Single-Center Experience with the Balloon-Expandable Myval Transcatheter Aortic Valve System in Patients with Bicuspid Anatomy: Procedural and 30-Day Follow-Up

Aims: To report our single-center data regarding the initial 52 consecutive patients with a bicuspid aortic valve who underwent a Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) procedure using the new balloon-expandable MYVAL system. The focus is on reporting procedural details and outcomes over the 30-day postoperative period. Methods: From December 2019 to July 2023, 52 consecutive patients underwent a TAVI procedure with bicuspid anatomy. All patients had moderate to-high surgical risk or were unsuitable for surgical aortic valve replacement based on the Heart Team's decision. Outcomes were analyzed according to the VARC-2 criteria. The results of bicuspid patients were compared to patients with tricuspid anatomy in the overall study group, and further analysis involved a comparison between 52 pairs after propensity score matching. The device performance was evaluated using transthoracic echocardiography. Data collection was allowed by the Local Ethical Committee. Results: The mean age was 71 ± 7.1 years, and 65.4% were male. The mean Euroscore II and STS score were 3.3 ± 3.2 and 5.2 ± 3.3, respectively. Baseline characteristics and echocardiographic parameters were well balanced even in the unmatched comparison. Procedures were significantly longer in the bicuspid group and resulted in a significantly higher ARI index. All relevant anatomic dimensions based on the CT scans were significantly higher in bicuspid anatomy, including a higher implantation angulation, a higher rate of horizontal aorta and a higher proportion of patients with aortopathy. In the unmatched bicuspid vs. tricuspid comparison, postprocedural outcomes were as follows: in-hospital mortality 0% vs. 1.4% (p = 0.394), device success 100% vs. 99.1% (p = 0.487), TIA 1.9% vs. 0% (p = 0.041), stroke 1.9% vs. 0.9% (p = 0.537), major vascular complication 3.8% vs. 2.3% (p = 0.530), permanent pacemaker implantation 34% vs. 30.4% (p = 0.429), and cardiac tamponade 0% vs. 0.5% (p = 0.624). In the propensity-matched bicuspid vs. tricuspid comparison, postprocedural outcomes were as follows: in-hospital mortality 0% vs. 0%, device success 100% vs. 100%, TIA 1.9% vs. 0% (p = 0.315), stroke 1.9% vs. 0.9% (p = 0.315), major vascular complication 3.8% vs. 0% (p = 0.475), permanent pacemaker implantation 34% vs. 24% (p = 0.274), and cardiac tamponade 0% vs. 0%. There was no annular rupture nor need for second valve or severe aortic regurgitation in both the unmatched and matched comparison. The peak and mean aortic gradients did not differ at discharge and at 30-day follow-up between the two groups regardless of whether the comparison was unmatched or matched. There were no paravalvular leakages (moderate or above) in the bicuspid patients. Intermediate and extra sizes of the Myval THV system used a significantly higher proportion in bicuspid anatomy with a significantly higher oversize percentage in tricuspid anatomy. Conclusions: The TAVI procedure using the Myval THV system in patients with significant aortic stenosis and bicuspid aortic valve anatomy is safe and effective. Hemodynamic parameters do not differ between tricuspid and bicuspid patients. However, the permanent pacemaker implantation rate is higher than expected; its relevance on long-term survival is controversial.

Feasibility and outcome of third-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with extra-large aortic annulus

BACKGROUND

Many patients in need for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) present with an aortic annulus size larger than recommended by the manufacturer's instructions for use (IFU).

AIMS

To investigate procedural and short-term safety and efficacy of TAVI in patients with extra-large annuli (ELA).

METHODS

30-day clinical outcome and valve performance as defined by VARC 3 of 144 patients with an aortic annulus size exceeding the permitted range were compared to a propensity-score matched control cohort of patients with an aortic annulus size consistent with the IFU.

RESULTS

Area and perimeter was 730.4 ± 53.9 mm2 and 96.7 ± 6.5 mm in the ELA group. Technical (96.5% vs. 94.4%) and device success (82.3% vs. 84.5%) were comparable in patients with ELA (annulus area 730.4 ± 53.9 mm2) and matched controls (annulus area 586.0 ± 48.2 mm2). There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality rate, major intraprocedural complications, type 3 or 4 bleedings, major vascular complications, or stroke. Moderate paravalvular leakage (PVL) occurred more frequent in the ELA group (8.9% vs 2.2%; p = 0.02). The rate of new pacemaker implantation was 7.0% in the ELA cohort and 15.0% in the control cohort, respectively (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of ELA patients with third-generation TAVI prostheses is feasible and safe, providing similar device success and complication rates as in matched controls with regular-sized aortic annulus. Post-interventional pacemaker implantation rates were low compared to the control group, yet incidence of moderate PVL remains problematic in ELA patients.

