Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and standard therapy in inoperable patients with aortic stenosis and low EF

Outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis and severely reduced ejection fraction following surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction demonstrate improvement in left ventricular injection fraction (LVEF) after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The timing and magnitude of recovery in patients with very low LVEF (≤ 25%) in surgical or transcatheter AVR is not well studied.

OBJECTIVE

Determine clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve repair (SAVR) in the subset of patients with severely reduced EF ≤ 25%.

METHODS

Single-center, retrospective study with primary endpoint of LVEF 1-week following either procedure. Secondary outcomes included 30-day mortality and delayed postprocedural LVEF. T-test was used to compare variables and linear regression was used to adjust differences among baseline variables.

RESULTS

83 patients were enrolled (TAVR = 56 and SAVR = 27). TAVR patients were older at the time of procedure (TAVR 77.29 ± 8.69 vs. SAVR 65.41 ± 10.05, p < 0.001). One week post procedure, all patients had improved LVEF after both procedures (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in LVEF between either group (TAVR 33.5 ± 11.77 vs. SAVR 35.3 ± 13.57, p = 0.60). Average LVEF continued to rise and increased by 101% at final follow-up (41.26 ± 13.70). 30-day mortality rates in SAVR and TAVR were similar (7.4% vs. 7.1%, p = 0.91).

CONCLUSION

Patients with severe AS and LVEF ≤ 25% have a significant recovery in post-procedural EF following AVR regardless of method. LVEF doubled at two years post-procedure. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality or mean EF recovery between TAVR and SAVR.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Indiana University institutional review board granted approval for above study numbered 15,322.

Impact of new-onset arrhythmia on cardiac reverse remodeling following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: computed tomography-derived left ventricular and atrial strains

OBJECTIVE

Patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are at risk for new-onset arrhythmia (NOA) that may require permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, resulting in decreased cardiac function. We aimed to investigate the factors that are associated with NOA after TAVR and to compare pre- and post-TAVR cardiac functions between patients with and without NOA using CT-derived strain analyses.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients who underwent pre- and post-TAVR cardiac CT scans six months after TAVR. New-onset left bundle branch block, atrioventricular block, and atrial fibrillation/flutter lasting over 30 days after the procedure and/or the need for PPM diagnosed within 1 year after TAVR were regarded as NOA. Implant depth and left heart function and strains were analyzed using multi-phase CT images and compared between patients with and without NOA.

RESULTS

Of 211 patients (41.7% men; median 81 years), 52 (24.6%) presented with NOA after TAVR, and 24 (11.4%) implanted PPM. Implant depth was significantly deeper in the NOA group than in the non-NOA group (- 6.7 ± 2.4 vs. - 5.6 ± 2.6 mm; p = 0.009). Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LV GLS) and left atrial (LA) reservoir strain were significantly improved only in the non-NOA group (LV GLS,  - 15.5 ± 4.0 to  - 17.3 ± 2.9%; p < 0.001; LA reservoir strain, 22.3 ± 8.9 to 26.5 ± 7.6%; p < 0.001). The mean percent change of the LV GLS and LA reservoir strains was evident in the non-NOA group (p = 0.019 and p = 0.035, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

A quarter of patients presented with NOA after TAVR. Deep implant depth on post-TAVR CT scans was associated with NOA. Patients with NOA after TAVR had impaired LV reserve remodeling assessed by CT-derived strains.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

New-onset arrhythmia (NOA) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) impairs cardiac reverse remodeling. CT-derived strain analysis reveals that patients with NOA do not show improvement in left heart function and strains, highlighting the importance of managing NOA for optimal outcomes.

KEY POINTS

• New-onset arrhythmia following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a concern that interferes with cardiac reverse remodeling. • Comparison of pre-and post-TAVR CT-derived left heart strain provides insight into the impaired cardiac reverse remodeling in patients with new-onset arrhythmia following TAVR. • The expected reverse remodeling was not observed in patients with new-onset arrhythmia following TAVR, given that CT-derived left heart function and strains did not improve.

Effectiveness and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in elderly people with severe aortic stenosis with different types of heart failure

BACKGROUND

Impaired left ventricular function is an independent predictor of adverse clinical outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis. The aim of this study is to evaluate the short-term changes of echocardiographic parameters, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) level and adverse events amongst patients with heart failure (HF) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedure.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at affiliated Yantai Yuhuangding Hospital of Qingdao University between September 2017 and September 2022. TAVR cases were stratified into three groups [heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFmrEF), heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF)] by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Baseline characteristics, changes in echocardiographic parameters (1 week and 1 month), BNP (1 month), and NYHA class (6 months) post-TAVR were compared across the three groups. Meanwhile, we observed the adverse events of the patients after TAVR.

