Transfemoral aortic valve implantation with new-generation devices

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.

Coronary Access After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Commissural Alignment: The ALIGN-ACCESS Study

BACKGROUND

Coronary access (CA) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with supra-annular transcatheter heart valves (THV) can be challenging. Specific Evolut R/Pro and Acurate Neo THVs orientations are associated with reduced neo-commissure overlap with coronary ostia, while SAPIEN 3 THV cannot be oriented. With the ALIGN-ACCESS study (TAVR With Commissural Alignment Followed by Coronary Access), we investigated the impact of commissural alignment on the feasibility of CA after TAVR.

METHODS

We performed coronary angiography after TAVR with intra-annular SAPIEN 3, supra-annular Evolut R/Pro, and Acurate Neo THVs in 206 patients. Evolut THVs were implanted aiming for commissure alignment. Alignment of Acurate Neo was retrospectively assessed in 36, intentionally attempted in 26 cases. The primary end point was the rate of unfeasible and nonselective CA after TAVR.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight percent of patients received SAPIEN 3, 31.1% Evolut Pro/R, 30.1% Acurate Neo THV. Final valve orientation was favorable to commissural alignment in 85.9% of Evolut and 69.4% of Acurate Neo cases (with intentional alignment successful in 88.5%). Selective CA was higher for SAPIEN 3 than for aligned and misaligned supra-annular THVs (95% versus 71% versus 46%, P<0.001). Cannulation of at least one coronary was unfeasible with 11% misaligned supra-annular, 3% aligned supra-annular, and 0% SAPIEN 3 THVs. Independent predictors of unfeasible/nonselective CA were implantation of a misaligned supra-annular THV (odds ratio, 4.59 [95% CI, 1.81-11.61]; P<0.01), sinus of Valsalva height (odds ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.7-0.98]; P=0.03), and THV-sinus of Valsalva relation (odds ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.1]; P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Commissural alignment improves the rate of selective CA after TAVR with supra-annular THVs. Nevertheless, aligned supra-annular THVs carry higher risk of unfeasible/nonselective CA than SAPIEN 3. Patients with a misaligned supra-annular THV, low sinus of Valsalva, and higher THV-sinus of Valsalva relation are at highest risk of impaired CA after TAVR.

Permanent pacemaker implantation following transcatheter aortic valve implantation using self-expandable, balloon-expandable, or mechanically expandable devices: a network meta-analysis

AIMS

Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) still limits the expansion of indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Comparison between different systems remains scarce. We aimed to determine the impact of the device type used on post-TAVI PPI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies reporting the use of balloon-expandable valve (BEV), self-expandable valve (SEV), and mechanically expandable valve (MEV) and post-TAVI PPI. A network meta-analysis was used to compare TAVI mechanisms (Analysis A) and transcatheter heart valves (Analysis B) with respect to post-TAVI PPI. Analysis A included 40 181 patients with a pooled PPI rate of 19.2% in BEV, 24.7% in SEV, and 34.8% in MEV. Balloon-expandable valve showed lower risk compared to either SEV or MEV and SEV demonstrated lower risk for PPI than MEV. Implantation of BEV was associated with 39% and 62% lower PPI rate with respect to SEV and MEV. Implantation of SEV was associated with 38% lower PPI rate with respect to MEV. Analysis B included 36.143 patients with the lowest pooled PPI rate of 9.6% for Acurate Neo or others, and the highest pooled PPI rate of 34.3% for Lotus. CoreValve, Evolut Portico, and Lotus influenced significantly PPI rate, while Sapien group did not.

CONCLUSION

Implantation of BEV and also SEV were associated with lower post-TAVI PPI rate, while MEV were associated with higher post-TAVI PPI. Patient tailored-approach including devices characteristics may help to reduce post-TAVI PPI and to allow TAVI to take the leap towards extension of use in younger patients.

PROSPERO NUMBER

CRD42021238671.

