Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Women With Small Annuli at Low or Intermediate Surgical Risk

There are limited data from randomized controlled trials assessing the impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgery in women with aortic stenosis and small aortic annuli. We evaluated 2-year clinical and hemodynamic outcomes after aortic valve replacement to understand acute valve performance and early and midterm clinical outcomes. This post hoc analysis pooled women enrolled in the randomized, prospective, multicenter Evolut Low Risk and SURTAVI intermediate risk trials. Women with severe aortic stenosis at low or intermediate surgical risk who had a computed tomography-measured annular perimeter of ≤72.3 mm were included and underwent self-expanding, supra-annular TAVR or surgery. The primary end point was 2-year all-cause mortality or disabling stroke rate. The study included 620 women (323 TAVR, 297 surgery) with a mean age of 78 years. At 2 years, the all-cause mortality or disabling stroke was 6.5% for TAVR and 8.0% for surgery, p = 0.47. Pacemaker rates were 20.0% for TAVR and 8.3% for surgery, p <0.001. The mean effective orifice area at 2 years was 1.9 ± 0.5 cm2 for TAVR and 1.6 ± 0.5 cm2 for surgery and the mean gradient was 8.0 ± 4.1 versus 12.7 ± 6.0 mm Hg, respectively (both p <0.001). Moderate or severe patient-prothesis mismatch at discharge occurred in 10.9% of patients who underwent TAVR and 33.2% of patients who underwent surgery, p <0.001. In conclusion, in women with small annuli, the clinical outcomes to 2 years were similar between self-expanding, supra-annular TAVR and surgery, with better hemodynamics in the TAVR group and fewer pacemakers in the surgical group.

Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable TAVR in Patients with a Small Aortic Annulus

BACKGROUND

Patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus are at risk for impaired valvular hemodynamic performance and associated adverse cardiovascular clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR).

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and an aortic-valve annulus area of 430 mm2 or less in a 1:1 ratio to undergo TAVR with either a self-expanding supraannular valve or a balloon-expandable valve. The coprimary end points, each assessed through 12 months, were a composite of death, disabling stroke, or rehospitalization for heart failure (tested for noninferiority) and a composite end point measuring bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction (tested for superiority).

RESULTS

A total of 716 patients were treated at 83 sites in 13 countries (mean age, 80 years; 87% women; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 3.3%). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients who died, had a disabling stroke, or were rehospitalized for heart failure through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 10.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -1.2 percentage points; 90% confidence interval [CI], -4.9 to 2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 41.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -32.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -38.7 to -25.6; P<0.001 for superiority). The aortic-valve mean gradient at 12 months was 7.7 mm Hg with the self-expanding valve and 15.7 mm Hg with the balloon-expandable valve, and the corresponding values for additional secondary end points through 12 months were as follows: mean effective orifice area, 1.99 cm2 and 1.50 cm2; percentage of patients with hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, 3.5% and 32.8%; and percentage of women with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction, 10.2% and 43.3% (all P<0.001). Moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch at 30 days was found in 11.2% of the patients in the self-expanding valve group and 35.3% of those in the balloon-expandable valve group (P<0.001). Major safety end points appeared to be similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus who underwent TAVR, a self-expanding supraannular valve was noninferior to a balloon-expandable valve with respect to clinical outcomes and was superior with respect to bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months. (Funded by Medtronic; SMART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04722250.).

Three-year clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid aortic disease: Comparison between self-expanding and balloon-expandable valves

INTRODUCTION

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis is a complex anatomical scenario for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Favorable short-term clinical outcomes have been reported with TAVI in this setting, but long-term data are scarce.

METHODS

We retrospectively included, in a single-center registry, patients with BAV stenosis who underwent TAVI before 2020. We compared patients treated with self-expanding valves (SEV) versus balloon-expandable valves (BEV). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, stroke and need for aortic valve (AV) reintervention at 3 years. Secondary endpoints included each component of the primary endpoint, cardiovascular mortality, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rate, mean gradient and ≥moderate paravalvular leak (PVL) rate.

