Do outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve implantation vary according to access route and valve type? The UK TAVI Registry

Femoral vessel complications after transfemoral TAVR-A contemporary sonography-based assessment of 480 patients with third-generation transcatheter valves

BACKGROUND

Postinterventional sonographic assessment of the femoral artery after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) has the potential to identify several pathologies. We investigated the incidence and risk factors of femoral vessel complications in a modern TAVR collective using postinterventional sonography.

METHODS

Between September 2017 and March 2022, 480 patients underwent TF-TAVR with postinterventional femoral sonography at a single center. Clinical outcomes and adverse events were analyzed after the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3) criteria.

RESULTS

In this cohort (51.2% male; age 80 ± 7.5 years, median EuroSCORE II 3.7) 74.8% (n = 359) were implanted with a self-expandable and 25.2% (n = 121) with a balloon-expandable valve. The main access (valve-delivery) was located right in 91.4% (n = 438), and the primary closure system was Proglide in 95% (n = 456). Vascular complications (VC) were observed in 29.16% (n = 140) of patients; 23.3% (n = 112) presented with minor- and 5.8% (n = 28) with major VC. Postinterventional femoral artery stenosis on the main access was observed in 9.8% (n = 47). Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed female sex (p = .03, odds ratio [OR] 2.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-4.89) and the number of used endovascular closure devices (p = .014, OR 0.11, 95%CI 0.02-0.64) as predictive factors for femoral artery stenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of postinterventional femoral artery stenosis following TF-TAVR was higher than expected with a number of used closure devices and female sex being independent risk factors. Considering the continuous advance of TAVR in low-risk patients with preserved physical activity, emphasis should be directed at the correct diagnosis and follow-up of these complications.

Transfemoral versus trans-subclavian access in transcatheter aortic valve implantation using self-expandable valve: A propensity-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is unfeasible for 10-15% of patients using the conventional transfemoral approach. Other alternative approaches, such as the subclavian approach, have emerged, with no clear recommendation indicating the superiority of one technique over another.

AIM

To compare the 1-month mortality and postprocedural outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation using a self-expandable valve via transfemoral and subclavian access.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-centre study including 1496 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation between January 2016 and December 2020 at Clermont-Ferrand University Hospital, France. Propensity score matching was used to compare transfemoral and subclavian access.

RESULTS

After building two propensity score-matched groups of 221 patients each with either access route (total n=442), baseline characteristics were similar. The procedure duration was significantly longer in the subclavian access group (53 [45-64] versus 60 [51-72] minutes; P<0.001), but with a lower amount of contrast agent (138 [118-165] versus 123 [105-150] mL; P<0.001), fluoroscopy time (11.2 [9-14] versus 9.9 [7-12] minutes; P<0.001) and radiation dose (397 [264-620] versus 321 [217-485] mGy; P<0.001). No significant difference was observed concerning 1-month mortality (odds ratio 1.62, 95% confidence interval 0.52-5.03; P=0.39) or periprocedural complications. Follow-up at 1 year confirmed no difference in longer-term mortality (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.52-5.03; P=0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

The subclavian approach provides similar results to the transfemoral approach in terms of mortality, efficacy and safety; it is a reasonable and effective alternative when the reference transfemoral approach is impossible or seems complex.

A successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement case with VIABAHN® VBX balloon-expandable stent-graft and long Dryseal sheath for challenging access route

Key Clinical Message

A combination of long large-bore sheath and balloon-expandable stent-graft can be effective to challenging access route in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Abstract

An 88-year-old female with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Multidetector computed tomography demonstrated a small aortic annulus, shaggy aorta, and significant stenosis with heavily calcified atherosclerotic lesions in the bilateral common iliac arteries (CIAs). TAVR with Evolut™ Pro+ via alternative approach was considered; however, our heart team concluded that the patient was unsuitable for the procedure due to anatomical reasons, patient frailty, and medication history. Finally, transfemoral TAVR with endovascular therapy (EVT) and 18Fr-65 cm-Dryseal was adopted for the site. Following EVT with VIABAHN® VBX balloon-expandable stent-graft (VBX) implantation to the right ostial CIA lesion, 18Fr-65 cm-Dryseal was advanced to the ascending aorta through VBX, and Evolut™ Pro+26 mm was successfully implanted without any complication. At the 2-month follow-up, the patient reported a significant improvement in shortness of breath and did not present any evidence of atheroembolism. Transfemoral TAVR with 18Fr-65 cm-Dryseal to shaggy aorta can be feasible depending on the plaque distribution, and VBX implantation to a heavily calcified ostial CIA lesion was safe and effective for obtaining enough lumen for a large-bore sheath.

Vascular access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The choice of an alternative access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains controversial when transfemoral (TF) access is not feasible.

METHODS

We conducted a network meta-analysis to compare the outcomes of TAVR via various peripheral vascular accesses. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through July 2022 to identify studies that investigated outcomes in patients who underwent TAVR via TF, trans-subclavian (Tsc), transcarotid (TC), or transcaval (Tcav) access. A network meta-analysis was conducted via random-effects model. Outcomes of interest were major or life-threatening bleeding, stroke, major vascular complication, and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

No randomized trial was identified. Our analysis included 33 observational studies that enrolled a total of 43,455 patients who underwent TAVR via TF (n = 36,202), Tsc (n = 3869), TC (n = 3066), or Tcav (n = 318) access. The risk of major or life-threatening bleeding was higher via Tsc compared with TF [odds ratio (OR); 95 % confidence interval (CI) =1.51 (1.03-2.23), p = 0.034]. The risk of stroke was higher via Tsc compared with TF and Tcav [OR (95 % CI) =2.00 (1.14-3.52), p = 0.018, OR (95 % CI) =2.43 (1.03-5.74), p = 0.044, respectively]. The risk of major vascular complications was lower via TC compared with Tsc, and Tcav and higher with Tcav compared with TF and Tsc. 30-day mortality was higher via Tsc compared with TF. Tsc was associated with higher risk of major or life-threatening bleeding compared with TF, and higher risk of stroke compared to TF and Tcav. Tcav had the highest risk of major vascular complications.

CONCLUSION

In patients who underwent TF, Tsc, TC, or Tcav TAVR, Tsc had a higher rate of stroke compared to TF and Tcav, and major or life-threatening bleeding compared to TF. The rate of major vascular complications in Tcav was the highest among the four approaches.