Anatomical Predictors of Pacemaker Dependency After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are often transient. Limited data exist on anatomic factors predisposing to pacemaker dependency after TAVR. We sought to assess the rate and the possible predictors of pacemaker dependency after TAVR.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker implantation up to 30 days after TAVR between May 2014 and September 2019 were included. Baseline electrocardiographic, computed tomography, and procedural characteristics were collected, including valve implantation depth and membranous septum length, an anatomic surrogate of the distance between the aortic annulus and the His bundle. Pacemaker dependency at 30 days and 1 year and all-cause mortality during follow-up were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 728 TAVR patients, 112 (53.5% men; median age, 81 years) underwent pacemaker implantation after TAVR. Of these, 44.6% (50 of 112) were pacemaker dependent at 30 days and 46.7% (36 of 77) at 1 year. By multivariate analysis, independent predictors of 30-day pacemaker dependency included left ventricular outflow tract calcifications under the left coronary cusp (odds ratio, 5.69 [95% CI, 1.45-22.31]; P=0.013) and a difference between membranous septum length and implantation depth (ΔMSID) ≥3 mm (odds ratio, 7.58 [95% CI, 2.07-27.78]; P=0.002). Conversely, membranous septum length and implantation depth alone were not associated with pacemaker dependency (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.60-1.05]; P=0.11 and odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.99-1.24]; P=0.08). At a median follow-up of 28.1 (11.7-48.6) months, pacemaker-dependent patients did not show a worse survival (P=0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Less than half of the patients undergoing pacemaker implantation after TAVR are pacemaker-dependent at midterm follow-up. ΔMSID ≥3 mm and the presence of left ventricular outflow tract calcifications under the left coronary cusp, but not membranous septum length nor implantation depth alone, are predictive of long-term pacemaker dependency after TAVR, thus influencing device selection and programming.

Comparison of Procedural and 1-Year Clinical Results of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using Prostheses with Different Design of Support Frame

Our study aimed to investigate whether the frame design of transcatheter heart valve (THV) affects the procedural and clinical results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).We retrospectively reviewed 163 patients with aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI using different types of THV (Edwards SAPIEN, n = 31; Venus-A, n = 63; and J-Valve, n = 69). The procedural outcomes and follow-up results for 1-year were compared among groups.The patients who underwent TAVI using J-Valve had a higher mean transaortic pressure gradient than those using SAPIEN or Venus-A after TAVI (1-year follow-up; P = 0.017, P < 0.001, respectively), whereas no difference was observed between the patients with SAPIEN and Venus-A prosthesis (P = 0.150). The incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation was highest in patients with Venus-A (19.0%), followed by SAPIEN (9.7%), and lowest in J-Valve (4.3%) (P = 0.025). No difference was observed in the 30-day mortality rate among the groups (P = 1.000). Moreover, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis revealed that there was no significant difference in the 1-year cumulative patient survival rate among three patient cohorts (log-rank, P = 0.850).The frame design of THVs could affect the valve-related hemodynamics and the incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation in TAVI, whereas it did not influence the survival rate of TAVI patients during 1-year follow-up period. All three THVs provided a convincing short-term outcome for TAVI patients.

Novel Perspective for Antithrombotic Therapy in TAVI

:

While surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was for years the only available treatment for symptomatic aortic stenosis, the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in 2002 and the improvement of its technical aspects in the following years, has holistically changed the synchronous therapeutic approach of aortic valve stenosis. Recent evidence has expanded the indication of TAVI from high to lower surgical risk populations with symptomatic aortic stenosis. The administration of antithrombotic therapy periprocedurally and its maintenance after a successful TAVI is crucial for the prevention of complications and affects postprocedural survival. Randomized controlled trials investigating the appropriate combination and the duration of antithrombotic treatment after TAVI are for the moment scarce. This review article sheds light on the underlying pathogenetic mechanisms contributing in periprocedural TAVI thrombotic complications and discuss the efficacy of current antithrombotic policies as evaluated in randomized trials.

Coronary Access and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Up to 3 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With a Balloon-Expandable Valve

Background:

Coronary artery disease and aortic stenosis often coexist. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a valid therapeutic option for younger, lower-risk patients who may eventually require coronary artery disease treatment. Thus, post-TAVI coronary access (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention are expected to increase. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate patients who were enrolled in the SOURCE 3 (SAPIEN 3 Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome) European registry for treatment with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve and underwent CA with or without percutaneous coronary intervention after TAVI.

Methods:

Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with or without CA up to 3 years after TAVI were compared. A Kaplan-Meier estimate with a univariate model determined the impact of CA on cardiac mortality.

Results:

Of 1936 TAVI patients (mean age 81.6 years, 52% male), 68 (3.5%) had CA within 3 years (mean 441±332 days) after TAVI. At baseline, the logistic EuroSCORE was similar (20.2% versus 18.3%, P=0.2, CA and non-CA groups, respectively). Higher rates of coronary artery disease (76.5% versus 50.6%, P<0.001), myocardial infarction (20.6% versus 11.5%, P=0.03) and previous coronary artery bypass graft (22.1% versus 11.0%, P=0.01) were present in the CA group. In 100% of patients, CA was successfully achieved. The clinical success of percutaneous coronary intervention was 97.9%. Cardiovascular mortality was numerically higher in patients with CA than in those without CA.