RESULTS

A total of 96 patients were included, of whom 15 (15.6%) had HFrEF, 15 (15.6%) had HFmrEF, and 66 (68.8%) had HFpEF. Compared to the HFpEF subgroup, patients in the HFrEF subgroup were younger (p < 0.05), and with a higher BNP (p < 0.05). The left ventricular end-diastolic dimension (LVEDD) in HFrEF group decreased significantly after TAVR. HFmrEF and HFrEF patients showed significant improvements in LVEF after TAVR. The pulmonary artery systolic pressure (PASP), aortic valve peak gradient (AVPG) and aortic valve peak gradient (V_max) decreased significantly 1 month after TAVR in all three groups compared to the baseline (all p < 0.05). BNP significantly reduced in HFrEF group compared to HFpEF patients after TAVR (p < 0.05). The majority of patients experienced an improvement at least one NYHA class in all three groups 6 months post-TAVR. There is no significant increase in the risk of adverse events in the HFrEF group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who underwent TAVR achieved significant improvements in BNP, NYHA class, LVEDD, LVEF, and PASP across the three HF classes, with a more rapid and pronounced improvement in the HFrEF and HFmrEF groups. Complication rates were low in the different HF groups. There is no significant increase in the risk of periprocedural complications in the HFrEF and HFmrEF groups.

Transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with left ventricular dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular systolic dysfunction have a poor prognosis, and this may result in inferior survival also after aortic valve replacement. The outcomes of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement were investigated in this comparative analysis.

METHODS

The retrospective nationwide FinnValve registry included data on patients who underwent transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement with a bioprosthesis for severe aortic stenosis. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust the outcomes for baseline covariates of patients with reduced (≤ 50%) left ventricular ejection fraction.

RESULTS

Within the unselected, consecutive 6463 patients included in the registry, the prevalence of reduced ejection fraction was 20.8% (876 patients) in the surgical cohort and 27.7% (452 patients) in the transcatheter cohort. Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with decreased survival (adjusted hazards ratio 1.215, 95%CI 1.067-1.385) after a mean follow-up of 3.6 years. Among 255 propensity score matched pairs, 30-day mortality was 3.1% after transcatheter and 7.8% after surgical intervention (p = 0.038). One-year and 4-year survival were 87.5% and 65.9% after transcatheter intervention and 83.9% and 69.6% after surgical intervention (restricted mean survival time ratio, 1.002, 95%CI 0.929-1.080, p = 0.964), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced left ventricular ejection fraction was associated with increased morbidity and mortality after surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Thirty-day mortality was higher after surgery, but intermediate-term survival was comparable to transcatheter intervention. Trial registration The FinnValve registry ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03385915.

Transcatheter heart valve selection in patients with low ejection fraction and aortic stenosis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of transcatheter heart valve (THV) choice in patients with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction.

BACKGROUND

The management congestive heart failure with combined LV systolic dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis (AS) is challenging, yet transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a suitable treatment option in such patients. Head-to-head comparisons among the balloon-expandable (BEV) and self-expandable (SEV) THV remain limited in this subgroup of patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we included patients with severe AS with LV systolic dysfunction (LVEF ≤40%) who underwent TAVR at four high volume centers. Two thousand and twenty-eight consecutive patients were analyzed, of which 335 patients met inclusion criteria. One hundred fourty-six patients (43%) received a SEV, and 189 patients (57%) received a BEV.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar except for a higher proportion of females in the SEV group. The primary composite endpoint of in-hospital mortality, moderate or greater paravalvular (PVL), stroke, conversion to open surgery, aortic valve reintervention, and/or need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) was no different among THV choice. There was more PVL in the SEV group, but higher transaortic gradients in the BEV group. Clinical outcomes and quality of life measures were similar up to 1 year follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The choice of THV in patients with severe AS and systolic dysfunction must be weighed on a case-by-case basis.

Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction in Aortic Stenosis: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis, Management, and Future Directions

Degenerative calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease and often co-exists with left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction at the time of diagnosis. Impaired LV systolic function has been associated with worse outcomes in the setting of AS, even after successful aortic valve replacement (AVR). Myocyte apoptosis and myocardial fibrosis are the 2 key mechanisms responsible for the transition from the initial adaptation phase of LV hypertrophy to the phase of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Novel advanced imaging methods, based on echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, can detect LV dysfunction and remodeling at an early and reversible stage, with important implications for the optimal timing of AVR especially in patients with asymptomatic severe AS. Furthermore, the advent of transcatheter AVR as a first-line treatment for AS with excellent procedural outcomes, and evidence that even moderate AS portends worse prognosis in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction patients, has raised the question of early valve intervention in this patient population. With this review, we describe the pathophysiology and outcomes of LV systolic dysfunction in the setting of AS, present imaging predictors of LV recovery after AVR, and discuss future directions in the treatment of AS extending beyond the traditional indications defined in the current guidelines.

Association Between Early Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Improvement After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and 5-Year Clinical Outcomes

Importance

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 50%, early LVEF improvement after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with improved 1-year mortality; however, its association with long-term clinical outcomes is not known.

Objective

To examine the association between early LVEF improvement after TAVR and 5-year outcomes.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study analyzed patients enrolled in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) 1, 2, and S3 trials and registries between July 2007 and April 2015. High- and intermediate-risk patients with baseline LVEF less than 50% who underwent transfemoral TAVR were included in the current study. Data were analyzed from August 2020 to May 2021.