Extrathoracic Against Intrathoracic Vascular Accesses for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Alternative vascular accesses to transfemoral access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be divided into intrathoracic (IT)-transapical and transaortic- and extrathoracic (ET)-transcarotid, transsubclavian, and transaxillary. This study aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of IT and ET accesses for TAVR as alternatives to transfemoral access. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all studies comparing IT-TAVR with ET-TAVR published until April 2023. Outcomes included in-hospital or 30-day all-cause mortality (ACM), 1-year ACM, postoperative and 30-day complications. A total of 18 studies with 6,800 IT-TAVR patients and 5,032 ET-TAVR patients were included. IT accesses were associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital or 30-day ACM (relative risk 1.99, 95% confidence interval 1.67 to 2.36, p <0.001), and 1-year ACM (relative risk 1.31, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.42, p <0.001). IT-TAVR patients presented more often with postoperative life-threatening bleeding, 30-day new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter, and 30-day acute kidney injury needing renal replacement therapy. The risks of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation and significant paravalvular leak were lower with IT-TAVR. ET-TAVR patients were more likely to be directly discharged home. There was no statistically significant difference regarding the 30-day risk of stroke. Compared with ET-TAVR, IT-TAVR was associated with higher risks of in-hospital or 30-day ACM, 1-year ACM and higher risks for some critical postprocedural and 30-day complications. Our results suggest that ET-TAVR could be considered as the first-choice alternative approach when transfemoral access is contraindicated.

Similar 5-Year Survival in Transfemoral and Transapical TAVI Patients: A Single-Center Experience

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) is generally considered to be associated with increased morbidity and mortality compared with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation TAVI (TF-TAVI). We aimed to compare different patient risk profiles, access-related complications, and long-term survival using inverse probability treatment weighting. This is a retrospective, single-center analysis of 925 consecutive patients with aortic valve stenosis undergoing TF-TAVI (n = 802) or TA-TAVI (n = 123) at the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, as a single procedure between September 2011 and August 2020. Baseline characteristics revealed a higher perioperative risk as reflected in the EuroSCORE II (geometric mean 2.3 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.2 to 2.4) vs. 3.7 (CI 3.1 to 4.5); before inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) p < 0.001) in the transfemoral than in the transapical group, respectively. After 30 days, TF-TAVI patients had a higher incidence of any bleeding than TA-TAVI patients (TF-TAVI n = 146 vs. TA-TAVI n = 15; weighted hazard ratio (HR) 0.52 (0.29 to 0.95); p = 0.032). After 5 years, all-cause mortality did not differ between the two groups (TF-TAVI n = 162 vs. TA-TAVI n = 45; weighted HR 1.31, (0.92 to 1.88); p = 0.138). With regard to our data, we could demonstrate, despite a higher perioperative risk, the short- and long-term safety and efficacy of the transapical approach for TAVI therapies. Though at higher perioperative risk, transapically treated patients suffered from less bleeding or vascular complications than transfemorally treated patients. It is of utmost interest that 5-year mortality did not differ between the groups.

Comparison of Transfemoral versus Transsubclavian/Transaxillary access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Femoral access is the gold standard for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Safe alternative access, that represents about 15 % of TAVR cases, remains important for patients without adequate transfemoral access. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing transfemoral (TF) access versus transsubclavian or transaxillary (TSc/TAx) access in patients undergoing TAVR. We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL Register, EMBASE, Web of Science, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov (inception through May 24, 2022) for studies comparing (TF) to (TSc/TAx) access for TAVR. A total of 21 studies with 75,995 unique patients who underwent TAVR (73,203 transfemoral and 2,792 TSc/TAx) were included in the analysis. There was no difference in the risk of in-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality between the two groups (RR 0.64, 95 % CI 0.36–1.13, P = 0.12) and (RR 0.95, 95 % CI 0.64–1.41, P = 0.81), while 1-year mortality was significantly lower in the TF TAVR group (RR 0.79, 95 % CI 0.67–0.93, P = 0.005). No significant differences in major bleeding (RR 0.82, 95 % CI 0.65–1.03, P = 0.09), major vascular complications (RR 1.14, 95 % CI 0.75–1.72, P = 0.53), and stroke (RR 0.66, 95 % CI 0.42–1.02, P = 0.06) were observed. In patients undergoing TAVR, TF access is associated with significantly lower 1-year mortality compared to TSc/TAx access without differences in major bleeding, major vascular complications and stroke. While TF is the preferred approach for TAVR, TSc/TAx is a safe alternative approach. Future studies should confirm these findings, preferably in a randomized setting.

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

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

Network meta-analysis comparing the short and long-term outcomes of alternative access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Several studies have pair-wise compared access sites for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) but pooled estimate of overall comparative efficacy and safety outcomes are not well known. We sought to compare short- and long-term outcomes following various alternative access routes for TAVR.

METHODS

Thirty-four studies with a pooled sample size of 32,756 patients were selected by searching PubMed and Cochrane library databases from inception through 11th June 2021 for patients undergoing TAVR via 1 of 6 different access sites: Transfemoral (TF), Transaortic (TAO), Transapical (TA), Transcarotid (TC), Transaxillary/Subclavian (TSA), and Transcaval (TCV). Data were extracted to conduct a frequentist network meta-analysis with a random-effects model using TF access as a reference group.

RESULTS

Compared with TF, both TAO [RR 1.91, 95% CI (1.46-2.50)] and TA access [RR 2.12, 95% CI (1.84-2.46)] were associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality. No significant difference was observed for stroke, myocardial infarction, major bleeding, conversion to open surgery, and major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events at 30 days between different accesses. Major vascular complications were lower in TA [RR 0.43, (95% CI, 0.28-0.67)] and TC [RR 0.51, 95% CI (0.35-0.73)] access compared to TF. The 1-year mortality was higher in TAO [RR of 1.35, (95% CI, 1.01-1.81)] and TA [RR 1.44, (95% CI, 1.14-1.81)] groups.

CONCLUSION

Non-thoracic alternative access site utilization for TAVR implantation (TC, TSA and TCV) is associated with outcomes similar to conventional TF access. Thoracic TAVR access (TAO and TA) translates into increased short and long-term mortality.

Transapical-transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve

BACKGROUND

Scarcely any data has been published on the mid-term effect of transapical-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) using the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve (S3; Edwards Lifesciences Corp., Irvine, CA, USA). We present mid-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes after TA-TAVI utilizing S3.

METHODS

Between 02/2014-06/2017, 122 elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent TA-TAVI utilizing S3 at our institution. We conducted clinical and echocardiographic follow-up. The mean follow-up was 15 months. All end-point-related outcomes were adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions.

