Assess the Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Valve with Mixed Disease versus Predominant Aortic Stenosis

Purpose

In mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), the results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are conflicting. There is limited data on the outcomes of TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and MAVD. The objective of this study is to compare outcomes after TAVR in BAV patients with MAVD and predominant aortic stenosis (PAS).

Patients and Methods

Patients with BAV who underwent TAVR between January 2016 and April 2023 were included. The primary outcome was device success. The secondary endpoints were periprocedural mortality and other complications as defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3). Propensity score matching was used to minimize potential confounding.

Results

A total of 262 patients were included in this study, 83 of whom had MAVD. The median age was 72 years, and 55.7% were male. The baseline comorbidity risk files were comparable between the two groups. Patients with MAVD had more mitral regurgitation, tricuspid regurgitation and pulmonary hypertension, larger annular and left ventricular outflow tract dimensions, and more severe calcification than PAS. In the unmatched population, MAVD patients had similar device success rate (69.9% vs 79.9%, P=0.075) and 30-day mortality (3.6% vs 3.4%, P=1) compared to PAS. Propensity score matching resulted in 66 patient pairs. Device success rate were still comparable in the matched population. Other clinical outcomes, including stroke, bleeding (type 2-4), major vascular complications, acute kidney injury (stage 2-4) and permanent pacemaker implantation, were comparable between the two groups. Multivariable logistic regression analysis did not show MAVD to be an independent negative predictor of device success. At one year, survival was similar between patients with MAVD and those with PAS.

Conclusion

For the bicuspid valve, patients with MAVD had a more challenging anatomy. MAVD patients associated with comparable 30-day clinical outcomes after TAVR compared to PAS patients in patients with BAV.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Concomitant Aortic Regurgitation

BACKGROUND

This study sought to evaluate outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with moderate or greater aortic regurgitation (AR).

METHODS

This was an observational study using an institutional database of TAVRs from November 2012 to April 2022. The study compared outcomes of TAVR in patients with isolated aortic stenosis (AS) vs patients with AS and concomitant AR (moderate or greater). Those patients with trace or mild AR were excluded. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were compared, with end points established by the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and Cox regression for mortality were performed. Competing-risk cumulative incidence estimates for heart failure readmissions were also compared.

RESULTS

Of 3295 patients, 605 (53.4%) had severe AS with no AR and 529 (46.6%) had severe AS with moderate or severe AR. There were no significant differences in in-hospital mortality, length of stay, stroke, myocardial infarction, permanent pacemaker requirement, transfusion requirement, minor or major vascular complications, or 30-day readmissions between the 2 groups (P > .05). There were also no significant differences in annular dissection or rupture, coronary obstruction, or device embolization. Mean gradient and paravalvular leak rates at 30 days and 1 year were similar between the groups. Survival estimates were comparable, and, on multivariable Cox regression, mixed aortic valvular disease was not associated with an increased hazard of death as compared with isolated AS (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.81-1.25; P = .962). Cumulative incidence estimates for heart failure readmissions were comparable between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR can be safely performed in patients with mixed valvular disease, with outcomes comparable to those in isolated AS.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease: A Multicenter Study

Mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD), defined by the concurrent presence of aortic stenosis (AS) and insufficiency is frequently seen in patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, studies comparing the outcomes of TAVI in MAVD versus isolated AS have demonstrated conflicting results. Therefore, we aim to assess the outcomes of TAVI in patients with MAVD in comparison with those with isolated severe AS. Patients who underwent native valve TAVI for severe AS at 3 tertiary care academic centers between January 2012 and December 2020 were included and categorized into 3 groups based on concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI) as follows: group 1, no AI; group 2, mild AI; and group 3, moderate to severe AI. Outcomes of interest included all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates at 30 days and 1 year. Other outcomes include bleeding, stroke, vascular complications, and the incidence of paravalvular leak at 30 days after the procedure. Of the 1,588 patients who underwent TAVI during the study period, 775 patients (49%) had isolated AS, 606 (38%) had mild AI, and 207 (13%) had moderate to severe AI. Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores were significantly different among the 3 groups (5% in group 1, 5.5% in group 2, and 6% in group 3, p = 0.003). Balloon-expandable valves were used in about 2/3 of the population. No statistically significant differences in 30-day or 1-year all-cause mortality and all-cause readmission rates were noted among the 3 groups. Post-TAVI paravalvular leak at follow-up was significantly lower in group 1 (2.3%) and group 2 (2%) compared with group 3 (5.6%) (p = 0.01). In summary, TAVI in MAVD is associated with comparable outcomes at 1 year compared with patients with isolated severe AS.