Exposures

Early LVEF improvement, defined as increase of 10 percentage points or more at 30 days and also as a continuous variable (ΔLVEF between baseline and 30 days).

Main Outcomes and Measures

All-cause death at 5 years.

Results

Among 659 included patients with LVEF less than 50%, 468 (71.0%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 82.4 (7.7) years. LVEF improvement within 30 days following transfemoral TAVR occurred in 216 patients (32.8%) (mean [SD] ΔLVEF, 16.4 [5.7%]). Prior myocardial infarction, diabetes, cancer, higher baseline LVEF, larger left ventricular end-diastolic diameter, and larger aortic valve area were independently associated with lower likelihood of LVEF improvement. Patients with vs without early LVEF improvement after TAVR had lower 5-year all-cause death (102 [50.0%; 95% CI, 43.3-57.1] vs 246 [58.4%; 95% CI, 53.6-63.2]; P = .04) and cardiac death (52 [29.5%; 95% CI, 23.2-37.1] vs 135 [38.1%; 95% CI, 33.1-43.6]; P = .05). In multivariable analyses, early improvement in LVEF (modeled as a continuous variable) was associated with lower 5-year all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio per 5% increase in LVEF, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88-1.00]; P = .04) and cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio per 5% increase in LVEF, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.82-0.98]; P = .02) after TAVR. Restricted cubic spline analysis demonstrated a visual inflection point at ΔLVEF of 10% beyond which there was a steep decline in all-cause mortality with increasing degree of LVEF improvement. There were no statistically significant differences in rehospitalization, New York Heart Association functional class, or Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary score at 5 years in patients with vs without early LVEF improvement. In subgroup analysis, the association between early LVEF improvement and 5-year all-cause death was consistent regardless of the presence or absence of coronary artery disease or prior myocardial infarction.

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and LVEF less than 50%, 1 in 3 experience LVEF improvement within 1 month after TAVR. Early LVEF improvement is associated with lower 5-year all-cause and cardiac death.

Prognostic Implications of Change in Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Reduced left ventricular (LV) systolic function is associated with worse prognosis in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We aimed to examine the changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after TAVI among patients with varying baseline LVEF. Moreover, variables associated with lack of LVEF improvement were identified and the association with long-term outcomes was investigated. A total of 560 patients (age 80 ± 7 years, 53% men) with severe AS who underwent transfemoral TAVI between 2007 and 2019 were selected. LVEF was assessed from transthoracic echocardiography at baseline (before TAVI) and at 6 and 12 months after TAVI. Patients were stratified according to baseline LVEF: (1) LVEF ≥50%, (2) LVEF 40% to 49%, and (3) LVEF <40%. The clinical end point was ≥5% LVEF improvement. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Patients with baseline LVEF<40% showed greater increase in LVEF than those with baseline LVEF 40% to 49% and LVEF ≥50% (from 33% ± 6% to 43% ± 10%, p <0.001; from 45% ± 3% to 52% ± 8%, p <0.001; and from 58% ± 5% to 59% ± 7%, p = 0.012, respectively, p for interaction <0.001). Coronary artery disease (odds ratio [OR] 1.80 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 3.06], p = 0.031), myocardial infarction (OR 2.07 [95% CI 1.19 to 3.61], p = 0.010), and permanent pacemaker (OR: 1.93 [95% CI 1.25 to 3.00], p = 0.003) were independently associated with the lack of ≥5% LVEF improvement. During a median follow-up of 3.8 (interquartile range 2.6 to 5.2) years, 176 patients died (31%). Patients with ≥5% LVEF improvement had similar outcomes compared with those with <5% LVEF improvement (log-rank p = 0.89). In conclusion, patients with severe AS and baseline LVEF <40% had the greatest improvement in LVEF at 1-year follow-up after TAVI. Coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, and permanent pacemaker were associated with lack of LVEF improvement. However, LVEF improvement at 12 months was not associated with long-term outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction: A single centre pilot study

Introduction

To define baseline echocardiographic, electrocardiographic (ECG) and computed tomographic (CT) findings of patients with heart failure undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and analyze their overall procedural outcomes.

Methods

Between 2018 and 2021, patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who performed transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in Sabah Al Ahmad Cardiac Centre, Al Amiri Hospital were identified. A retrospective review of patients' parameters including pre-, intra-, and post-procedural data was conducted. Patients were grouped in 2 subgroups according to their EF: EF <40% (HFrEF) and EF ≥ 40%. The data included patients’ baseline characteristics, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic details along with pre-procedural CT assessment of aortic valve dimensions. Primary outcomes including post-operative disturbances, pacemaker implantation and in-hospital mortality following TAVR were additionally analyzed.

Results

A total of 61 patients with severe AS underwent TAVR. The mean age was 73.5 ± 9, and 21 (34%) of the patients were males. The mean ejection fraction (EF) was 55.5 ± 9.7%. Of 61 patients, 12 (20%) were identified as heart failure with reduced EF (<40%). These patients were younger, more often males, and were more likely to have coronary artery disease (75% versus 53.1%). Left ventricular hypertrophy and diastolic dysfunction was documented in 75% and 58.3% of patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) respectively. Post TAVR conduction disturbances, with the commonest being LBBB was observed in 41.7%. Permanent pacemaker was implanted in 3 of patients with HFrEF (25%). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regards to in hospital mortality (p = 0.618).