RESULTS

The STS-score of the entire cohort was 6.26±4.6. More than one-third of the patients exhibited severe peripheral artery disease. The 30-d all-cause mortality, all-stroke rate, and myocardial infarction of the entire cohort were 4.1%, 1.6%, and 0.8% respectively. Median survival time of the entire cohort was 35 months. The cumulative mid-term myocardial infarction and stroke rate was 2.6% and 3.5%, respectively. The postoperative moderate/severe paravalvular leakage occurred in 1.6% of cases. At discharge, one-year and two-year postprocedure peak/mean gradients were 16.6±8.3/ 9±5.1 mmHg, 18±6.9/ 10±4.5 mmHg, and 22.2±5.4/ 12.8±4.6 mmHg, respectively. The rate of new pacemaker cases was 14.1%. Acute kidney injury network 2/3 appears, as an independent predictor of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed very promising early and mid-term clinical outcomes with a high degree of device success and good hemodynamic performance after TA-TAVI using the S3 in the intermediate risk patient profile.

Predictors for the risk of permanent pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive treatment than surgery for severe aortic stenosis. However, its use is restricted by the fact that many patients eventually require permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI). This meta-analysis was performed to identify predictors of post-TAVR PPMI.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched. Relevant studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in the pooling analysis after quality assessment.

RESULTS

After pooling 67 studies on post-TAVR PPMI risk in 97,294 patients, balloon-expandable valve use was negatively correlated with PPMI risk compared with self-expandable valve (SEV) use (odds ratio [OR]: 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37-0.53). Meta-regression analysis revealed that history of coronary artery bypass grafting and higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score increased the risk of PPMI with SEV utilization. Patients with pre-existing cardiac conduction abnormalities in 28 pooled studies also had a higher risk of PPMI (OR: 2.33, 95% CI: 1.90-2.86). Right bundle branch block (OR: 5.2, 95% CI: 4.37-6.18) and first-degree atrioventricular block (OR: 1.97, 95% CI: 1.38-2.79) also increased PPMI risk. Although the trans-femoral approach was positively correlated with PPMI risk, the trans-apical pathway showed no statistical difference to the trans-femoral pathway. The approach did not increase PPMI risk in patients with STS scores >8. Patient-prosthesis mismatch did not influence post-TAVR PPMI risk (OR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.67-1.16). We also analyzed implantation depth and found no difference between patients with PPMI after TAVR and those without.

CONCLUSIONS

SEV selection, pre-existing cardiac conduction abnormality, and trans-femoral pathway selection are positively correlated with PPMI after TAVR. Pre-existing left bundle branch block, patient-prosthesis mismatch, and implantation depth did not affect the risk of PPMI after TAVR.

Early clinical outcomes after transaxillary versus transfemoral TAVI. Data from the Spanish TAVI registry

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Transaxillary access (TXA) has become the most widely used alternative to transfemoral access (TFA) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to compare total in-hospital and 30-day mortality in patients included in the Spanish TAVI registry who were treated by TXA or TFA access.

METHODS

We analyzed data from patients treated with TXA or TFA and who were included in the TAVI Spanish registry. In-hospital and 30-day events were defined according to the recommendations of the Valve Academic Research Consortium. The impact of the access route was evaluated by propensity score matching according to clinical and echocardiogram characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 6603 patients were included; 191 (2.9%) were treated via TXA and 6412 via TFA access. After adjustment (n=113 TXA group and n=3035 TFA group) device success was similar between the 2 groups (94%, TXA vs 95%, TFA; P=.95). However, compared with the TFA group, the TXA group showed a higher rate of acute myocardial infarction (OR, 5.3; 95%CI, 2.0-13.8); P=.001), renal complications (OR, 2.3; 95%CI, 1.3-4.1; P=.003), and pacemaker implantation (OR, 1.6; 95%CI, 1.01-2.6; P=.03). The TXA group also had higher in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates (OR, 2.2; 95%CI, 1.04-4.6; P=.039 and OR, 2.3; 95%CI, 1.2-4.5; P=.01, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with ATF, TXA is associated with higher total mortality, both in-hospital and at 30 days. Given these results, we believe that TXA should be considered only in those patients who are not suitable candidates for TFA.

Clinical outcomes following transapical TAVR with ACURATE neo in the CHANGE neo TA study

Background

A transapical (TA) approach to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be used when a transfemoral (TF) approach is not feasible. The CHANGE neo TA study evaluated patients treated in routine clinical practice via TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo bioprosthetic aortic valve.

Methods and results

This single-arm post-market study had a planned enrolment of 200 subjects; enrolment was terminated early due to declining TA-TAVR procedures at participating centers. Final enrolment was 107 patients (mean age: 79.3 years; 54.2% female; mean STS score at baseline: 6.2%). The mortality rate in the intent-to-treat population was 11.2% at 30 days (primary endpoint) and 25.6% at 12 months. The VARC-2 composite endpoint for 30-day safety occurred in 24.3% of patients. Six patients (5.6%) received a permanent pacemaker within 30 days. Site-reported echocardiographic data showed early improvements in mean aortic valve gradient (baseline: 38.8 [SD 13.1] mmHg, discharge: 6.7 [SD 3.7] mmHg) and effective orifice area (baseline: 0.7 [SD 0.2] cm², discharge: 1.9 [SD 0.6] cm²), and the discharge rate of paravalvular regurgitation was low (74.7% none/trace, 24.2% mild, 1.1% severe).

Conclusions

TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo valve system yields acceptable clinical outcomes, providing an alternative for patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for TF-TAVR.

Neurocognitive Status after Aortic Valve Replacement: Differences between TAVI and Surgery

Over the past decade, indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have progressed rapidly—procedural numbers now exceed those of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in many countries, and TAVI is now a realistic and attractive alternative to SAVR in low-risk patients. Neurocognitive outcomes after TAVI and SAVR remain an issue and sit firmly under the spotlight as TAVI moves into low-risk cohorts. Cognitive decline and stroke carry a significant burden and predict future functional decline, reduced mobility, poor quality of life and increased mortality. Early TAVI trials used varying neurocognitive definitions, and outcomes differed significantly as a result. Recent international consensus statements defining endpoints following TAVI and SAVR have standardised neurological outcomes and facilitate interpretation and comparison between trials. The latest TAVI and SAVR trials have demonstrated more consistent and favourable neurocognitive outcomes for TAVI patients, and cerebral embolic protection devices offer the prospect of further refinement and improvement.

Real-world experience of suture-based closure devices: Insights from the FDA Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience

OBJECTIVES

We analyzed post-marketing surveillance data from the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database for suture-based vascular closure devices (VCDs) - Perclose ProGlide (Abbott, Chicago, Illinois) and Prostar XL (Abbott).

BACKGROUND

Suture-based VCDs are mostly used for large-bore femoral arterial access-site closure. Real-world, contemporary experience on the most commonly reported complications and modes of failure associated with these devices is limited.