Prognostic utility of N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide ratio in mixed aortic valve disease

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the incremental prognostic value of N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (Nt-proBNP) for risk stratification in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) patients.

METHODS

We included 556 (73±12 years, 37% women) consecutive patients with at least a moderate aortic stenosis (AS) or aortic regurgitation (AR) lesion with a concomitant AS or AR of any severity in whom Nt-proBNP was measured and expressed as its ratio (measured Nt-proBNP divided by the upper limit of normal Nt-proBNP for age and sex). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Baseline median Nt-proBNP ratio was 3.8 (IQR: 1.5-11.3), and the median follow-up was 5.6 years (4.8-6.1). Early aortic valve replacement (AVR) was performed within 3 months in 423 (76%) patients, while 133 (24%) remained initially under medical treatment. In comprehensive multivariable analyses, Nt-proBNP ratio was significantly associated with excess mortality (continuous variable: HR (95% CI): 1.24 (1.04 to 1.47), p=0.02; Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3: 2.41 (1.33 to 4.39), p=0.004). The independent prognostic value was also observed in patients with severe or non-severe AS/AR, and those treated by early-AVR (all p<0.04). Nt-proBNP ratio as continuous and dichotomic (≥3) variables showed incremental prognostic value (all net reclassification index >0.42, all p≤0.008). After early-AVR, Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3 was associated with higher 30-day mortality (9 (4%) vs 1 (0.5%), p=0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In this series of MAVD patients, Nt-proBNP ratio was a powerful predictor of early and long-term mortality, even in patients with both non-severe AS/AR. Moreover, early-AVR may be an option for patients with Nt-proBNP ratio ≥3. Further randomised studies are needed to validate this last point.

Comparative Outcomes of TAVR in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease and Aortic Stenosis: A Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a suitable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). A high proportion of patients with AS have mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) with mild or more concurrent aortic regurgitation (AR). Differential outcomes of TAVR among patients with AS and MAVD have not been well characterized. We compared 1-year mortalities following TAVR among patients with MAVD and AS.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis of studies published in PubMed/Medline. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality following TAVR among patients with MAVD vs. AS. Secondary endpoints were: (1) incidence of AR within 30 days following TAVR (post TAVR AR); and (2) 1-year all-cause mortality within each group stratified according to severity of post TAVR AR.

RESULTS

Nine studies involving 9505 participants were included in the analysis. At 1 year following TAVR, mortality was lower in MAVD than in AS; HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81-0.98. The mortality advantage increased when pre-TAVR AR was moderate or more; HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.99. The mortality advantage was attenuated after correction for publication bias. There was a higher risk of post TAVR AR in the MAVD group; OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.20-1.90 but the impact on mortality of moderate vs. mild post TAVR AR was greater among patients with AS than in patients with MAVD HR 1.67 95% CI 0.89-3.14 vs. 0.93 95% CI 0.47-1.85.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MAVD have similar or improved survival 1 year after TAVR compared to those with AS.