RESULTS

A total of 150 consecutive patients (SEV = 83, BEV = 67) were included. No significant differences were reported between SEV and BEV groups for the primary composite endpoint (SEV 35.9% vs. BEV 32%, p = 0.66), neither for clinical secondary endpoints (all-cause mortality SEV 28.1% vs. BEV 28%, p = 0.988; cardiovascular mortality SEV 14.1% vs. BEV 20%, p = 0.399; stroke SEV 12.5% vs. BEV 6%, p = 0.342; need for AV reintervention SEV 0% vs. BEV 0%; PPI SEV 28.1% vs. BEV 24%, p = 0.620). A lower mean gradient persisted up to 3 years in the SEV group (SEV 8.8 ± 3.8 mmHg vs. BEV 10.7 ± 3.2 mmHg, p = 0.063), while no significant difference was found in the rate of ≥ moderate PVL (SEV 3/30 vs. BEV 0/25, p = 0.242).

CONCLUSIONS

In this single center registry, we observed favorable 3-year clinical outcomes in nonselected BAV patients treated with different generation devices, without significant differences between patients receiving SEV or BEV.

Cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients at low surgical risk in France: a model-based analysis of the Evolut LR trial

BACKGROUND

In the recent Evolut Low Risk randomized trial, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was shown to be non-inferior to surgery (SAVR) regarding the composite end point of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 24 months.

AIMS

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of self-expandable TAVI in low-risk patients, using the French healthcare system as the basis for analysis.

METHODS

Mortality, health-related quality of life, and clinical event rates through two-year follow-up were derived from trial data (N = 725 TAVI and N = 678 SAVR; mean age: 73.9 years; mean STS-PROM: 1.9%). Cost inputs were based on real-world data for TAVI and SAVR procedures in the French healthcare system. Costs and effectiveness as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) were projected to lifetime via a decision-analytic model under assumption of no mortality difference beyond two years. The discounted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was evaluated against a willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000 per QALY gained. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted, including assumptions about differential long-term survival.

RESULTS

For the base case, mean survival was 13.69 vs 13.56 (+ 0.13) years for TAVI and SAVR, respectively. Discounted QALYs were 9.34 vs. 9.21 (+ 0.13) and discounted lifetime costs €52,267 vs. €51,433 (+ €833), resulting in a lifetime ICER of €6368 per QALY gained. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, TAVI was found dominant or cost-effective in 74.4% of samples.

CONCLUSION

TAVI in patients at low surgical risk is a cost-effective alternative to SAVR in the French healthcare system. Longer follow-up data will help increase the accuracy of lifetime survival projections.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Global TAVR Activity: The COVID-TAVI Study

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected health care systems. Patients in need of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are especially susceptible to treatment delays.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global TAVR activity.

METHODS

This international registry reported monthly TAVR case volume in participating institutions prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2018 to December 2021). Hospital-level information on public vs private, urban vs rural, and TAVR volume was collected, as was country-level information on socioeconomic status, COVID-19 incidence, and governmental public health responses.

RESULTS

We included 130 centers from 61 countries, including 65,980 TAVR procedures. The first and second pandemic waves were associated with a significant reduction of 15% (P < 0.001) and 7% (P < 0.001) in monthly TAVR case volume, respectively, compared with the prepandemic period. The third pandemic wave was not associated with reduced TAVR activity. A greater reduction in TAVR activity was observed in Africa (-52%; P = 0.001), Central-South America (-33%; P < 0.001), and Asia (-29%; P < 0.001). Private hospitals (P = 0.005), urban areas (P = 0.011), low-volume centers (P = 0.002), countries with lower development (P < 0.001) and economic status (P < 0.001), higher COVID-19 incidence (P < 0.001), and more stringent public health restrictions (P < 0.001) experienced a greater reduction in TAVR activity.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR procedural volume declined substantially during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in Africa, Central-South America, and Asia. National socioeconomic status, COVID-19 incidence, and public health responses were associated with treatment delays. This information should inform public health policy in case of future global health crises.