METHODS

Post-marketing surveillance data from the FDA MAUDE database, for the ProGlide system and for the Prostar XL system, were analyzed, yielding 827 Perclose ProGlide reports and 175 Prostar XL reports.

RESULTS

Of the 827 reports of major complications involving the Perclose ProGlide devices, 404 reports involved injury, and one involved death related to the device. In the Prostar XL analysis, 94 reports involved injury, and one involved death. Bleeding from vessel injury was the most common adverse outcome described with both devices, followed by hematoma and thrombus. Surgical repair was the most commonly used treatment strategy. In terms of device malfunction, suture-related malfunction (212 reports) was most commonly seen in the Perclose ProGlide group, while failed deployment was most commonly seen in the Prostar XL group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis of the MAUDE database demonstrates that in real-world practice, suture-based VCDs were found to be associated with complications, including vascular injury, difficulties with the device itself, and even death. Ongoing user education and pre-procedural patient selection are important to minimize risks associated with suture-based vascular closure devices.

Endoconduit for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Access challenges are sometimes encountered in patients who require transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Transapical (TA) access is a well-established alternative, but it is more invasive than the standard transfemoral (TF) access techniques. We adopted the iliac endoconduit technique to perform TF TAVI in a patient with small-caliber, heavily calcified iliac arteries. This technique could provide an adequate access route for TAVI that is minimally invasive, even for patients with prohibitory iliac anatomy.

Comparison of outcomes following transfemoral versus trans-subclavian approach for transcatheter aortic valve Implantation: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The subclavian artery is an alternative access route for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), with a potential advantage in patients unsuitable for traditional access routes such as the femoral artery. This study aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of the trans-subclavian (TSc) compared to the trans-femoral (TF) approach.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted on two online databases: Embase and Medline. The initial search returned 508 titles. Nine observational studies were included: n = 2938 patients (2382 TF and 556 TSc).

RESULTS

Both TSc and TF groups were comparable for: 30-day mortality (Odds ratio, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.49 - 1.16, p = 0.195); in-hospital stroke (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.60-1.85, p = 0.859); myocardial infarction (OR 1.97, 95% CI 0.74-5.23, p = 0.176); paravalvular leaks (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.76-1.90, p = 0.439); rates of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation (OR 1.49, 95% CI 0.92-2.41, p = 0.105); in-hospital bleeding and meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between access points (OR 3.44, 95% CI 0.35-34.22, p = 0.292). Procedural time was found to be longer in the TSc group (SMD 1.02; 95% CI 0.815-1.219, p < 0.001). Major vascular complications were significantly higher in the TF group (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.94, p = 0.029). Meta regression found no influence of the covariates on the outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Subclavian access is both a safe and feasible alternative access route for TAVI with lower risks of major vascular complications. This study supports the use of subclavian access as a viable alternative in patient groups where transfemoral TAVI is contraindicated.

Transfemoral versus transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a single-centre experience

OBJECTIVES

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with increased mortality as compared to the transfemoral (TF) access. Possible mechanisms include different patient risk profiles as well as an intrinsic injury caused by the access route itself.

METHODS

All consecutive patients scheduled for TAVI between January 2009 and June 2016 at a single centre were evaluated. A comparison of 30-day mortality and morbidity rates for patients undergoing TF or transapical (TA) TAVI was performed according to the criteria of the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2.

RESULTS

During the investigated period, 1130 patients (TF: n = 619, TA: n = 511) were scheduled for TAVI. TA patients had a higher operative risk profile (logistic EuroSCORE: 24% vs 17%; P < 0.001). Unadjusted 30-day mortality rate was higher in TA than in TF patients, albeit this difference was not significant [TA: 6.7%, TF: 4.8%; odds ratio (OR) 1.3 (0.8-2.3); P = 0.216]. The multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed the logistic EuroSCORE and institutional experience, but not the access mode as independent predictors of 30-day mortality. Major access-site complications occurred with a similar frequency in both groups [TA: 9.4%; TF: 9.2%; OR 1.02 (0.68-1.53); P = 0.915]. Unadjusted long-term mortality rate was higher after TA TAVI. After adjustment, the Cox regression analysis revealed similar long-term mortality rates after TF and TA TAVI [hazard ratio 1.1 (0.88-1.36)].

CONCLUSIONS

The increased mortality of patients undergoing TA TAVI is associated with the patient risk profile and the institutional experience but not with the access mode itself.

A meta-analysis comparing transaxillary and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Background

While transfemoral (TF) approach is considered as the default access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the alternative access route of choice remains to be elucidated. Transaxillary (TAx) approach has shown promise as an excellent option. We performed a meta-analysis of the studies comparing the TF and TAx approaches using one type of self-expandable transcatheter valve to avoid device-related bias.

Methods

We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from inception to December 2018 to identify articles comparing TAx-TAVR and TF-TAVR. The studies included in this meta-analysis contain data related to the use of the CoreValve device. Patients' baseline characteristics, procedural outcomes, and clinical outcomes were extracted from the articles and pooled for analysis.

Results

The meta-analysis included five studies comprising 1,414 patients in the TF group and 489 patients in the TAx group. The average EuroScores of the TF and TAx groups were 20.04±13.89 and 22.73±14.73, respectively. The TAx group has higher rates of major comorbidities. No difference was found between the two groups with regard to vascular complications (P=0.71; OR 1.08; 95% CI, 0.71-1.65), aortic regurgitation (P=0.90; OR 1.03; 95% CI, 0.71-1.49), and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation (P=0.42; OR 1.12; 95% CI, 0.86-1.46). The TAx group has a lower incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) (P=0.05; OR 1.63; 95% CI, 1.01-2.62). No difference was observed in 30-day mortality (P=0.32; OR 1.30; 95% CI, 0.78-2.17) or 1-year mortality (P=0.21; OR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.50-1.16).

Conclusions

TAx-TAVR is associated with overall comparable outcomes to TF TAVR in high-risk patient cohorts, despite higher incidences of major comorbidities in the TAx-TAVR patient population. The rate of AKI appears to be lower after TAx-TAVR.

Performing optimal transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The need for tailored use of transcatheter valves

BACKGROUND

Despite the worldwide development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over the last decade, strategies that take patient characteristics into account to guide the choice of transcatheter heart valve have not been evaluated.

AIM

To evaluate the immediate results of TAVI using a tailored choice of balloon-expandable or self-expanding transcatheter heart valve, according to each patient's clinical and anatomical characteristics.