Mixed aortic stenosis and regurgitation: a clinical conundrum

Mixed aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation (AR) is the most frequent concomitant valve disease worldwide and represents a heterogeneous population ranging from mild AS with severe AR to mild AR with severe AS. About 6.8% of patients with at least moderate AS will also have moderate or greater AR, and 17.9% of patients with at least moderate AR will suffer from moderate or greater AS. Interest in mixed AS/AR has increased, with studies demonstrating that patients with moderate mixed AS/AR have similar outcomes to those with isolated severe AS. The diagnosis and quantification of mixed AS/AR severity are predominantly echocardiography-based, but the combined lesions lead to significant limitations in the assessment. Aortic valve peak velocity is the best parameter to evaluate the combined haemodynamic impact of both lesions, with a peak velocity greater than 4.0 m/s suggesting severe mixed AS/AR. Moreover, symptoms, increased left ventricular wall thickness and filling pressures, and abnormal left ventricular global longitudinal strain likely identify high-risk patients who may benefit from closer follow-up. Although guidelines recommend interventions based on the predominant lesion, some patients could potentially benefit from earlier intervention. Once a patient is deemed to require intervention, for patients receiving transcatheter valves, the presence of mixed AS/AR could confer benefit to those at high risk of paravalvular leak. Overall, the current approach of managing patients based on the dominant lesion might be too reductionist and a more holistic approach including biomarkers and multimodality imaging cardiac remodelling and inflammation data might be more appropriate.

Circulating Irisin Level as a Biomarker for Pure Aortic Stenosis and Aortic Valve Calcification

Irisin, a myokine mainly secreted by skeletal and cardiac muscles, is actively involved in cardiovascular diseases. However, whether irisin is associated with aortic stenosis remains unknown. Two hundred ninety-three severe AS patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation were enrolled and followed-up for 35 months on average. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) was applied to measure circulating irisin levels. Patients were divided into two groups based on the median plasma irisin level. We found that high plasma irisin levels were independently associated with pure aortic stenosis (PAS) after adjusting for age, body mass index, history of peripheral vascular disease, and creatinine (OR = 3.015, 95% CI 1.775-5.119, P < 0.001). ROC curve analysis showed a significant predictive value of irisin for PAS (AUC = 0.647, 95% CI 0.583-0.711, P < 0.001). The severity of aortic valve calcification was negatively associated with plasma irisin levels (P < 0.05). In conclusion, irisin is an independent predictor for PAS and is negatively associated with the severity of aortic valve calcification.

Comparison of In-Hospital Outcomes and Readmission Rates of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Mixed Aortic Valve Disease Versus Pure Aortic Stenosis

Recently, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been performed in patients with combined aortic stenosis (AS) and aortic regurgitation. We sought to evaluate in-hospital outcomes and readmission rates after TAVI in patients with mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD). A total of 100,573 TAVI procedures were identified between 2011 and 2017 using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision procedure codes the from Nationwide Readmissions Database. We separated patients into 2 cohorts, those with MAVD and those with pure AS. The primary outcome was all-cause inpatient mortality after TAVI, and secondary outcomes included rates of 30- and 90-day readmissions and postprocedural complications. A total of 3,260 patients had MAVD (median age 83 years, 43.5% women). In-hospital mortality (2.5% vs 2.6%, p = 0.531) and rates of paravalvular leak (1.0% vs 1.3%, p = 0.056) were similar between the MAVD and pure AS groups. Major bleeding (7.4% vs 9.6%, p <0.001), 30-day readmission (0.5% vs 8.8%, p <0.001) and 90-day readmission rates (0.8% vs 16.0%, p <0.001), acute kidney injury (12.9% vs 15.1%, p <0.001), postoperative ischemic stroke (2.0% vs 5.7%, p <0.001), and mechanic circulatory support use (1.9% vs 4.5%, p <0.001) were less prevalent in the MAVD cohort. Using a multivariate logistic regression model to adjust for confounding factors, MAVD was not predictive of mortality in patients who underwent TAVI (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99 to 1.57, p = 0.056); however, MAVD was associated with: decreased odds of 30-day readmission (adjOR 0.05, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.08, p <0.001), 90-day readmission rates (adjOR 0.04, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.06, p <0.001), and higher odds of pacemaker implantation (adjOR 1.46, 95% CI 1.29 to 1.65, p <0.001). In conclusion, despite differences in the aortic valve and left ventricular anatomy (pressure vs volume-related adaptive changes) in patients with MAVD and pure AS, TAVI appears safe and feasible. However, patients with MAVD were more likely to have permanent pacemakers implanted. The results of our study warrant further randomized controlled studies to confirm these findings.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in mixed aortic valve disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Utilization of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded from high-risk patients to intermediate- and select low-risk candidates with severe aortic stenosis (AS). TAVR is currently not indicated for patients with aortic insufficiency, and its outcomes in mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) are unclear.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline, CINHAL, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies comparing TAVR outcomes in patients with AS vs. MAVD. Primary outcomes included 30-day and late all-cause mortality, and paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). Secondary outcomes were major bleeding, vascular complications, device implantation success, permanent pacemaker, and stroke. Pooled odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using Der Simonian-Laird random-effects model.

