The aims of this work-up are several: validation of the indication, feasibility and safety of the procedure, selection of the prosthesis and of the route, anticipation of technical challenges. The CT-scan is the cornerstone of this assessment allowing for valve and vascular access appraisal. The geriatric evaluation remains important in the elderly, frail, high-risk patients. The assessment of cardiac and extracardiac comorbidities is systematic and may be incorporated into dedicated risk scores to improve the prediction of post-TAVI outcomes; this should be the basis of the decision-making process by the Heart Team.

Physiological Versus Angiographic Guidance for Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation is uncertain. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has never been clinically validated in aortic stenosis. The study aim was to analyze the clinical outcome of FFR-guided revascularization in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Methods and Results Patients with severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease at coronary angiography were included in this retrospective analysis and divided in 2 groups: angiography guided (122/216; 56.5%) versus FFR-guided revascularization (94/216; 43.5%). Patients were clinically followed up and evaluated for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 2-year follow-up. Most lesions in the FFR group resulted negative according to the conventional 0.80 cutoff value (111/142; 78.2%) and were deferred. The FFR-guided group showed a better major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event-free survival compared with the angio-guided group (92.6% versus 82.0%; hazard ratio, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-1.0; P=0.035). Patients with deferred lesions based on FFR presented better outcome compared with patients who underwent angio-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (91.4% versus 68.1%; hazard ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1-0.6; P=0.001). Conclusions FFR guidance was associated with favorable outcome in this observational study in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Randomized trials are needed to investigate the long-term effects of FFR-guided revascularization against angiographic guidance alone in patients with aortic stenosis.

Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the management of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, and indications are expanding towards treating younger patients with lower-risk profiles. Given the progressive nature of coronary artery disease and its high prevalence in those with severe aortic stenosis, coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention will become increasingly necessary in patients after TAVR. There are some data suggesting that there are technical difficulties with coronary re-engagement, particularly in patients with self-expanding valves that, by design, extend above the coronary ostia. The authors review the challenges of coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention post-TAVR and examine the geometric interactions between currently approved transcatheter aortic valves and coronary ostia, while providing a practical guide on how to manage these potentially complex situations.

The Influence of Aortic Valve Obstruction on the Hyperemic Intracoronary Physiology: Difference Between Resting Pd/Pa and FFR in Aortic Stenosis

The reliability of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in aortic stenosis (AS) has been questioned because of the uncertain response to vasodilators. A retrospective multicenter cohort of 114 AS patients who underwent coronary physiology assessment was compared with 154 controls before and after propensity matching adjustment. The difference between resting distal coronary vs aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) and FFR (ΔPd/Pa-FFR) was tested against the severity of AS. ΔPd/Pa-FFR was not influenced by the severity of AS in terms of aortic valve area (r = - 0.02, p = 0.83) and gradient (r = - 0.05, p = 0.64) or by the left ventricle hypertrophy (r = - 0.03, p = 0.88). Conversely, ΔPd/Pa-FFR was influenced by the presence of diabetes (r = - 0.24, p = 0.005), peripheral vascular disease (r = - 0.16, p = 0.047), and chronic kidney disease (r = - 0.19, p = 0.03). No significant difference was observed in the ΔPd/Pa-FFR between patients with AS and matched controls. Further studies are warranted to validate the FFR-guided revascularization in patients with AS.

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for the Assessment of Intermediate Coronary Artery Stenosis in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: Comparison With Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the diagnostic performance of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS).

BACKGROUND

The iFR was introduced as a new, nonpharmacologic stress index of coronary stenosis severity. However, the diagnostic performance of iFR has not been sufficiently explored in patients with severe AS.

METHODS

We analyzed 95 consecutive patients with AS (57 women) demonstrating intermediate coronary artery stenosis (116 vessels), and compared the iFR values with fractional flow reserve (FFR) values and with adenosine-stress myocardial perfusion imaging as indicators of myocardial ischemia.