METHODS

This single-centre observational study included all patients treated with TAVI from 2012 to 2017. The 30-day results were reported according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. A total of 502 patients were included (mean age, 81±9 years; 52% men; mean EuroSCORE II, 7.0±6.5%). Three main variables guided the choice of transcatheter heart valve: the anatomy of the iliofemoral arteries and of the aortic root, and the general condition of the patient.

RESULTS

A SAPIEN™ balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve was used in 275 patients (55%) and a CoreValve™ self-expanding transcatheter heart valve in 227 patients (45%). The approach was transfemoral in 427 patients (85%), and only 29 patients (6%) required transthoracic access. At 30-day follow-up, the rates of adverse events were as follows: mortality, 3.2%; stroke, 3.0%; major bleeding, 5.9%; and major vascular complications, 6.0%. Rates of complications at 30 days were similar in the SAPIEN™ and CoreValve™ groups, except for a higher rate of pacemaker implantation in the latter group (29.5% vs. 14.5%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

The choice of balloon-expandable or self-expanding transcatheter heart valve tailored to the patient's clinical and anatomical characteristics allows for maximal use of the transfemoral approach, and is associated with low 30-day rates of major complications and mortality.

Right Transaxillary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Using the "Flip-n-Flex" Technique

BACKGROUND

Right transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAx-TAVR) is rarely performed due to challenging vascular tortuosity and unfavorable implantation angles. We explored this procedure using the newer-generation balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) valve and our novel "flip-n-flex" technique. The safety and effectiveness of the procedure and the learning curve of our early experiences were investigated.

METHODS

The first 10 consecutive patients undergoing right TAx-TAVR performed at our center from June 2016 to May 2018 were included in the study. Patients' preoperative characteristics, procedural outcomes, and clinical outcomes were studied. Intraoperative fluoroscopy times were also reviewed to analyze the procedural learning curve.

RESULTS

The 10 patients were a mean age of 81.8 ± 8.7 years, and 5 patients (50%) were women. Mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 12.0% ± 9.5%. Procedural success was achieved in all cases without vascular complications. Paravalvular leak was absent or mild in all patients. Two patients (20%) required permanent pacemaker implantation. The median postoperative length of stay was 4 days (range, 2-13 days). The 30-day mortality was 0%. Mean transvalvular gradient improved from 38.4 ± 12.6 mm Hg to 9 ± 4.4 mm Hg postoperatively. New York Heart Association Functional Classification improved in all patients. The fluoroscopy time showed marked reduction from 44.1 ± 8.2 minutes to 17.4 ± 2.9 minutes with the use of the flip-n-flex technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Our early experience of right TAx-TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve demonstrated satisfactory outcomes and a quick learning as facilitated by the flip-n-flex technique. This could be a beneficial TAVR approach to suitable patients.

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a low ejection fraction

OBJECTIVES

It may be expected that patients with left ventricular dysfunction may be at greater risk of complications after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) via transapical (TA) access compared with via transfemoral (TF) access. There is a lack of data comparing the outcomes of TAVI using TA and TF access in patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (EF).

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of data from a high-volume heart centre in Germany. TAVI access route assignment was based on a 'best for TF' approach, where only patients who met a strict set of criteria underwent TF-TAVI, with the remainder receiving TA-TAVI. For this analysis, patients were included if they had a pre-TAVI EF of ≤ 40%. Early mortality and late (1-year) mortality were compared through multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 342 patients in the registry had an EF of ≤ 40%, of which 74.9% underwent TA-TAVI and 25.1% underwent TF-TAVI. Higher proportions of the TA group presented with certain comorbidities, and their logistic EuroSCORE and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk scores were higher than in the TF group. At 1 year, TA access was associated with greater mortality in the univariate analysis (odd ratio 2.43; 95% confidence interval 1.04-5.69). However, after multivariate adjustment, no significant differences were found in either 30-day or 1-year mortality rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The data suggest that, for patients with a reduced EF, TA-TAVI is not associated with a poorer outcome compared with TF-TAVI. Therefore, TA access should not be discounted based on the presence of left ventricular dysfunction alone.

Comparison of Outcomes of Transfemoral Versus Transapical Approach for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Post hoc analyses of clinical trials have shown superior outcomes for a transfemoral (TF) compared with a transapical (TA) approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). There are few contemporary data on utilization and outcomes of TF versus TA TAVI in real-world patient populations. Using the National Inpatient Sample 2011 to 2014, we identified TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures using ICD-9 procedure codes 35.05 and 35.06, respectively. A propensity-matched cohort of TF and TA TAVI procedures balanced on 23 baseline characteristics was assembled. Outcomes included in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI requiring dialysis (AKI-D) and postoperative stroke. A total of 7,973 TAVI procedures representative of 39,745 procedures nationally were included in the study. Of these, 80.2% were performed using a TF approach while 19.8% used a TA approach. Patients in the TF-TAVI group were older (mean age 81.7 vs 80.4 years, p < 0.001), with a higher prevalence of heart failure (12.7% vs 7.6%, p < 0.001) and lower prevalence of peripheral vascular disease (28.0% vs 35.5%, p < 0.001) compared with the TA-TAVI group. In 1,576 propensity-matched pairs of TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI procedures, TF-TAVI was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42 to 0.88, p = 0.01), lower rates of AKI (0.53, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.63, p < 0.001), similar rates of AKI-D (OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.38, p = 0.38) and postoperative stroke (OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.10, p = 0.56) compared with TA-TAVI. In conclusion, TF-TAVI is associated with lower rates of in-hospital mortality and AKI compared with TA-TAVI. A TF approach should be preferred over a TA approach for TAVI whenever possible.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation via the superficial femoral artery: An underused access route?

Common femoral arterial (CFA) access is the most commonly used access route for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In majority of cases, it is easily accessible percutaneously without requiring surgical cut down. However, in patients with high body mass index (BMI) or central obesity, it can be more than 8-10 cm below the skin making the procedure more technically demanding and satisfactory hemostasis more difficult to achieve. The superficial femoral artery (SFA) lies only a few centimeters distal to the CFA with little compromise on vessel caliber, yet can allow more suitable access in certain patients with a high BMI. We describe three cases in which SFA access was successfully used as the primary delivery route for TAVI.