RESULTS

Six observational studies with 58 879 patients were included in the analysis. There was no significant difference in 30-day all-cause mortality [OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.15); P = 0.63], however, MAVD group had higher odds of moderate-to-severe PVR [1.81 (1.41-2.31); P < 0.01]. MAVD patients had lower odds of device implantation success [0.60 (0.40-0.91); P = 0.02] while other secondary outcomes were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR in MAVD is associated with increased odds of paravalvular regurgitation and lower odds of device implantation success when compared to severe aortic stenosis.

Application of three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography in preoperative evaluation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Background

Our goal was to determine the accuracy of 3-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE) compared with that of computed tomography (CT) in the preoperative evaluation for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) when the errors caused by inconsistent software and method have been eliminated and the representativeness of the sample has been improved. We also investigated the influence of aortic root calcification on the accuracy of 3D-TEE in aortic annulus evaluations.

Methods

Part I: 45 of 233 patients who underwent TAVR in the department of cardiovascular surgery at the Xijing hospital from January 2016 to August 2019 were studied retrospectively. Materialise Mimics software and the multiplanar reconstruction method were used for evaluation, based on 3D-TEE and CT. The annulus area-derived diameter, the annulus perimeter-derived diameter (Dp), the annulus mean diameter, the left ventricular outflow tract Dp diameter, the sinotubular junction (STJ) diameter-Dp, and the aortic sinus diameter were compared and analyzed. Part II: 31 of 233 patients whose 3D-TEE and CT data were well preserved and in the required format were included. HU450 and HU850 were used as indicators to measure the severity of calcification. The Spearman rank correlation and Linear regression were used to analyze the correlation between aortic root calcification and the accuracy of 3D-TEE in aortic annulus measurement.

Results

The measurement results based on 3D-TEE were significantly lower than those obtained using CT (P < 0.05), except for the STJ diameter-Dp in diastole (P = 0.11). The correlation coefficient of the two groups was 0.699–0.954 (P < 0.01), which also indicated a significant correlation between the two groups. A Bland–Altman plot showed that the ordinate values were mostly within the 95% consistency limit; the consistency of the two groups was good. By establishing the linear regression equation, the two groups can be inferred from each other. The Spearman rank correlation analysis and the Linear regression analysis showed that the influence of aortic calcification on the accuracy of the 3D-TEE annulus evaluation was limited.

Conclusions

Although an evaluation based on 3D-TEE underestimated the results, we can deduce CT results from 3D-TEE because the two methods exhibit considerable correlation and consistency.

Trial registration

Name: Surgery and Transcatheter Intervention for Structural Heart Diseases. Number: NCT02917980. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?term=NCT02917980.

Implications of Coexisting Aortic Regurgitation in Patients With Aortic Stenosis

Background

Aortic regurgitation (AR) is a common comorbidity in patients with aortic stenosis (AS), but coexisting AR has often been excluded from major clinical studies on AS. The impact of coexisting AR on the natural history of AS has not been well-described.

Objectives

The authors compared clinical outcomes in medically managed patients with moderate-to-severe AS with or without coexisting AR.

Methods

Consecutive patients (N = 1,188) with index echocardiographic diagnosis of moderate-to-severe AS (aortic valve area <1.5 cm²) were studied. All patients were medically managed and were divided into those with coexisting AR (at least moderate severity) and those without. Adverse composite clinical outcomes were defined as mortality or admissions for congestive cardiac failure on subsequent follow-up. The authors compared differences in clinical profile and outcomes between the groups.