Conclusions:

In the large SOURCE 3 European registry, CA was needed at 3-year follow-up after TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve in 3.5% of patients and was successful in all patients. The clinical success of percutaneous coronary intervention was 97.9%.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02698956.

Coronary Angiography After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) to Evaluate the Risk of Coronary Access Impairment After TAVR-in-TAVR

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)‐in‐TAVR is a possible treatment for transcatheter heart valve (THV) degeneration. However, the displaced leaflets of the first THV will create a risk plane (RP) under which the passage of a coronary catheter will be impossible. The aim of our study was to evaluate the potential risk of impaired coronary access (CA) after TAVR‐in‐TAVR.

Methods and Results

We prospectively performed coronary angiography after TAVR with different THVs in 137 consecutive patients, looking where the catheter crossed the valve frame. If coronary cannulation was achieved from below the RP, the distance between valve frame and aortic wall was measured by aortic angiography. CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR was defined as feasible if the catheter passed above the RP, as theoretically feasible if passed under the RP with valve‐to‐aorta distance >2 mm, and as unfeasible if passed under the RP with valve‐to‐aorta distance ≤2 mm. Seventy‐two patients (53%) received a Sapien 3 THV, 26 (19%) received an Evolut Pro/R THV, and 39 (28%) received an Acurate Neo THV. CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR was considered feasible in 40.9% (68.1%, 19.2%, and 5.1%, respectively; P<0.001), theoretically feasible in 27.7% (8.3%, 42.3%, and 53.8%, respectively; P<0.001), and unfeasible in 31.4% (23.6%, 38.5%, and 41.1%, respectively; P=0.116). Independent predictors of impaired CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR were female sex (odds ratio [OR], 3.99; 95% CI, 1.07–14.86; P=0.040), sinotubular junction diameter (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48–0.80; P<0.001), and implantation of a supra‐annular THV (OR, 6.61; 95% CI, 1.98–22.03; P=0.002).

Conclusions

CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR might be unfeasible in >30% of patients currently treated with TAVR. Patients with a small sinotubular junction and those who received a supra‐annular THV are at highest risk of potential CA impairment with TAVR‐in‐TAVR.

Treatment of aortic stenosis in patients with chronic liver disease: Another win for transfemoral TAVR?

Chronic liver disease is associated with increased operative risk of open-heart surgery. In this study, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) carried high periprocedural mortality, but transfemoral TAVR appeared to be superior to SAVR in terms of long-term survival. Better risk stratification tools are needed for patients with liver dysfunction to avoid futile TAVR and SAVR procedures.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with Lotus and Sapien 3 prosthetic valves: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Frequent occurrence of paravalvular leak (PVL) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was the main concern with early-generation devices and focused technological improvements. Current systematic review and meta-analysis sought to compare outcomes of TAVR for severe native valve stenosis with next-generation devices: Lotus and Sapien 3.

Methods

Electronic databases were screened for studies comparing outcomes of TAVR with Lotus and Sapien 3. In a random-effects meta-analysis, the pooled incidence rates of procedural, clinical and functional outcomes according to VARC-2 definitions were assessed.

Results

Eleven observational studies including 2,836 patients (Lotus N=862 vs. Sapien 3 N=1,974) met inclusion criteria. No differences were observed regarding composite endpoints—device success and early safety. Similarly, 30-day mortality, major vascular complications, acute kidney injury and serious bleeding events were similar with both devices. Lotus valve demonstrated 35% reduction of the risk for mild PVL: risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49–0.85, P=0.002; but there were no statistical differences with regard to moderate/severe PVL (RR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.18–1.77, P=0.320). Lotus valves produced significantly higher mean transaortic gradients: mean difference (MD) 0.88 mmHg, 95% CI, 0.24–1.53 mmHg, P=0.007; however, without translation into higher rate of prosthesis-patient mismatch (RR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.82–1.47, P=0.540). As compared to Sapien 3, Lotus device placement was associated with significantly higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.95–2.71, P<0.00001) and cerebrovascular events (RR 1.76, 95% CI: 1.03–2.99, P=0.040).

Conclusions

Lotus valve, as compared with Sapien 3, was associated with lower risk for PVL but higher risk for permanent pacemaker implantation and cerebrovascular events.

Transcatheter treatment of native aortic valve regurgitation: Results from an international registry using the transfemoral ACURATE neo valve

•

Native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) presents technical challenges for TAVR.

•

This is the largest study on NAVR patients treated with the ACURATE neo valve.

•

Intraprocedural mortality was 0%, device success 87.5% and moderate PVL rate 8.3%.

•

Device success tended to be higher with perimeter-based >10% oversizing.