A case of a transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation using balloon expandable valve for failed SOLO SMART stentless bioprosthetic valve

A 74-year-old man who had undergone surgical aortic valve replacement with the SOLO SMART stentless bioprosthetic valve 25 mm (LivaNova PLC, London, UK) and mitral valve replacement with MOSAIC 29 mm (Medtronic, Minneapolis, USA) 4 years previously was diagnosed with congestive heart failure, and transferred to our hospital. Echocardiography revealed severe aortic regurgitation caused by degraded bioprosthetic valve. He required continuous dobutamine administration to maintain hemodynamics. As a result of heart team discussion, we decided to perform transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) using balloon expandable valve (Sapien 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, USA). Since SOLO SMART stentless valve was placed to Valsalva sinus at the supra-annular level with continuous sutures, we planned to anchor TAVI valve 4 mm to the left ventricular side from the bottom of the failed stentless valve. Two pigtail catheters were placed at the bottom of the failed stentless valve leaflet to mark the nadir of stentless valve. After ViV-TAVI, the patient no longer required catecholamine administration and was discharged home one month later. This is the first case of ViV-TAVI using balloon expandable valve for failed SOLO SMART stentless bioprosthetic valve in a Japanese patient.

Learning objective

Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) for stentless valves is known to be technically challenging due to poor fluoroscopic visibility. Because the SOLO SMART stentless bioprosthetic valve is sutured to the wall of the sinus of Valsalva above the annulus, the landing point of transcatheter heart valve is at a native annulus which is lower than the bottom of the SOLO SMART leaflet. We describe the first Japanese case of ViV-TAVI with balloon expandable valve for the SOLO SMART stentless bioprosthetic valve.

Clinical outcomes of TAVI with the Myval balloon-expandable valve for non-calcified aortic regurgitation

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in non-calcified aortic regurgitation (NCAR) is an off-label procedure. The balloon-expandable Myval includes extra-large sizes (30.5 mm and 32 mm) of interest in this setting.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of Myval in NCAR.

METHODS

This was an international, multicentre, observational study that enrolled all consecutive patients with symptomatic severe NCAR undergoing TAVR with the Myval device. The images were centrally analysed.

RESULTS

A total of 113 patients were recruited, 64.6% were men, the mean age was 78.4±7.5 years, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.7±1.7%. Aortic root dilatation was present in 59.3% of patients, 7.1% were bicuspid, and the mean annular area was 638.6±106.0 mm2. The annular area was beyond the recommended range for extra-large sizes in 2.6% of cases, and additional volume was added in 92% (median 4 cc, up to 9 cc). The extra-large sizes were used in 95 patients (84.1%), and the mean oversizing was 17.9±11.0%. The technical success rate was 94.7%; the rate of residual ≥moderate aortic regurgitation was 8.9%, and the pacemaker rate was 22.2%. There were no cases of annular rupture, cardiac tamponade, or aortic dissection, but in 4 patients (3.5%) valve embolisation occurred (1 antegrade and 3 ventricular), all in cases with a tapered left ventricle outflow tract (p=0.007). Thirty-day and 1-year mortality were 5.3% and 9.7%, respectively. Technical success was associated with better survival (97.1% vs 72.7%; p=0.012), and valve embolisation was the main determinant of mortality (p=0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

Myval is a feasible and safe option for selected non-operable patients with NCAR and demonstrated good midterm outcomes and lack of impact of oversizing on device durability.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), first described in 1978, occurs when a prosthetic valve functions normally, but has an effective orifice area that is too small relative to the patient's body surface area. It results in residual left ventricular afterload and higher transvalvular pressure gradient, which has been considered to impair prognosis. PPM following surgical aortic replacement is reportedly associated with worse clinical outcomes, such as high mortality. However, the impact of PPM on clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains unclear. There is conflicting evidence on the impact of PPM following TAVI due to differences across studies in terms of follow-up period, methods, patient populations, and type of bioprosthetic valve. The present review summarizes the most recent evidence on PPM after TAVI.