Peripheral Artery Disease and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes: A Report From the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Therapy Registry

BACKGROUND

Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is associated with increased cardiovascular mortality, and PAD risk factors overlap with those for aortic stenosis. The prevalence and outcomes associated with PAD in a population undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are unknown.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry linked to Medicare claims data, we identified patients ≥65 years old undergoing TAVR from 2011 to 2015. We calculated hazard ratios for 1-year adverse outcomes, including mortality, readmission, and bleeding, for patients with PAD compared with those without, adjusting for baseline characteristics and postprocedure medications. Analyses were performed separately by access site (transfemoral and nontransfemoral). Of 19 660 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, 4810 (24.5%) had PAD; 3730 (47.9%) of 7780 patients undergoing nontransfemoral TAVR had PAD. In both groups, patients with PAD were significantly more likely to have coronary and carotid artery diseases. At 1-year follow-up, patients with PAD undergoing TAVR via transfemoral access had a higher incidence of death (16.8% versus 14.4%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; P=0.01), readmission (45.5% versus 42.1%; hazard ratio, 1.11; P<0.001), and bleeding (23.1% versus 19.7%; hazard ratio, 1.18; P<0.001) compared with patients without PAD. Patients with PAD undergoing TAVR via nontransfemoral access did not have significantly higher rates of 1-year mortality or readmission compared with patients without PAD.

CONCLUSIONS

PAD is common among patients undergoing commercial TAVR via transfemoral and nontransfemoral access. Among patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR, PAD is associated with a higher incidence of 1-year adverse outcomes compared with absence of PAD.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01737528.

Conduction abnormalities after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

In the last few years, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an alternative procedure in patients with severe aortic stenosis and high risk for surgical aortic replacement. Due to the anatomic correlation between aortic valve structure and conduction system of the heart, one of the most common complications after TAVI is conduction system disturbances which including bundle branch block, complete heart block and need for permanent pacemaker implantation. Although these disturbances are usually not lethal, they may have a great influence on patients' state and long term-survival. Several risk factors for conduction disturbances have been identified which including age, anatomy of the heart, periprocedural factors, type of implanted valve, preexisting abnormalities and comorbidities. As this technique becomes more familiar to physicians, patients should be carefully screened for risk factors for the development of conduction abnormalities after TAVI in order to provide effective prevention and proper treatment.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation at a high-volume center: the Bad Rothenfelde experience

Introduction

The “transfemoral (TF) first” approach to access route selection in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is popular; however, the risk of major vascular complications is substantial. The “best for TF” approach identifies only the patients with ideal anatomy for TF-TAVI, potentially minimizing complications.

Aim

To characterize the outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI at a large-volume site that employs this approach.

Material and methods

Patients who underwent TAVI at the Bad Rothenfelde Heart Centre between 2008 and 2016 were consecutively enrolled. Findings were compared to those from large, multicenter registries.

Results

Of the 1,644 patients enrolled, 1,140 underwent TA- and 504 TF-TAVI. Comorbidities were more frequent in TA patients, who also had higher risk scores (EuroSCORE: 25.5% vs. 21.2%; STS score: 11.0% vs. 7.5%; p < 0.001 for both). Rates of conversion to open surgery, major vascular complications and intra-procedural mortality did not differ between groups. At 30 days, mortality rates were higher in the TA group (3.9% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.036). Stroke/transient ischemic attack and permanent pacemaker implantation rates did not differ significantly between groups (2.0% and 9.1% overall, respectively). Compared to multicenter registries, trends in mortality and complication rates were similar, though magnitudes were lower in the present study. In contrast with the present study, major vascular complication rates in multicenter registries are significantly higher for TF compared to TA patients.

Conclusions

At this high-volume center, the use of a “best for TF” approach to TAVI resulted in low mortality and complication rates.

Prolonged Intensive Care Unit Stay Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

PURPOSE

Postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) stay after cardiac surgeries has been extensively studied, but little attention has been given to ICU stay following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This study examined ICU stay after TAVR.

METHODS

Two hundred and forty-five patients who underwent TAVR between April 2010 and October 2016 were studied retrospectively. We investigated the status of ICU stay, the predictors of prolonged ICU stay (PICUS), and its impact on short- and long-term outcomes. Prolonged ICU stay was defined as post-TAVR ICU stay longer than 2 days (day of TAVR + 1 day).

RESULTS

Length of ICU stay was 2.6 ± 4.9 days, and PICUS was identified in 14.7% of the patients. The predominant reason for PICUS was congestive heart failure or circulatory failure (41.7%). Pulmonary dysfunction and nontransfemoral approach were independent predictors of PICUS (pulmonary dysfunction: odds ratio = 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05-7.35; nontransfemoral approach: odds ratio = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.15-6.89). Prolonged ICU stay was associated with higher rate of 30-day combined end point (PICUS vs non-PICUS: 44.4% vs 3.3%, P < .0001), longer postoperative hospital stay (49.9 ± 141.9 days vs 12.0 ± 6.0 days, P < .0001), and lower rate of discharge home (77.8% vs 95.2%, P = .0002). Patients with PICUS had worse long-term survival (P < .0001), and PICUS was a predictor of mortality (hazard ratio: 4.21, 95% CI: 2.09-8.22).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged ICU stay following TAVR was found in 14.7%, and pulmonary dysfunction and nontransfemoral approach were associated with PICUS. Short- and long-term prognoses were worse in patients with PICUS than those without.

Causes and temporal trends in procedural deaths after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The causes of procedural deaths after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have been scarcely detailed.

AIMS

To assess these causes and their temporal trends since the beginning of the TAVI era.

METHODS

From October 2006 to April 2014, 601 consecutive high-risk/inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent TAVI using the Edwards SAPIEN or SAPIEN XT or the Medtronic CoreValve. The transfemoral route was the default approach; the transapical or left subclavian approaches were alternative options. Patients were divided into three tertiles according to the date of the procedure.

RESULTS

Procedural death occurred in 45 patients (7.5%), with a median±standard deviation age of 83±7 years; 23 were men (51%) and the mean logistic EuroSCORE was 26±16%. The main cause of death was heart failure (n=19, 42%), followed by cardiac rupture (n=12, 27%), intensive care complications (n=9, 20%) and vascular complications (n=5, 11%). The mortality rate was higher after transapical than transfemoral TAVI (17% vs. 5%; P<0.001). The mortality rate decreased over time (11.9% in the first tertile, 6.0% in the second and 4.5% in the third [P=0.007]), driven by a reduction in heart failure-related deaths (6.5% in the first tertile vs. 1.5% in the third; P=0.011). Vascular complication-related deaths disappeared in the third tertile. However, there was no decrease in deaths related to cardiac ruptures and intensive care complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The procedural mortality rate of TAVI decreased over time, driven by the decrease in heart failure-related deaths. However, efforts should continue to prevent cardiac ruptures and improve the outcomes of patients requiring intensive care after TAVI.

European real world trans-catheter aortic valve implantation: systematic review and meta-analysis of European national registries

Objective

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been adopted rapidly in Europe. TAVI national registries can augment understanding of technologies and represent real-world experience, providing further clinical insights. We undertook a meta-analysis of published European national TAVI registries to assess current results following TAVI in Europe.