RESULTS

The median value and interquartile range (first quartile [Q1], third quartile [Q3]) of the iFR was 0.86 (Q1 to Q3 range, 0.76 to 0.93), and that of the FFR was 0.84 (Q1 to Q3 range, 0.76 to 0.91). The iFR values correlated well with the FFR values (R = 0.854; p < 0.0001). A receiver operating characteristic analysis demonstrated an optimal cutoff of 0.82 for the iFR to indicate an FFR ≤0.75, with an area under the curve of 0.92. The optimal iFR cutoff value indicating myocardial ischemia on perfusion scintigraphy was 0.82 (area under the curve: 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe AS, a good correlation exists between iFR and FFR. Both the iFR and FFR values exhibit good correlation with perfusion scintigraphy-identified myocardial ischemia. The iFR could be a safe diagnostic tool for patients with severe AS. (The Impact of FFR and iFR in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis; UMIN000024479).

Timing and Outcomes of PCI in the TAVR Era

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become an established therapy for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). As the number of patients referred for TAVR increases, so does the prevalence of untreated obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) in the population under evaluation. Despite the high prevalence of CAD in patients treated with TAVR, the management strategy of concomitant CAD in these patients remains an area of considerable uncertainty.

RECENT FINDINGS

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with CAD and severe AS has been shown to be feasible and safe. Whether revascularization before, during, or after TAVR is optimal remains a subject of debate. All three approaches represent valid strategies with advantages and disadvantages that need to be carefully weighed on an individual basis. Current expert opinions recommend that PCI should be performed before or at the time of TAVR as long as the risk of the procedure does not outweigh the potential benefits. The results of large clinical trials evaluating the optimal revascularization time are closely awaited.

Coronary Revascularisation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Candidates: Why, Who, When?

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic stenosis (AS) frequently coexist. The presence of CAD has been consistently associated with an impaired prognosis in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement during short- and long-term follow-up. Accordingly, current guidelines recommend coronary revascularisation of all significant stenoses in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement. Conversely, the management of concomitant CAD in patients with severe AS undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still a matter of debate. The aim of this review article is to provide an overview on the role of coronary revascularisation in TAVI patients.

Impact of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) and revascularization on outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has not been fully elucidated so far.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether the degree of CAD influences the prognosis of patients undergoing TAVI.

METHODS

Before TAVI, all patients underwent revascularization of the proximal vessels or the left main stem if indicated (stenosis ≥70% or 50%, respectively). In 666 patients, we calculated the baseline (bSS) and residual SYNTAX Score (rSS) prior to TAVI. In patients with revascularization, we determined the SYNTAX Revascularization Index (SRI=(1-(rSS/bSS))∗100). We also assessed the SYNTAX Score II (SS-II), combining anatomical and clinical variables. The primary endpoint was 3-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Higher baseline and residual SYNTAX Score were associated with increased 3-year mortality (no CAD 26.2%, low bSS 34.8%, high bSS 46.8%; p=0.001, respectively, no CAD 25.9%, low rSS 31.4%, high rSS 41.5%; p=0.01). The extent of revascularization represented by the SRI was not associated with outcome. The SYNTAX Score II was also associated with increased 3-year mortality. However, baseline and residual SYNTAX Score as well as SYNTAX Score II did not independently predict mortality.

CONCLUSION

The anatomic severity of CAD as assessed by the baseline and residual SYNTAX Score is associated with survival after TAVI. Coronary artery disease seems to reflect general comorbidity burden and is associated with a higher risk profile of the patient.

Coronary Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) is highly prevalent among patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Historically, surgical aortic valve replacement with coronary artery bypass grafting was the only treatment option for patients with severe AS and significant CAD. The rapid expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement has led to significant paradigm shifts in the treatment of severe AS and has raised new questions regarding the optimal management of CAD in these patients. We review the evidence regarding management of concomitant CAD in severe AS patients, specifically focusing on issues surrounding transcatheter aortic valve replacement. In the absence of robust evidence supporting specific treatment strategies, decisions regarding coronary revascularization in severe AS should be individualized and made within the context of a multidisciplinary heart team.