New-Generation Transcatheter Aortic Valves in Patients With Small Aortic Annuli - Comparison of Balloon- and Self-Expandable Valves in Asian Patients

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annulus: A Meta-Analysis

Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a superior option to surgery in patients with small aortic annulus (SAA), it is not clear which type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) has better results in terms of echocardiographic hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expanding valves (SEVs) in patients with SAA who underwent TAVI regarding their impact on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were measured for the outcomes, as appropriate. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the generation type of devices and study designs. A total of 16 articles comprising 1 randomized trial, 3 propensity-matched studies, and 12 observational studies including 4,341 patients (1,967 in BEV and 2,374 in the SEV group) with SAA were included. The implantation of BEVs correlated with a lower indexed effective orifice area (MD -0.19 [-0.25 to -0.13]) and higher transvalvular mean pressure gradient (MD 3.91, 95% CI 2.96 to 4.87). Compared with SEVs, BEVs had increased risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM; RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.45) and severe PPM (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.15). However, BEV had lower moderate and severe paravalvular leak (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.69), risk of stroke (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.76), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91). The 1-year all-cause mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49) and cardiac-related mortality (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 9.81) were not different between the 2 groups. In conclusion, SEVs were associated with larger indexed effective orifice area and lower PPM but higher paravalvular leak. In contrast, patients with SEVs were more likely to develop stroke and required permanent pacemaker implantation. Both THVs did not show difference in terms of early and midterm all-cause and cardiac mortality. Because both types of THVs show similar results regarding mortality data, hemodynamics should be among the factors considered in decision making for patients with SAA who underwent TAVI.

Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.

The first clinical data of the SAPIEN 3 aortic valve in the treatment of aortic stenosis in China

Background

Data on outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement with SAPIEN 3 in China is limited as it was approved by the National Medical Products since 2020. The present study was designed to collect clinical data on the SAPIEN 3 aortic valve in Chinese patients with bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve stenosis.

Methods

We analyzed the patient characteristics, procedural features and procedural outcomes of the first 438 patients (223 for bicuspid aortic valve and 215 tricuspid aortic valve) from 21 provinces in 74 sites treated with the SAPIEN 3 valve system for transcatheter aortic valve replacement between September 2020 and May 2022.

Results

Procedural mortality was 0.7%. 5 cases during the operation were converted to surgery. Among 438 cases, permanent pacemaker implantation was performed in a total of 12 cases (2.7%). The patient had severe leaflet calcification of the aortic valve, with moderate and severe calcification reaching 39.7% and 35.2% respectively. The size of the implanted valves was predominantly 26 mm and 23 mm, reaching 42.5% and 39.5% respectively. The incidence of moderate or severe perivalvular leak in the postoperative period was 0.5%, with a predominance of 90/10 and 80/20 valve deployment height. There was a significant difference in the deployment height of the valve between bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve, with the bicuspid aortic valve having a more deployment height of 90/10. Annulus size in bicuspid aortic valve group was significantly larger than tricuspid aortic valve group. Valve sizing for oversized, within size, and undersized were different between bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve.

Conclusions

Procedural success rates were high, with similar and good results for bicuspid aortic valve and tricuspid aortic valve, low perivalvular leak for both valve types, and low permanent pacemaker implantation rates for both valve types. Annulus size, valve sizing and coronary artery height were significantly different in the BAV and TAV group.

Clinical and Technical Challenges of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is present when the effective area of a prosthetic valve inserted into a patient is inferior to that of a normal human valve; the hemodynamic consequence of a valve too small compared with the size of the patient's body is the generation of higher than expected transprosthetic gradients. Despite evidence of increased risk of short- and long-term mortality and of structural valve degeneration in patients with PPM after surgical aortic valve replacement, its clinical impact in patients subject to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is yet unclear. We aim to review and update on the definition and incidence of PPM after TAVI, and its prognostic implications in the overall population and in higher-risk subgroups, such as small aortic annuli or valve-in-valve procedures. Last, we will focus on the armamentarium available in order to reduce risk of PPM when planning a TAVI procedure.