Mid-term impact of underfilling and overfilling of the SAPIEN 3 balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation on mortality and valve function

At present, underfilling or overfilling the volume of the balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) is generally utilized in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, no research has assessed the clinical impact of filling volume variations of the current-generation SAPIEN 3 THV. We analyzed the clinical data of 331 patients who underwent TAVI with SAPIEN 3 at our institution. Post-procedural echocardiographic and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) scan data and 3-year prognoses according to each filling volume were assessed. The procedural outcomes and 3-year mortality rates were comparable among the underfilling, nominal filling, and overfilling groups. For all THV sizes, the THV area evaluated on post-procedural MDCT scan increased stepwise along with an elevated filling volume, thereby covering a wide range of native annulus area. Compared with patients in the nominal filling and overfilling groups, those with 23-mm THVs in the underfilling group had a smaller effective orifice area (EOA) (1.38 [IQR: 1.18-1.56] vs. 1.57 [IQR: 1.41-1.84] vs. 1.58 [IQR: 1.45-1.71] cm², P = 0.02) and a higher mean transvalvular gradient (13.6 [IQR: 11.0-15.7] vs. 12.1 [IQR: 9.0-14.9] vs. 12.0 [IQR: 8.1-14.8] cm², P = 0.04). In conclusion, by adjusting the filling volume of SAPIEN 3 using THV with limited sizes, continuously distributed native annulus areas were covered. The underfilling implantation technique had a minimal negative effect on the valve function of 23-mm THVs only. In the entire cohort, the filling volume variations did not affect the mid-term prognosis negatively.

Delivery balloon volume positively correlates with the diameter and effective orifice area of implanted SAPIEN 3

BACKGROUND

In transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using SAPIEN 3 (S3) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA), some clinicians decrease or increase the delivery balloon volume (VOL) when deploying S3 or conducting post-dilatation. However, the effects of controlling VOL on transcatheter heart valve diameter (THVD) and valve function remain unclear. We assessed associations among VOL, THVD, and effective orifice area (EOA) of S3.

METHODS

We enrolled patients undergoing TAVR using 23- and 26-mm S3 in Sendai Kousei Hospital between 2017 and 2019. VOL was controlled based on preprocedural computed tomography and intraprocedural transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). THVD were defined as the diameters of transcatheter heart valve at mid-level measured by TEE.

RESULTS

In enrolled 332 patients (23-mm, n = 188; 26-mm, n = 144), one (0.3%) and two (0.6%) developed annulus rupture and moderate/severe paravalvular leak, respectively. VOL at deployment was positively correlated with THVD on deployment (23-mm, r = 0.44, p < 0.001; 26-mm, r = 0.57, p < 0.001) and EOA (23-mm, r = 0.23, p = 0.0019; 26-mm, r = 0.22, p = 0.0094). In multiple regression analyses, VOL and post-dilatation were significant determinants of THVD, although aortic annulus area, calcium volume, and pre-dilatation were not. The areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve that were used to evaluate the accuracy of the index obtained by dividing THVD by body surface area (indexed THVD) to predict patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) were 0.744 and 0.811 in the 23- and 26-mm cohorts, respectively. A cut-off indexed THVD of ≤11.5 and 12.1 mm/m² well predicted PPM (23-mm, odds ratio, 5.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.33-20.3; 26-mm, odds ratio 14.1, 95% confidence interval 2.40-81.0).

CONCLUSION

VOL was positively correlated with THVD and EOA. Smaller indexed THVD was associated with a higher incidence of PPM. Controlling VOL under on-site THVD evaluation may be useful in reducing the PPM incidence.

Incidence and predictors of prosthesis-patient mismatch after TAVI using SAPIEN 3 in Asian: differences between the newer and older balloon-expandable valve

Background

The balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) is superior to the older-generation balloon-expandable SAPIEN XT (XT) in a lower incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation, lower complication rates and better survival in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) more frequently occurs in S3 than XT. Further, little information is available on PPM after TAVI using S3 in Asians. This study aims to determine the incidence and predictors of PPM in S3 by focusing on the difference between S3 and XT using data from a Japanese multicentre registry.