Results

There were 88 patients (7.4%) with coexisting AR and AS. These patients did not differ significantly in age, but had lower body mass index (22.9 ± 3.8 vs 25.3 ± 5.1 kg/m²), lower diastolic blood pressure (68.7 ± 10.7 vs 72.2 ± 12.3 mm Hg), larger end-diastolic volume index (68.8 ± 18.8 vs 60.4 ± 17.8 mL/m²) and larger left ventricular mass index (118.6 ± 36.4 vs 108.9 ± 33.1 g/m²). The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors did not differ significantly. Coexisting AR was associated with increased incidence of adverse outcomes (log-rank 4.20; P = 0.040). On multivariable Cox regression, coexisting AR remained independently associated with adverse outcomes (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.02-1.82) after adjusting for age, AS severity, left ventricular ejection fraction, and year of study.

Conclusions

In patients with AS, coexisting AR was associated with changes in echocardiographic profile and adverse outcomes.

Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant aortic insufficiency: Insights from the TVT Registry

AIMS

Data regarding outcomes for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) with concomitant aortic insufficiency (AI), undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are limited. This study aimed to analyze the prevalence of severe AS with concomitant AI among patients undergoing TAVR and outcomes of TAVR in this patient group.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using data from the STS/ACC-TVT Registry, we identified patients with severe AS with or without concomitant AI who underwent TAVR between 2011 and 2016. Patients were categorized based on the severity of pre-procedural AI. Multivariable proportional hazards regression models were used to examine all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization at 1-year. Among 54,535 patients undergoing TAVR, 42,568 (78.1%) had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe AS with concomitant AI is common among patients undergoing TAVR, and is associated with lower 1 year mortality and HF hospitalization. Future studies are warranted to better understand the mechanisms underlying this benefit.

SHORT ABSTRACT

In this nationally representative analysis from the United States, 78.1% of patients undergoing TAVR had severe AS with concomitant AI. Device success was lower in patients with severe AS with concomitant AI as compared with isolated AS. The presence of baseline AI was associated with lower 1 year mortality (HR 0.94 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.91-0.98, P < .001) and HF hospitalization (HR 0.87 per 1 grade increase in AI severity; 95% CI, 0.84-0.91, P < .001).

The Evolving Management of Aortic Valve Disease: 5-Year Trends in SAVR, TAVR, and Medical Therapy

Aortic stenosis (AS) and regurgitation (AR) may be treated with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), transcatheter AVR (TAVR), or medical therapy (MT). Data are lacking regarding the usage of SAVR, TAVR, and MT for patients hospitalized with aortic valve disease and the characteristics of the patients and hospitals associated with each therapy. From the Nationwide Readmissions Database, we determined utilization trends for SAVR, TAVR, and MT in patients with aortic valve disease admitted from 2012 to 2016 for valve replacement, heart failure, unstable angina, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, or syncope. We also performed multinomial logistic regressions to investigate associations between patient and hospital characteristics and treatment. Among 366,909 patients hospitalized for aortic valve disease, there was a 48.1% annual increase from 2012 through 2016. Overall, 19.9%, 6.7%, and 73.4% of patients received SAVR, TAVR, and MT, respectively. SAVR decreased from 21.9% in 2012 to 18.5% in 2016, whereas TAVR increased from 2.6% to 12.5%, and MT decreased from 75.5% to 69.0%. Older age, female sex, greater severity of illness, more admission diagnoses, not-for-profit hospitals, large hospitals, and urban teaching hospitals were associated with greater use of TAVR. In multivariable analysis, likelihood of TAVR relative to SAVR increased 4.57-fold (95% confidence interval 4.21 to 4.97). TAVR has increased at the expense of both SAVR and MT, a novel finding. However, this increase in TAVR was distributed inequitably, with certain patients more likely to receive TAVR certain hospitals more likely to provide TAVR. With the expected expansion of indications, inequitable access to TAVR must be addressed.