Conclusion

Severe AS with EF <40% constitute a remarkable proportion of patients undergoing TAVR. Preliminary results of post-operative conduction disturbances and in hospital mortality in HFrEF patients were concluded to not differ from patients with LVEF ≥40%.

•

This is the first reported outcome study of TAVR in patients with heart failure in Kuwait.

•

Conduction disturbances induced by TAVR was observed in almost half of the patients.

•

Systolic dysfunction was not a predictor of in hospital complications or mortality outcomes.

Comparative Analysis of the Kinetic Behavior of Systemic Inflammatory Markers in Patients with Depressed versus Preserved Left Ventricular Function Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

BACKGROUND

Prior studies have proven the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with reduced left ventricular (LV) function. This study's aim was to investigate periprocedural inflammatory responses after TAVI.

METHODS

Patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and reduced LV function who underwent transfemoral TAVI were enrolled. A paired-matched analysis (1:2 ratio) was performed using patients with preserved LV function. Whole white blood cells (WBC) and subpopulation dynamics as well as the neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) were evaluated at different times.

RESULTS

A total of 156 patients were enrolled, including 52 patients with LVEF < 40% 35.00 [30.00, 39.25] and 104 with LVEF > 50% 55.00 [53.75, 60.0], p < 0.001. Baseline NLR in the reduced LV function group was significantly higher compared to the preserved LV function group, 2.85 [2.07, 4.78] vs. 3.90 [2.67, 5.26], p < 0.04. After a six-month follow-up, the inflammatory profile was found to be similar in the two groups, NLR 2.94 [2.01, 388] vs. 3.30 [2.06, 5.35], p = 0.288. No significant mortality differences between the two groups were observed in the long-term outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis, with reduced LV function, was associated with an improvement in the inflammatory profile that may account for some of the observable benefits of the procedure in this subset of patients.

Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of Immediate Improvement in Left Ventricular Systolic Function After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Immediate improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is common; however, data on the pattern and prognostic value of this improvement are limited. To evaluate the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of immediate improvement in LVEF, we studied 694 consecutive patient who had underwent successful TAVI for severe aortic stenosis (AS) between March 2010 and December 2019. We defined immediate improvement of LVEF as an absolute increase of ≥5% in LVEF at post-procedure echocardiogram. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event (MACCE), defined as a composite of death from cardiovascular cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or rehospitalization from cardiovascular cause. Among them, 160 patients showed immediate improvement in LVEF. The independent predictors of immediate LVEF improvement were absence of hypertension and baseline significant aortic regurgitation, and greater baseline LV mass index. Immediate improvement in LVEF was significantly associated with a lower risk of MACCE (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.81; p = 0.01). In conclusion, approximately one-fourth of patients with severe AS who underwent TAVI showed immediate improvement in LVEF during index hospitalization. Immediate LVEF recovery was associated with a lower risk of MACCE during follow-up.

Diastolic Function and Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: PARTNER 2 SAPIEN 3 Registry

BACKGROUND

Few studies have evaluated if diastolic function could predict outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to assess the association between diastolic dysfunction (DD) and outcomes in patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS

Baseline, 30-day, and 1- and 2-year transthoracic echocardiograms from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) 2 SAPIEN 3 registry were analyzed by a consortium of core laboratories and divided into the American Society of Echocardiography DD groups.

RESULTS

Among the 1,750 included, 682 (54.4%) had grade 1 DD, 352 (28.1%) had grade 2 DD, 168 (13.4%) had grade 3 DD, and 51 (4.1%) had indeterminate DD grade. Incremental baseline grades of DD were associated with an increase in combined 1- and 2-year cardiovascular (CV) death/rehospitalization (all p < 0.002) and all-cause death at 2 years (p = 0.01) but not at 1 year. Improvement in DD grade/grade 1 DD at 30 days post-TAVR was seen in 70.8% patients. Patients with improvement in ≥1 grade of DD/grade 1 DD had reduced 1-year CV death/rehospitalization (p < 0.001) and increased 2-year survival (p = 0.01). Baseline grade 3 DD was a predictor of 1-year CV death/rehospitalization (hazard ratio: 2.73; 95% confidence interval: 1.07 to 6.98; p = 0.04). Improvement in DD grade/grade 1 DD at 30 days was protective for 1-year CV death/rehospitalizations (hazard ratio: 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.19 to 0.83; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

In the PARTNER 2 SAPIEN 3 registry, baseline DD was a predictor of up to 2 years clinical outcomes in patients who underwent TAVR. Improvement in DD grade at 30 days was associated with improvement in short-term clinical outcomes. (The PARTNER II Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves II - PARTNER II - PARTNERII - S3 Intermediate [PARTNERII S3i]; NCT03222128; PARTNER II Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valves II - High Risk and Nested Registry 7 [PII S3HR/NR7]; NCT03222141).