Transaxillary versus transfemoral access as default access in TAVI: A propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Transfemoral (TF) access is default in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Transaxillary (TAx) access has been shown to be a safe alternative in case of prohibitive iliofemoral anatomy, but whether TAx as preferred access has similar safety and efficacy as TF access is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between patients treated with self-expanding devices using TF or TAx route as preferred access in TAVI.

METHODS

A single center cohort of 354 patients treated using TAx as preferred access and a multi-center cohort of 5980 patients treated using TF access were compared. Propensity score matching was used to reduce selection bias and potential confounding. After propensity score matching, each group consisted of 322 patients. Clinical outcomes according to VARC-2 were compared using chi-square test.

RESULTS

In 6334 patients undergoing TAVI, mean age was 81.4 ± 7.0 years, 57% was female and median logistic EuroSCORE was 14.7% (IQR 9.5-22.6). In the matched population (age 79.3 ± 7.0, 50% female, logistic EuroSCORE 13.4%, IQR 9.0-21.5), primary outcomes 30-day and one-year all-cause mortality were similar between Tax and TF groups (30 days: 5% versus 6%, p = 0.90; 1 year: 20% versus 16%, p = 0.17). Myocardial infarction was more frequent in patients undergoing Tax TAVI compared with TF (4% versus 1%, p = 0.05), but new permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted (12% versus 21%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

TAx as preferred access is feasible and safe with outcomes that are comparable to TF access.

Bleeding in Patients Undergoing Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Incidence, Trends, Clinical Outcomes, and Predictors

BACKGROUND

Bleeding is one of the most frequent complications in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Importantly, major bleeding is associated with poor clinical outcomes after TAVR. However, large studies on bleeding complications in the contemporary TAVR population are limited.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, temporal trends, clinical outcomes, and predictors of bleeding in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR.

METHODS

The CENTER2 study is a pooled patient-level database from 10 clinical studies including patients who underwent TAVR between 2007 and 2022.

RESULTS

A total of 23,562 patients underwent transfemoral TAVR. The mean age was 81.5 ± 6.7 years, and 56% were women. Major bleeding within the first 30 days was observed in 1,545 patients (6.6%). Minor bleeding was reported in 1,143 patients (4.7%). Rates of major bleeding decreased from 11.5% in 2007-2010 to 5.5% in 2019-2022 (Ptrend < 0.001). Dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with higher major bleeding rates compared with single antiplatelet therapy (12.2% vs 9.1%; OR: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.13-1.72; P = 0.002). Patients with major bleeding had increased mortality risk during the first 30 days (14.1% vs 4.3%; OR: 3.66; 95% CI: 3.11-4.31; P < 0.001) and during 1-year follow-up (27.8% vs 14.5%; HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.41-1.59; P < 0.001). Minor bleeding did not affect 1-year mortality risk (16.7% vs 14.5%; HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.93-1.32; P = 0.27). Predictors of major bleeding were female sex and peripheral vascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Bleeding complications remain frequent and important in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Increased mortality risk in major bleeding persists after the initial 30 days. (Cerebrovascular Events in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Balloon-Expandable Valves Versus Self-Expandable Valves [CENTER]; NCT03588247).

Comparison of ultrasound- versus fluoroscopy-guidEd femorAl access In tranS-catheter aortic valve replacement In the Era of contempoRary devices: The EASIER registry