Methods

Electronic databases were searched. The review focused on the comparison of the following TAVI strategies: transfemoral (TF) and transapical (TA) SAPIEN and CoreValve implantation. Individual event rates for outcomes of interest were pooled using a mixed effect model.

Results

Seven European national TAVI registries (UK, Swiss, Belgium, Italy, Spain, France, Germany) were identified, including a total of 9786 patients who received TF-SAPIEN (n = 2885), TA-SAPIEN (n = 2252) and CoreValve (n = 4649) implantation. Pooled incidence of 30-day mortality was 0.08% [95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.05–0.11], 0.12% [95% CI: 0.07–0.19] and 0.06% [95% CI: 0.03–0.11] for TF-SAPIEN, TA-SAPIEN and CoreValve respectively (test for subgroup difference P = 0.18); there was high heterogeneity across European countries. Pooled incidence of stroke was comparable among the TAVI strategies (test for subgroup difference P = 0.79); the incidence of post-procedural moderate paravalvular leak ≥ 2 (P = 0.9) was similar across groups. CoreValve implantation was associated with an increased risk of pacemaker implantation (0.22 [95% CI: 0.19–0.26]; test for subgroup difference P < 0.0001). The lowest 30-day mortality was associated with TAVI performed in Spain (b coefficient −4.3; P = 0.03), in Italy (b coefficient −2.1; P < 0.0001), in UK (b coefficient −1.95; P = 0.01) and in France (b coefficient −2.8; P = 0.03). The German registry has the highest mortality for every TAVI strategy amongst all other European registries and especially for the TA-SAPIEN group.

Conclusions

Transarterial TAVI approaches were associated with a low early mortality regardless of the type of device used. There was marked heterogeneity among European countries for early mortality.

Conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedures - predictors and management

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a safe and efficient alternative to cardiac surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis. In many countries the number of performed TAVI procedures equals the number of surgical implantations. Indications for TAVI are becoming more liberal, allowing a wider spectrum of patients to benefit from the advantages of transcatheter therapy. Due to its invasive nature, TAVI is associated with some complications such as conduction disturbances. Although these disturbances are usually not lethal, they have a great influence on patients’ state and long term-survival. The most relevant and common are His’ bundle branch blocks, atrioventricular blocks, and need for permanent pacemaker implantation. With the frequency at 10% to even 50%, conduction abnormalities are among the most important TAVI-related adverse events. Risk factors for conduction disturbances include age, anatomy of the heart, periprocedural factors, type of implanted valve, and comorbidities. Severity of occurring complications varies; therefore selection of a proper treatment approach is required. Considered as the most effective management, permanent pacemaker implantation turned out to negatively influence both recovery and survival. Moreover, there is no expert consensus on use of resynchronization therapy after TAVI. In this paper, the authors present a comprehensive analysis of the most common conduction disturbances accompanying TAVI, factors related to their occurrence, and treatment approach.

Impact of suture mediated femoral access site closure with the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide system on outcome in transfemoral aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Management of femoral access site is an important issue in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and crucial for acute and long-term outcome. Data on vascular closure devices in this setting are limited. We evaluated safety and efficacy of the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide suture-based vascular closure device.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We enrolled 585 patients undergoing percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Outcomes were defined according to Valve academic research consortium (VARC)-2 criteria. In 237 (40.5%) patients femoral access site closure was performed using the Prostar and in 348 patients (59.6%) using the ProGlide vascular closure device. There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics including single and dual antiplatelet therapies. Sheath outer diameter was significantly larger in the ProGlide compared with the Prostar group (7.7±1.5 vs. 7.9±0.5mm; p=0.001). Closure device failure according to VARC-2 criteria was significantly more frequent with the Prostar versus ProGlide device (19% vs. 4.6%; p<0.01). Need for surgical repair (11.8% vs. 0%, p<0.01), major (12.2% vs. 2.3%, p<0.01) and minor (17.3% vs. 5.7%, p<0.01) vascular complications and bleeding complications (5.5% vs. 2.0%, p=0.02) occurred significantly more often with the Prostar device compared with the ProGlide system. In addition, in-hospital mortality was higher with Prostar compared with ProGlide (5.9% vs. 2.0%; p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

Femoral access site closure with the ProGlide device compared with the Prostar device in transfemoral aortic valve implantation was associated with significantly lower rates of closure device failure, minor and major bleedings and a significantly lower in-hospital mortality.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.govNCT02162069.

Early and mid-term outcomes of 1904 patients undergoing transcatheter balloon-expandable valve implantation in Italy: results from the Italian Transcatheter Balloon-Expandable Valve Implantation Registry (ITER)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this multicentre study is to report the clinical experiences of all patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with a balloon-expandable device in Italy.

METHODS

The Italian Transcatheter balloon-Expandable valve Registry (ITER) is a real-world registry that includes patients who have undergone TAVI with the Sapien (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) bioprosthesis in Italy since it became available in clinical practice. From 2007 to 2012, 1904 patients were enrolled to undergo TAVI in 33 Italian centres. Outcomes were classified according to the updated Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) definitions. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Mean age was 81.7 (SD:6.2) years, and 1147 (60.2%) patients were female. Mean Logistic EuroSCORE was 21.1% (SD:13.7). Transfemoral, transapical, transaortic and transaxillary TAVI was performed in 1252 (65.8%), 630 (33.1%), 18 (0.9%) and 4 (0.2%) patients, respectively. Operative mortality was 7.2% (137 patients). The VARC-2 outcomes were as follows: device success, 88.1%; disabling stroke, 1.0%; life-threatening and major bleeding 9.8 and 10.5%, respectively; major vascular complication, 9.7%; acute kidney injury, 8.2%; acute myocardial infarction ≤72 h, 1.5%. Perioperative pacemaker implantation was necessary in 116 (6.1%) patients. At discharge, the mean transprosthetic gradient was 10.7 (SD:4.5) mmHg. Incidence of postoperative mild, moderate or severe paravalvular leak was, respectively, 32.1, 5.0 and 0.4%. A total of 444/1767 (25.1%) deaths after hospital discharge were reported: of these, 168 (37.8%) were classified as cardiac death. Preoperative independent predictors of all-cause mortality were male gender (HR: 1.395; 95% CI:1.052-1.849); overweight, BMI 25-30 kg/m² (HR: 0.775; 95% CI: 0.616-0.974); serum creatinine level (every 1 mg/dl increase; HR: 1.314; 95% CI:1.167-1.480); haemoglobin level (every 1 g/dl increase; HR: 0.905; 95% CI:0.833-0.984); critical preoperative state (HR: 2.282; 95% CI: 1.384-3.761); neurological dysfunction (HR: 1.552; 95% CI:1.060-2.272); atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.556; 95% CI:1.213-1.995); pacemaker rhythm (HR: 1.948; 95% CI:1.310-2.896); NYHA Class III or IV (HR: 1.800; 95% CI:1.205-2.689 or HR: 2.331; 95% CI:1.392-3.903, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI with a balloon-expandable device in the 'real world' shows good mid-term outcomes in terms of survival, technical success, valve-related adverse events and haemodynamic performance.