Computed tomography angiography-derived extracellular volume fraction predicts early recovery of left ventricular systolic function after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

AIMS

Recovery of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after aortic valve replacement has prognostic importance in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). The mechanism by which myocardial fibrosis impacts LVEF recovery in AS is not well characterized. We sought to evaluate the predictive value of extracellular volume fraction (ECV) quantified by cardiac CT angiography (CTA) for LVEF recovery in patients with AS after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS AND RESULTS

In 109 pre-TAVR patients with LVEF <50% at baseline echocardiography, CTA-derived ECV was calculated as the ratio of change in CT attenuation of the myocardium and the left ventricular (LV) blood pool before and after contrast administration. Early LVEF recovery was defined as an absolute increase of ≥10% in LVEF measured by post-TAVR follow-up echocardiography within 6 months of the procedure. Early LVEF recovery was observed in 39 (36%) patients. The absolute increase in LVEF was 17.6 ± 8.8% in the LVEF recovery group and 0.9 ± 5.9% in the no LVEF recovery group (P < 0.001). ECV was significantly lower in patients with LVEF recovery compared with those without LVEF recovery (29.4 ± 6.1% vs. 33.2 ± 7.7%, respectively, P = 0.009). In multivariable analysis, mean pressure gradient across the aortic valve [odds ratio (OR): 1.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.03-1.11, P: 0.001], LV end-diastolic volume (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-0.99, P: 0.035), and ECV (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86-0.99, P: 0.018) were independent predictors of early LVEF recovery.

CONCLUSION

Increased myocardial ECV on CTA is associated with impaired LVEF recovery post-TAVR in severe AS patients with impaired LV systolic function.

Impact of Left-Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients With High- and Low- Gradient Severe Aortic Stenosis Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with high-gradient (HG) severe aortic stenosis (AS) and reduced left-ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) are unknown.

METHODS

Patients undergoing TAVR for native severe AS between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively included and classified into 3 groups: HG (≥ 40 mm Hg) and preserved EF (≥ 50%), HG low EF (< 50%), and low gradient (LG < 40 mm Hg) low EF. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular mortality and readmission for heart failure at 1 year after TAVR.

RESULTS

Of the 526 patients included, 323 (61%) had HG preserved EF, 69 (13%) had HG low EF, and 134 (26%) had LG low EF. HG low EF group had higher prevalence of atrial fibrillation and heart failure and higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons score compared with the HG preserved EF group. Patients in the LG low EF group were older and had higher prevalence of coronary artery disease compared with those in the HG groups. All-cause mortality at 30 days (4.0%) was similar across the 3 groups. After adjustment, the risk of primary endpoint was similar in the HG low-EF vs preserved EF groups. Conversely, the risk of primary endpoint was higher in the LG low EF group vs the HG preserved EF group (hazard ratio [HR], 2.24; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.36-3.70; P = 0.002) and vs HG low EF group (HR, 3.50; 95% CI, 1.55-7.90; P = 0.003), whereas the risk of all-cause mortality was similar across the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The outcome of patients with HG low EF severe AS following TAVR is as good as that of patients with HG preserved EF.

Effectiveness and Safety of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Aortic Stenosis and Variable Ejection Fractions (<40%, 40%-49%, and >50%)

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in aortic stenosis patients with mid-range ejection fraction (ASmrEF) and compared it to aortic stenosis patients with reduced ejection fraction (ASrEF) and preserved ejection fraction (ASpEF). TAVI cases were stratified by baseline ejection fraction (ASrEF, ASmrEF, ASpEF) and compared for characteristics, procedural outcomes, and change in echocardiographic parameters at 1 year and mortality over a 5-year follow-up. The final study population included 708 patients who underwent TAVI. ASmrEF patients presented with improved EF at 1-year after procedure (49.0 ± 9.8 at 1 year vs 43.0 ± 2.5 at baseline, p <0.001) and showed improvements in left ventricular (LV) diameters (LV end-diastolic diameter: 50.4 ± 6.0 at 1 year vs 53.0 ± 5.5 at baseline and LV end-systolic diameter 34.7 ± 7.8 at 1 year vs 39.5 ± 5.9 at baseline, p <0.001 for both). LVEF improved for patients with ASrEF but not in ASpEF patients. LV diameters did not improve for patients in either group. Procedural safety and success rates were similar between all heart failure groups. Survival rates over a 5-year follow-up post-TAVI were not different between patients with ASmrEF, ASrEF, and ASpEF (ASrEF 78.4%, ASmrEF 81.9%, ASpEF 78.3%, p = 0.327). TAVI for patients with ASmrEF is safe and effective and results in marked improvement of LV function and structure.