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications (VCs) still represent one of the principal concerns of trans-femoral trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). New-generation devices can minimize such complications but the arterial access management is left to the operator's choice. This study aims to describe the rate of VCs in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices and to determine whether an ultrasound-guided (USG) vs. a fluoroscopy-guided (FG) femoral access management has an impact on their prevention.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational, multicenter study. Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices were analyzed from January 2022 to October 2022 in five tertiary care centers. Femoral accesses were managed according to the operator's preferences. All the patients underwent a pre-discharge peripheral ultrasound control. VCs and bleedings were the main endpoints of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 458 consecutive patients were enrolled (274 in the USG group and 184 in the FG group). VCs occurred in 6.5 % of the patients (5.2 % minor and 1.3 % major). There was no difference between the USG and the FG groups in terms of any VCs (7.3 % vs. 5.4 %; p = 0.4), or any VARC-3 bleedings (6.9 % vs 6 %, p = 0.9). At logistic regression analysis, the two guidance strategies did not result as predictors of VCs (odds Ratio 0.8, 95 % Confidence Interval 0.46-1.4; P = 0.4).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with new-generation devices, the occurrence of VCs is low and mostly represented by minor VCs. USG and FG modalities did not affect the rate of VCs.

Transfemoral tricuspid valve replacement and one-year outcomes: the TRISCEND study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

For patients with symptomatic, severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), early results of transcatheter tricuspid valve (TV) intervention studies have shown significant improvements in functional status and quality of life associated with right-heart reverse remodelling. Longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm sustained improvements in these outcomes.

METHODS

The prospective, single-arm, multicentre TRISCEND study enrolled 176 patients to evaluate the safety and performance of transcatheter TV replacement in patients with ≥moderate, symptomatic TR despite medical therapy. Major adverse events, reduction in TR grade and haemodynamic outcomes by echocardiography, and clinical, functional, and quality-of-life parameters are reported to one year.

RESULTS

Enrolled patients were 71.0% female, mean age 78.7 years, 88.0% ≥ severe TR, and 75.4% New York Heart Association classes III-IV. Tricuspid regurgitation was reduced to ≤mild in 97.6% (P < .001), with increases in stroke volume (10.5 ± 16.8 mL, P < .001) and cardiac output (0.6 ± 1.2 L/min, P < .001). New York Heart Association class I or II was achieved in 93.3% (P < .001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score increased by 25.7 points (P < .001), and six-minute walk distance increased by 56.2 m (P < .001). All-cause mortality was 9.1%, and 10.2% of patients were hospitalized for heart failure.

CONCLUSIONS

In an elderly, highly comorbid population with ≥moderate TR, patients receiving transfemoral EVOQUE transcatheter TV replacement had sustained TR reduction, significant increases in stroke volume and cardiac output, and high survival and low hospitalization rates with improved clinical, functional, and quality-of-life outcomes to one year. Funded by Edwards Lifesciences, TRISCEND ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04221490.

Comparison of different percutaneous revascularisation timing strategies in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains unknown.

AIMS

We sought to compare different PCI timing strategies in TAVI patients.

METHODS

The REVASC-TAVI registry is an international registry including patients undergoing TAVI with significant, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) at preprocedural workup. In this analysis, patients scheduled to undergo PCI before, after or concomitantly with TAVI were included. The main endpoints were all-cause death and a composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 2 years. Outcomes were adjusted using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method.

RESULTS

A total of 1,603 patients were included. PCI was performed before, after or concomitantly with TAVI in 65.6% (n=1,052), 9.8% (n=157) or 24.6% (n=394), respectively. At 2 years, all-cause death was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (6.8% vs 20.1% vs 20.6%; p<0.001). Likewise, the composite endpoint was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (17.4% vs 30.4% vs 30.0%; p=0.003). Results were confirmed at landmark analyses considering events from 0 to 30 days and from 31 to 720 days.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and stable coronary artery disease scheduled for TAVI, performance of PCI after TAVI seems to be associated with improved 2-year clinical outcomes compared with other revascularisation timing strategies. These results need to be confirmed in randomised clinical trials.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Evolut platform for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: the international, multicentre, prospective BIVOLUTX registry

BACKGROUND

Prospective data about transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients are limited.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of the Evolut PRO and R (34 mm) self-expanding prostheses in BAV patients and explore the impact of different computed tomography (CT) sizing algorithms in a prospective registry.