Methods

From the Optimised transCathEter vAlvular iNtervention-TAVI (OCEAN-TAVI) registry, 2134 patients undergoing TAVI using S3 or XT were included. PPM was defined as moderate if ≧0.65 but ≦0.85 cm²/m² or severe if <0.65 cm²/m² at the indexed effective orifice area by postprocedural echocardiography.

Results

The incidence of moderate and severe PPM in S3 was 13.3% and 1.3%, respectively. The 20 mm transcatheter heart valve (THV) was more frequently used in S3 than XT (7.4% vs 2.4%, p<0.0001). PPM was more frequently observed in S3 than XT (14.7% vs 8.8%, p<0.0001). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed S3 predicted PPM (OR 1.92 (95% CI 1.35 to 2.74), p=0.0003). The mutual predictors for PPM between S3 and XT were younger age, larger body surface area, smaller aortic valve area, no balloon postdilatation and the use of 20 mm and 23 mm THV. When comparing 23 mm, 26 mm and 29 mm S3, the ORs of 20 mm S3 were 5.67 (95% CI 2.88 to 11.12), 19.24 (95% CI 8.13 to 46.86) and 51.03 (95% CI 12.28 to 280.77), respectively.

Conclusions

The incidence of PPM after TAVI using S3 was 14.6% overall in this Asian population. PPM was more frequently observed in S3 than XT. A considerable number of patients were treated by the 20 mm S3 in an Asian cohort. The 20 mm THV was identified as a strong predictor for PPM.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

After 15 years of successive randomized, controlled trials, indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are rapidly expanding. In the coming years, this procedure could become the first line treatment for patients with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and a tricuspid aortic valve anatomy. However, randomized, controlled trials have excluded bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), which is the most frequent congenital heart disease occurring in 1% to 2% of the total population and representing at least 25% of patients 80 years of age or older referred for aortic valve replacement. The use of a less invasive transcatheter therapy in this elderly population became rapidly attractive, and approximately 10% of patients currently undergoing TAVR have a BAV. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the "European Conformity" have approved TAVR for low-risk patients regardless of the aortic valve anatomy whereas international guidelines recommend surgical replacement in BAV populations. Given this progressive expansion of TAVR toward younger and lower-risk patients, heart teams are encountering BAV patients more frequently, while the ability of this therapy to treat such a challenging anatomy remains uncertain. This review will address the singularity of BAV anatomy and associated technical challenges for the TAVR procedure. We will examine and summarize available clinical evidence and highlight critical knowledge gaps regarding TAVR utilization in BAV patients. We will provide a comprehensive overview of the role of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis, and classification of BAV and TAVR procedure planning. Overall, we will offer an integrated framework for understanding the current role of TAVR in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis and for guiding physicians in clinical decision-making.

Treating patients with excessively large annuli with self-expanding transcatheter aortic valves: insights into supra-annular structures that anchor the prosthesis

BACKGROUND

Some patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have excessively large annuli (ELA) without device options according to current sizing charts. This retrospective study aims to summarize the presentation and outcomes of ELA patients receiving first-generation self-expanding valves.

METHODS

The TAVR database was reviewed in search for cases of self-expanding valves. Patients who had annuli exceeding the perimeter limit on the device sizing chart were referred to as the ELA group. Patients who had annuli within the range covered by the two largest sizes and received the corresponding valve size served as the control group (CG). Baseline, procedures, outcomes, and imaging characteristics on multislice computed tomography (MSCT), such as native anatomy and postimplant stent geometry, were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients were included in the ELA group and 82 in the CG. The patients in the ELA group were younger than those in the CG (72.5 ± 6.2 vs. 75.4 ± 5.8 years, P = 0.03). The median intended perimeter oversizing in relation to the annulus in the ELA group was much smaller than in the CG (-0.4 [-4.6, 4.1] % vs. 16.1 [11.7, 20.8] %, P < 0.01). The calcium burden in the aortic root was around 1.3-fold greater in the ELA group than the CG (756.0 [534.5, 1670.9] vs. 582.1 [310.3, 870.9] mm³, P = 0.01). The need for second valve implantation was higher in ELA (21.4% vs. 12.2%, P = 0.23) but no valve embolization was encountered. The 1‑year follow-up was comparable, including >mild paravalvular leak.

CONCLUSION

Under cautious patient selection using MSCT, TAVR with self-expanding valves in patients with ELA appears feasible. Supra-annular structures likely provide the extra anchoring.