Minimally Invasive Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement is Associated With Improved Outcomes in Patients With Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Objective

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have a poor prognosis compared with patients with preserved LVEF. To evaluate the impact of sutureless Perceval (LivaNova, Italy) aortic bioprosthesis on LVEF and clinical outcomes in patients with baseline left ventricular (LV) dysfunction who underwent isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Methods

Between March 2011 and August 2017, 803 patients underwent AVR with Perceval bioprosthesis implantation. Fifty-two isolated AVR had preoperative LVEF ≤45%. Mean age of these patients was 77 ± 6 years, 24 patients were female (46%), and mean EuroSCORE II was 9.4% ± 4.8%. Perceval bioprosthesis was implanted in 9 REDO operations. In 43 patients (83%), AVR was performed in minimally invasive surgery with an upper ministernotomy ( n = 13) or right anterior minithoracotomy ( n = 30).

Results

One patient died in hospital. Cardiopulmonary bypass and aortic cross-clamp times were 85.5 ± 26 minutes and 55.5 ± 19 minutes, respectively. At mean follow-up of 33 ± 20 months (range: 1 to 75 months), survival was 90%, freedom from reoperation was 100%, and mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 11 ± 5 mmHg. LVEF improved from 37% ± 7% preoperatively to 43% ± 8% at discharge ( P < 0.01) and further increased to 47% ± 9% at follow-up ( P = 0.06), LV mass decreased from 149.8 ± 16.9 g/m2 preoperatively to 115.3 ± 11.6 g/m2 at follow-up ( P < 0.001), and moderate paravalvular leakage occurred in 1 patient without hemolysis not requiring any treatment.

Conclusions

AVR with sutureless aortic bioprosthesis implantation in patients with preoperative LV dysfunction demonstrated a significant immediate and early improvement in LVEF.

Effect of Baseline Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction on 2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Background:

Impaired left ventricular function is associated with worse prognosis among patients with aortic stenosis treated medically or with surgical aortic valve replacement. It is unclear whether reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is an independent predictor of adverse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Methods and Results:

Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER 2 trials (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) and registries were stratified according to presence of reduced LVEF (<50%) at baseline, and 2-year risk of cardiovascular mortality was compared using Kaplan–Meier methods and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Of 2991 patients, 839 (28%) had reduced LVEF. These patients were younger, more often males, and were more likely to have comorbidities, such as coronary disease, diabetes mellitus, and renal insufficiency. Compared with patients with normal LVEF, patients with low LVEF had higher crude rates of 2-year cardiovascular mortality (19.8% versus 12.0%, P <0.0001) and all-cause mortality (27.4% versus 19.2%, P <0.0001). Mean aortic valve gradient was not associated with clinical outcomes other than heart failure hospitalizations (hazard ratio [HR], 0.99; CI, 0.99–1.00; P =0.03). After multivariable adjustment, patients with reduced versus normal LVEF had significantly higher adjusted risk of cardiovascular death (adjusted HR, 1.42, 95% CI, 1.11–1.81; P =0.005), but not all-cause death (adjusted HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.99–1.47; P =0.07). When LVEF was treated as continuous variable, it was associated with increased 2-year risk of both cardiovascular mortality (adjusted HR per 10% decrease in LVEF, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.07–1.27; P =0.0006) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.01–1.16; P =0.02).

Conclusions:

In this patient-level pooled analysis of PARTNER 2 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement, baseline LVEF was an independent predictor of 2-year cardiovascular mortality.

Clinical Trial Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01314313, NCT02184442, NCT03222128, and NCT02184441.

Impact of preprocedural echocardiographic parameters on increased stroke volume after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Aims

Increased stroke volume (SV) is a prognosticator of severe aortic stenosis (AS) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This study aimed to investigate preprocedural echocardiographic predictors of increased SV after TAVR.

Methods and results

Clinical and echocardiographic data were retrospectively analysed in 129 patients with severe AS who underwent TAVR (2013-2015). We compared the echocardiographic data and cardiac events between the decreased SV group (n=28) and the increased SV group (n=101). Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to assess the predictors of increasing SV. AS severity significantly diminished, left and right ventricular function improved, and SV index (SVi) increased after TAVR: aortic valve area index (0.46±0.13 vs. 1.18±0.33 cm2, p<0.001); aortic regurgitation (AR) grade (1.85±0.55 vs. 1.60±0.54, p<0.001); left ventricular ejection fraction (59.9±12.7 vs. 64.1±12.0%, p<0.001); right ventricular fractional area change (RVFAC) (48.8±11.9 vs. 53.3±14.0%, p<0.001); SV index (SVi) (46.7±11.0 vs. 52.8±12.0 ml/m2, p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier survival estimates suggested that the SVi increase was associated with the decreased cardiovascular events one year after TAVR (hazard ratio 4.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32-12.7, p=0.02). On multivariate analysis, preprocedural AR grade (odds ratio [OR] 7.00, 95% CI: 2.76-17.8, p<0.001) and preprocedural RVFAC (OR 1.05, 95% CI: 1.01-1.10, p=0.011) correlated with the SV increase.

Conclusions

Preprocedurally, greater AR and higher RVFAC could predict an increased SVi and thus the occurrence of fewer cardiac events. Preserved preprocedural RV systolic function is crucial for an increased SV after TAVR.