METHODS

A total of 149 bicuspid patients were treated in 14 countries. The primary endpoint was the intended valve performance at 30 days. Secondary endpoints were 30-day and 1-year mortality, severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and the ellipticity index at 30 days. All study endpoints were adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria.

RESULTS

The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.6% (1.7-4.2). Type I L-R BAV was observed in 72.5% of the patients. Evolut valve sizes 29 and 34 mm were utilised in 49.0% and 36.9% of the cases, respectively. The 30-day cardiac death rate was 2.6%; the 1-year cardiac death rate was 11.0%. Valve performance at 30 days was observed in 142/149 (95.3%) patients. The mean aortic valve area post-TAVI was 2.1 (1.8-2.6) cm2, and the mean aortic gradient was 7.2 (5.4-9.5) mmHg. No patient had more than moderate aortic regurgitation at 30 days. PPM was observed in 13/143 (9.1%) surviving patients and was severe in 2 patients (1.6%). Valve function was maintained at 1 year. The mean ellipticity index remained 1.3 (interquartile range 1.2-1.4). Overall, 30-day and 1-year clinical and echocardiography outcomes were similar between the two sizing strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

BIVOLUTX demonstrated a favourable bioprosthetic valve performance and good clinical outcomes after TAVI with the Evolut platform in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis. No impact from the sizing methodology could be identified.

Contemporary European practice in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the 2022 European TAVI Pathway Registry

Background

A steep rise in the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for the management of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis occurred. Minimalist TAVI procedures and streamlined patient pathways within experienced Heart Valve Centres are designed to overcome the challenges of ever-increasing procedural volume.

Aims

The 2022 European TAVI Pathway Survey aims to describe contemporary TAVI practice across Europe.

Materials and methods

Between October and December 2022, TAVI operators from 32 European countries were invited to complete an online questionnaire regarding their current practice.

Results

Responses were available from 147 TAVI centres in 26 countries. In 2021, the participating centres performed a total number of 27,223 TAVI procedures, with a mean of 185 TAVI cases per centre (median 138; IQR 77-194). Treatment strategies are usually (87%) discussed at a dedicated Heart Team meeting. Transfemoral TAVI is performed with local anaesthesia only (33%), with associated conscious sedation (60%), or under general anaesthesia (7%). Primary vascular access is percutaneous transfemoral (99%) with secondary radial access (52%). After uncomplicated TAVI, patients are transferred to a high-, medium-, or low-care unit in 28%, 52%, and 20% of cases, respectively. Time to discharge is day 1 (12%), day 2 (31%), day 3 (29%), or day 4 or more (28%).

Conclusion

Reported adoption of minimalist TAVI techniques is common among European TAVI centres, but rates of next-day discharge remain low. This survey highlights the significant progress made in refining TAVI treatment and pathways in recent years and identifies possible areas for further improvement.

3-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Randomized data comparing outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with surgery in low-surgical risk patients at time points beyond 2 years is limited. This presents an unknown for physicians striving to educate patients as part of a shared decision-making process.

OBJECTIVES

The authors evaluated 3-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the Evolut Low Risk trial.

METHODS

Low-risk patients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular valve or surgery. The primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke and several secondary endpoints were assessed at 3 years.

RESULTS

There were 1,414 attempted implantations (730 TAVR; 684 surgery). Patients had a mean age of 74 years and 35% were women. At 3 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 7.4% of TAVR patients and 10.4% of surgery patients (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.49-1.00; P = 0.051). The difference between treatment arms for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke remained broadly consistent over time: -1.8% at year 1; -2.0% at year 2; and -2.9% at year 3. The incidence of mild paravalvular regurgitation (20.3% TAVR vs 2.5% surgery) and pacemaker placement (23.2% TAVR vs 9.1% surgery; P < 0.001) were lower in the surgery group. Rates of moderate or greater paravalvular regurgitation for both groups were <1% and not significantly different. Patients who underwent TAVR had significantly improved valve hemodynamics (mean gradient 9.1 mm Hg TAVR vs 12.1 mm Hg surgery; P < 0.001) at 3 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Within the Evolut Low Risk study, TAVR at 3 years showed durable benefits compared with surgery with respect to all-cause mortality or disabling stroke. (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients; NCT02701283).

Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in collaboration with the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery

Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is a frequent finding in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and the management of these two conditions becomes of particular importance with the extension of the procedure to younger and lower-risk patients. Yet, the preprocedural diagnostic evaluation and the indications for treatment of significant CAD in TAVI candidates remain a matter of debate. In this clinical consensus statement, a group of experts from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery aims to review the available evidence on the topic and proposes a rationale for the diagnostic evaluation and indications for percutaneous revascularisation of CAD in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter treatment. Moreover, it also focuses on commissural alignment of transcatheter heart valves and coronary re-access after TAVI and redo-TAVI.

A direct wire pacing device for transcatheter heart valve and coronary interventions: a first-in-human, multicentre study of the Electroducer Sleeve

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and complex percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) may require cardiac pacing during device delivery, generally requiring the insertion of a temporary pacing lead via an additional venous access site. The purpose-built Electroducer Sleeve device provides direct wire pacing without the need for a temporary venous pacemaker.

AIMS

This study assessed the safety of temporary cardiac pacing using the novel sleeve device during PCI.

METHODS

This was a multicentre, non-randomised, prospective, first-in-human, single-arm, pilot study. The primary endpoint was analysis of a safety outcome, defined as the occurrence of haematomas or bleeding complications at the device vascular access site. Secondary endpoints included analyses of effectiveness and qualitative outcomes.

RESULTS

Sixty patients (mean age: 77.9±9.6 years) from 4 centres in France were included: 39 (65%) underwent TAVI, and 21 (35%) underwent PCI. Procedures were performed using the sleeve with access through the radial (32 patients; 53.3%) or femoral arteries (26; 43.3%), or the femoral vein (2; 3.3%). Primary endpoint analysis revealed that 2 patients (3.3%) developed EArly Discharge After Transradial Stenting of CoronarY Arteries Study (EASY) grade I/Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type I haematomas at the device access site. As a measure of effectiveness, a haemodynamic effect was observed after each spike delivery in 54 patients (90%). Analyses of other secondary endpoints showed that 2 patients (6.3%) presented asymptomatic radial artery occlusion. No allergies were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This first-in-human trial using the Electroducer Sleeve indicated that this novel, purpose-built, temporary pacing device was safe and effective. Larger prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.

Permanent pacemaker implantation and left bundle branch block with self-expanding valves - a SCOPE 2 subanalysis

BACKGROUND

No detailed data on left bundle branch block (LBBB) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) exist from randomised clinical trials comparing the ACURATE neo and CoreValve Evolut devices.

AIMS

Our aim was to assess the incidence and impact of new LBBB and PPI with self-expanding prostheses from a powered randomised comparison.

METHODS

From the SCOPE 2 trial, 648 patients with no previous pacemaker were analysed for PPI at 30 days, and 426 patients without previous LBBB were adopted for analysis of LBBB at 30 days.  Results: At 30 days, 16.5% of patients required PPI; rates were higher in CoreValve Evolut compared to ACURATE neo recipients (21.0% vs 12.3%; p=0.004). Previous right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR] 6.11, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.19-11.73; p<0.001) was associated with an increased risk of PPI at 30 days, whereas the use of the ACURATE neo (OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.31-0.81; p=0.005) was associated with a decreased risk. One-year mortality was similar in patients with and without new PPI. A total of 9.4% of patients developed persistent LBBB at 30 days, with higher incidences in CoreValve Evolut recipients (13.4% vs 5.5%; p=0.007). New LBBB at 30 days was associated with lower ejection fraction at 1 year (65.7%±11.0 vs 69.1%±7.6; p=0.041).