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been validated for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients at high and intermediate surgical risk. Recently, TAVR has been proposed as an alternative to medical therapy in inoperable patients with severe native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR). This multicenter international registry sought to evaluate safety and efficacy of TAVR with the self-expandable ACURATE neo valve in a cohort of patients with NAVR.

Methods

A total of 24 patients with severe NAVR treated by TAVR between September 2016 and October 2018 in 13 European centers were included. Clinical, procedural and follow up data were inserted in a dedicated database. Outcomes were codified according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria.

Results

Mean age was 79.4 years, 58.4% were female. Mean EuroSCORE II and STS score were 5% and 3.9%, respectively. Device success was 87.5%. Moderate paravalvular leak (PVL) was found in two (8.3%) of patients, both with a perimeter oversizing index <10%. Implantation of a second device was necessary in three cases (12.5%), one for severe PVL and two for device displacement. New pacemaker implantation rate was 21.1%. At 30 days, stroke and all-cause mortality rates were 0% and 4.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

This multicenter study suggests good feasibility and early safety of transfemoral TAVR with the self-expandable ACURATE neo device in patients with severe NAVR refused for surgery. Rates of moderate PVL, new pacemaker implantation and need for a second valve were higher than those reported for TAVR in aortic stenosis.

Factors influencing the choice between transcatheter and surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients younger than 80 years: Results from the OBSERVANT study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze the baseline features and clinical outcomes of patients younger than 80 years undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) real-world study, focusing on variables guiding Heart Team decision toward TAVI.

BACKGROUND

Patients treated with TAVI, independently of surgical risk score, are mostly older than 80 years.

METHODS

OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. For this analysis, baseline characteristics, therapeutic approach and outcomes up to 5 years of follow-up of 4,801 patients under 80 years of age were collected. Patients were stratified by age classes (<65, 65-74, and 75-79 years).

RESULTS

Patients <80 years of age with severe symptomatic AS undergoing TAVI (n = 483) had significantly higher Logistic EuroSCORE (10.84% vs. 5.22%, p < .001) and prevalence of comorbidities compared to subjects undergoing SAVR (n = 4,318). The decision to perform TAVI over SAVR was driven by anatomical factors, mainly previous cardiac surgery (odds ratio [OR] 24.73, confidence interval [CI] 12.71-48.10, p < .001) and the presence of porcelain aorta (OR 17.44, CI 6.67-45.55, p < .001), and clinical factors, mainly moderate-severe frailty score (OR 5.49, CI 3.33-9.07, p < .001), oxygen dependency (OR 7.42, CI 2.75-20.04, p < .001) and need for dialytic treatment (OR 5.24, CI 1.54-17.80, p < .008). Among patients undergoing TAVI, those under 65 years had the highest baseline risk profile (despite a low Logistic EuroSCORE) and the highest 5-year mortality compared to those 65-74 and 75-79-year-old (65.22% vs. 48.54% vs. 55.24%, log-rank p = .061).

CONCLUSION

Among patients under 80 years of age with symptomatic severe AS, only 10% underwent TAVI. These patients were at higher baseline risk compared to those undergoing SAVR. The decision to perform TAVI was driven by the presence of both anatomical and clinical factors beyond surgical risk scores. Patients under 65 years of age, despite the low Logistic EuroSCORE, had the highest preoperative risk profile and carried the worse outcome.

Network meta-analysis of new-generation valves for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

To comprehensively compare and rank new-generation valves (NGVs) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation, we performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) of all eligible comparative studies. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched through September 2018. We included all studies comparing 4 NGVs (ACURATE, Evolut R, Lotus, and SAPIEN 3) and an early generation valve (CoreValve) as the reference transcatheter heart valve (THV) each other and reporting at least one of postprocedural incidence of all-cause death, ≥ moderate aortic regurgitation (AR), and new permanent pacemaker implantation (PMI). To compare different THVs, a random-effects restricted-maximum-likelihood NMA based on a frequentist framework for indirect and mixed comparisons was used. Using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA), the relative ranking probability of each THV was estimated and the hierarchy of competing THVs was obtained. We identified 29 eligible studies enrolling a total of 17,817 patients. In accordance with the estimated SUCRA probability, SAPIEN 3 was the best effective for a reduction in death (80.6%) and the second best for decreased ≥ moderate AR (74.4%) and PMI (74.1%) compared with the other THVs. Lotus was ranked the best for a reduction in ≥ moderate AR (94.5%;), whereas the worst for decreased PMI (1.2%) and the second worst for a reduction in mortality (38.6%). ACURATE was the best for decreased PMI (99.2%) and the second best for a reduction in mortality (77.9%). As a whole, SAPIEN 3 may be the best effective NGV among the 4 examined NGVs (ACURATE, Evolut R, Lotus, and SAPIEN 3).