Effect of Aortic Valve Calcium Quantity on Outcome After Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty for Severe Aortic Stenosis

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty has a role in a select group of patients with severe aortic stenosis. Identifying those appropriate patients who will benefit most is key. Given previous evidence demonstrating that histologically the intervention involves a physical disrupting of the cusp's calcium we hypothesized that the quantity of calcium seen at CT will influence outcome. We examined our cohort of patients who had undergone balloon aortic valvuloplasty and CT-quantified aortic valve calcium (AVC) between July 2011 and April 2014. All patients underwent echocardiography pre- and post-procedure and for those patients managed medically, again at 6 months. A potential predictive AVC value for mortality was calculated using Youden's index. A total of 240 aortic valvuloplasties were performed in 206 patients (male = 124). Valvuloplasty caused a significant (pre 0.63 ± 0.21 vs post 0.77 ± 0.27 cm², p <0.01, n = 240), but temporary (post 0.80 ± 0.27 vs 6 months: 0.64 ± 0.18 cm², p <0.01, n = 88) increase in valve area. Those patients with a non-severe AVC (<1853.5 AU) had a larger increase in valve area after valvuloplasty compared with those with more calcium (0.10 [95% confidence interval {CI} 0.05 to 0.10] vs 0.15 [95%CI 0.10 to 0.22] cm², p = 0.049). Multivariate analysis revealed severe AVC (Hazard ratio 2.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 6.63, p = 0.02) along with pulmonary artery pressure post-valvuloplasty (Hazard ratio 1.02, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.03, p = 0.03) to be predictive of survival. In conclusion, in patients with severe aortic stenosis the degree of AVC impacts on the success of valvuloplasty.

The role of echocardiography in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an effective and less invasive treatment for the increasing population of individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Echocardiography is crucial in the assessment of AS patients from pre- to post-procedure. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) may be used to assess patient suitability for TAVI, as well as evaluate the severity of AS, the aortic valve complex, aortic valve morphology, mitral regurgitation (MR), and left ventricular function. Transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) is usually used as an intra-procedural monitoring tool to provide feedback during the procedure, to assess prosthetic valve function, and to detect complications rapidly before and after balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) or transcatheter heart valve (THV) deployment. In this review, the role of echocardiography in the pre-, intra-, and post-TAVI procedure periods is described in detail.

Early Recovery of Left Ventricular Systolic Function after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background

A lot of studies have shown a positive effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF).

Objectives

We aimed to investigate the effect of TAVI on left ventricular function and correlate this phenomenon with hypertrophy degree in an early follow-up.

Materials and Methods

Between August 2015 and July 2016, 250 consecutive patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) underwent TAVI in our institution. Given the aim of this analysis, only patients with an LVEF <50%, no more than moderate mitral valve regurgitation, successful valve implantation, and 1-month follow-up available were included in the study (n = 46). Patients were enrolled in a prospective database, with clinical and echocardiographic evaluations at 1 month after TAVI.

Results

All patients had severe symptomatic AS (mean transaortic pressure gradients: 44.1 ± 13.8 mmHg and mean aortic valve area: 0.66 ± 0.19 cm²). Mean baseline LVEF was 39.3 ± 8.8%. Significant hemodynamic improvement was observed after TAVI. Mean transvalvular aortic gradient decreased significantly from 44.1 ± 13.8 mmHg to 8.9 ± 4.2 mmHg (P < 0.005). A statistically significant improvement in LVEF compared to baseline was observed in the 1^st month of follow-up (39.3 ± 8.8% vs. 44.1 ± 10.1%, P < 0.019). Overall, 52.2% of patients showed an increase in LVEF, 32.6% had no change, while only 2.2% had a decrease in LVEF. Interestingly, we found a significant reverse correlation between LVEF improvement and ventricular hypertrophy measured as diastolic interventricular septum thickness (Pearson index r = -0.42). Patients showing greater improvement in LVEF were those with less than moderate hypertrophy.

Conclusions

Patients with depressed systolic function show a consistent and early LVEF recovery after TAVI. An impaired LVEF recovery is most likely among patients with more than moderate hypertrophy, probably responsible of left ventricular fibrosis that irremediably compromises systolic function.

Mechanical Intervention for Aortic Valve Stenosis in Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

The risk and benefit of mechanical interventions in valvular heart disease have been primarily described among patients with normal ejection fraction. The advent of nonsurgical mechanical interventions for aortic stenosis (transcatheter aortic valve replacement) may alter the risk-benefit ratio for patients who would otherwise be at increased risk for valve surgery. This review describes the epidemiology and pathophysiology of aortic stenosis with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction and summarizes the current registry and clinical trial data applicable to this frequently encountered high-risk group. It concludes with discussion of ongoing trials, new approaches, emerging indications, and a potential clinical algorithm incorporating optimal mechanical intervention for patients with aortic stenosis and concomitant reduced ejection fraction.