Does a Higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score Predict Outcomes in Transfemoral and Alternative Access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement?

BACKGROUND

Nontransfemoral (non-TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is often associated with worse outcomes than TF TAVR. We investigated the relationship between increasing Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) predicted risk of mortality (PROM) score and observed mortality and morbidity in TF and non-TF TAVR groups.

METHODS

We reviewed 595 patients undergoing TAVR at Emory Healthcare between 2007 and 2014. Clinical outcomes were reported for 337 TF patients (57%) and 258 non-TF patients (43%). We created 3 STS PROM score subgroups: <8%, 8%-15%, and >15%. A composite outcome of postoperative events was defined as death, stroke, renal failure, vascular complications, or new pacemaker implantation.

RESULTS

TF patients were older (82.4 ± 8.0 vs 80.8 ± 8.7 years, p = 0.02), whereas the STS PROM was higher in non-TF patients (10.5% ± 5.3% vs 11.7% ± 5.7%, p = 0.01). Observed/expected mortality was less than 1.0 in all groups. The rate of the composite outcome did not differ between STS PROM subgroups in TF (p = 0.68) or non-TF TAVR (p = 0.27). One-year mortality was higher for patients with STS PROM >8% in the non-TF group; however, this difference was not observed in TF patients (p = 0.40).

CONCLUSIONS

As expected, non-TF patients were at a higher risk than TF patients for procedural morbidity and death. Although no differences were observed in 30-day deaths or morbidity in different STS PROM subgroups, those undergoing non-TF TAVR at a higher STS PROM (>8%) had higher 1-year mortality. When applicable, TF TAVR remains the procedure of choice in high- or extreme-risk patients undergoing TAVR.

Clinical Outcomes After Transapical and Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Insertion: An Evolving Experience

BACKGROUND

Prior publications note increased adverse events after transapical compared with transfemoral access transcatheter aortic valve insertion (TAVI). We reviewed our TAVI experience to understand the differences in baseline patient characteristics and outcomes associated with the two access methods.

METHODS

The records were reviewed of 567 patients who underwent transfemoral (n = 351, 61.9%) and transapical (n = 216, 38.1%) TAVI from November 2008 through July 2015.

RESULTS

Compared with patients who underwent transfemoral access, the patients who underwent transapical access were older (82.0 ± 7.5 versus 79.6 ± 9.7 years; p = 0.006), had more peripheral vascular disease (78.2% versus 54.7%; p < 0.001), more previous coronary artery bypass graft operations (50.9% versus 32.5%; p < 0.001), and higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality (9.4% ± 5.4% versus 8.8% ± 6.5%; p = 0.032). In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates, however, were similar between the two groups (transapical, n = 7, 3.2%; transfemoral, n = 13, 3.7%; p = 0.772). Follow-up echocardiography in 547 (100.0%) surviving patients at a median of 182 days (interquartile range, 35 to 420) demonstrated less paravalvular regurgitation grade of moderate or greater in patients who underwent transapical access (transapical, n = 6, 2.9%; transfemoral, n = 35, 10.4%; p = 0.001) but similar ejection fraction in the two groups (transapical, 55.4% ± 12.2%; transfemoral, 55.9% ± 13.0%; p = 0.419). Mortality rates at 1 year (transapical, 19.2% ± 3.0%; transfemoral,14.7% ± 3.2%) and 4 years (transapical, 47.4% ± 6.4%; transfemoral, 42.7% ± 4.9%) were also similar between the two groups (p = 0.342).

CONCLUSIONS

Transapical and transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve insertions result in similar operative and longer term mortality rates, despite differences in baseline patient risk. The findings support the concept that access does not influence treatment-related mortality rates.

Myocardial injury following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights from delayed-enhancement cardiovascular magnetic resonance

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence, localisation and extent of myocardial injury as determined by late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) on cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 37 patients, who underwent successful TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve (transapical [TA], n=11; non-TA, n=26), were included. Cardiac biomarker (CK-MB and cTnT) levels were determined at baseline and following TAVI. CMR was performed within a week before and within 30 days following TAVI. Some increase in cardiac biomarkers was detected in 97% of the patients as determined by a rise in cTnT, and in 49% of the patients as determined by a rise in CK-MB. Following TAVI, no new myocardial necrosis defects were observed with the non-TA approach. Nonetheless, all patients who underwent TAVI through the TA approach had new focal myocardial necrosis in the apex, with a median myocardial extent and necrotic mass of 5% [2.0-7.0] and 3.5 g [2.3-4.5], respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some increase in cardiac biomarkers of myocardial injury was systematically detected following TAVI, new myocardial necrosis as evaluated by CMR was observed only in patients undergoing the procedure through the TA approach, involving ~5% of the myocardium in the apex.

Emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acutely decompensated aortic stenosis

AIMS

To assess outcomes of TAVR as a rescue therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock due to acutely decompensated aortic stenosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of 771 high-risk patients who underwent TAVR, 27 (3.5%; 78±9 years; 12 men) were treated emergently due to acutely decompensated aortic stenosis with cardiogenic shock. SAPIEN and CoreValve prostheses were implanted in 11 and 16 patients, respectively: the transfemoral access route was used in 25. Three patients died within 72 hours of successful valve deployment, and a further six died within a month, giving a 30-day mortality of 33.3%, which was significantly higher than in electively treated patients (7.7%, p<0.0001). Univariate predictors of 30-day mortality in cardiogenic-shock patients were baseline cardiac output <3.0 l/min, reduced cardiac power index, impaired renal function, and mechanical ventilation, as well as severe acute kidney injury after TAVR. Estimated one-year survival was 59.3% in emergently and 82.7% in electively treated patients (p=0.0009). However, 30-day landmark analysis showed no difference in cumulative survival between TAVR modalities. In cardiogenic-shock patients without concomitant reduced cardiac output and impaired renal function at baseline (n=22), estimated one-year survival was 72.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR should be considered a reasonable rescue therapy in patients with cardiogenic shock secondary to decompensated aortic stenosis.