Early Recovery of Left Ventricular Systolic Function After CoreValve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Approximately one third of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis have reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) before transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The incidence, predictors, and significance of early LVEF recovery after CoreValve transcatheter aortic valve replacement have not been described.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We studied 156 patients from the CoreValve Extreme and High-Risk trials with LVEF ≤40% at baseline who had 30-day LVEF data. All patients underwent core laboratory echocardiographic assessment of LVEF at baseline, post procedure, discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year. Early LVEF recovery was defined as an absolute increase of ≥10% in EF at 30 days. One-year outcomes were compared between patients with and without early recovery. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of early recovery. Early LVEF recovery occurred in 62% of patients, generally before discharge. By 30 days LVEF increased >17% compared with baseline in the early recovery group with minimal increase in the no-early recovery group (48.9±8.8% versus 31.5±6.9%; P<0.001). One-year all-cause mortality was numerically (but not statistically) higher in the no-early recovery group (24% versus 12%; P=0.07). Absence of previous myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-1.03) and baseline mean gradient ≥40 mm Hg (odds ratio, 4.59; 95% confidence interval, 1.76-11.96) were identified as predictors of early LVEF recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly two thirds of patients with reduced LVEF will have a marked early improvement after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Early LVEF recovery is associated with improved clinical outcomes and is most likely among patients with higher baseline aortic valve gradients and no previous myocardial infarction.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01240902.

Prognostic Significance of Change in the Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Left Ventricular Dysfunction

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) have a poor prognosis compared with patients with preserved LVEF. To evaluate the impact of early LVEF recovery in patients with baseline dysfunction on clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), we included all consecutive patients who underwent TAVI from the Italian ClinicalService registry with an LVEF of ≤45% at baseline who had 1-month LVEF data. Patients who experienced a previous coronary artery bypass graft, a previous valve replacement, or a previous myocardial infarction were excluded from the analysis. Therefore, 131 patients with an improvement in LVEF of <10% (no-R group) were compared with 121 patients with an improvement in LVEF of ≥10% (R group). The primary end point was the rate of death of any cause. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine independent predictors of lack in LVEF recovery. Early LVEF recovery occurred in 48% of the patients, generally before discharge. One-year all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were significantly higher in the no-early recovery group (log rank test p = 0.005 and p = 0.003, respectively). Baseline severe left ventricular dysfunction and previous percutaneous coronary intervention were identified as independent predictors to warn the lack of improvement in LVEF. In conclusion, nearly 50% of patients with preoperative left ventricular dysfunction demonstrated a significant early improvement in LVEF after TAVI. Lack of early LVEF recovery is associated with a worse clinical outcome and is most likely among patients with a severely abnormal baseline LVEF and a previous percutaneous coronary intervention.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and MitraClip to Reverse Heart Failure

Valvular heart diseases such as aortic stenosis and mitral regurgitation are often associated with heart failure, which in turn increases patients' Surgical Thoracic Society (STS) score. A high STS score means the patient is high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement and mitral valve repair/replacement. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous mitral valve repair offer a minimally invasive alternative for the treatment of valvular heart disease in patients with severe heart failure. We aim to review the current evidence on the safety, efficacy, and outcomes of these devices in patients with severe heart failure.

Impact of Ejection Fraction and Aortic Valve Gradient on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

In patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), studies have suggested that reduced left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) and low aortic valve gradient (AVG) are associated with worse long-term outcomes. Because these conditions commonly coexist, the extent to which they are independently associated with outcomes after TAVR is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of LVEF and AVG on clinical outcomes after TAVR and to determine whether the effect of AVG on outcomes is modified by LVEF.

METHODS

Using data from 11,292 patients who underwent TAVR as part of the Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry, we examined rates of 1-year mortality and recurrent heart failure in patients with varying levels of LV dysfunction (LVEF <30% vs. 30% to 50% vs. >50%) and AVG (<40 mm Hg vs. ≥40 mm Hg). Multivariable models were used to estimate the independent effect of AVG and LVEF on outcomes.

RESULTS

During the first year of follow-up after TAVR, patients with LV dysfunction and low AVG had higher rates of death and recurrent heart failure. After adjustment for other clinical factors, only low AVG was associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio: 1.21; 95% confidence interval: 1.11 to 1.32; p < 0.001) and higher rates of heart failure (hazard ratio: 1.52; 95% confidence interval: 1.36 to 1.69; p <0.001), whereas the effect of LVEF was no longer significant. There was no evidence of effect modification between AVG and LVEF with respect to either endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of real-world patients undergoing TAVR, low AVG, but not LV dysfunction, was associated with higher rates of mortality and recurrent heart failure. Although these findings suggest that AVG should be considered when evaluating the risks and benefits of TAVR for individual patients, neither severe LV dysfunction nor low AVG alone or in combination provide sufficient prognostic discrimination to preclude treatment with TAVR.

The role of TTE in assessment of the patient before and following TAVI for AS

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is now accepted as a standard mode of treatment for an increasingly large population of patients with severe aortic stenosis. With the availability of this technique, echocardiographers need to be familiar with the imaging characteristics that can help to identify which patients are best suited to conventional surgery or transcatheter aortic valve implantation, and what parameters need to be measured. This review highlights the major features that should be assessed during transthoracic echocardiography before presentation of the patient to the 'Heart Team'. In addition, this review summarises the aspects to be considered on echocardiography during follow-up assessment after successful implantation of a transcatheter aortic valve.