CONCLUSIONS

New LBBB and PPI rates were lower in ACURATE neo compared to CoreValve Evolut recipients. The ACURATE neo valve was associated with a lower risk of PPI at 30 days. No effect on 1-year mortality was determined for PPI at 30 days, while LBBB at 30 days was associated with reduced ejection fraction at 1 year.

Diabetes mellitus in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a propensity matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Diabetes Mellitus (DM) affects a third of patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). DM is a well-known risk factor for cardiac surgery, but its prognostic impact in TAVI patients remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing TAVI.

METHODS

This multicentre registry includes data of > 12,000 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI. We assessed baseline patient characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with DM and without DM. Clinical outcomes were defined by the second valve academic research consortium. Propensity score matching was applied to minimize potential confounding.

RESULTS

Of the 11,440 patients included, 31% (n = 3550) had DM and 69% (n = 7890) did not have DM. Diabetic patients were younger but had an overall worse cardiovascular risk profile than non-diabetic patients. All-cause mortality rates were comparable at 30 days (4.5% vs. 4.9%, RR 0.9, 95%CI 0.8-1.1, p = 0.43) and at one year (17.5% vs. 17.4%, RR 1.0, 95%CI 0.9-1.1, p = 0.86) in the unmatched population. Propensity score matching obtained 3281 patient-pairs. Also in the matched population, mortality rates were comparable at 30 days (4.7% vs. 4.3%, RR 1.1, 95%CI 0.9-1.4, p = 0.38) and one year (17.3% vs. 16.2%, RR 1.1, 95%CI 0.9-1.2, p = 0.37). Other clinical outcomes including stroke, major bleeding, myocardial infarction and permanent pacemaker implantation, were comparable between patients with DM and without DM. Insulin treated diabetics (n = 314) showed a trend to higher mortality compared with non-insulin treated diabetics (n = 701, Hazard Ratio 1.5, 95%CI 0.9-2.3, p = 0.08). EuroSCORE II was the most accurate risk score and underestimated 30-day mortality with an observed-expected ratio of 1.15 in DM patients, STS-PROM overestimated actual mortality with a ratio of 0.77 and Logistic EuroSCORE with 0.35.

CONCLUSION

DM was not associated with mortality during the first year after TAVI. DM patients undergoing TAVI had low rates of mortality and other adverse clinical outcomes, comparable to non-DM TAVI patients. Our results underscore the safety of TAVI treatment in DM patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03588247).

Two-year clinical outcomes after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation with balloon-expandable versus self-expanding valves: A subanalysis of the GALILEO trial

BACKGROUND

Midterm data comparing clinical outcomes after successful implantation of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THV) are limited. We aimed to compare 2-year outcomes after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the Edwards balloon-expandable or the Medtronic self-expanding THV.

METHODS

Two-year outcomes were analyzed according to the implanted THV in the GALILEO trial. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was a composite of all-cause death or thromboembolic events including stroke, myocardial infarction, symptomatic valve thrombosis, systemic embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism.

RESULTS

Among 1644 patients recruited in 136 centers across 16 countries between 2015 and 2018, 499 received a self-expanding and 757 patients received a balloon-expandable THV. Patients treated with a self-expanding THV were more likely to be female, and had higher surgical risk, lower hemoglobin levels, and more frequent valve-in-valve procedures than those with a balloon-expandable THV. After multivariable adjustment, there were no significant differences in major clinical outcomes between self-expanding versus balloon-expandable THV: MACCE (17.0% vs. 13.4%, adjusted-hazard ratios [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.82-1.69); all-cause death (11.4% vs. 9.3%, adjusted-HR 1.26; 95% CI: 0.78-2.05); cardiovascular death (8.5% vs. 4.0%, adjusted-HR 1.53; 95% CI: 0.82-2.86), any stroke (5.1% vs. 3.7%, adjusted-HR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.43-1.73); major or life-threatening bleeding (5.9% vs. 6.8%, adjusted-HR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.53-1.63).

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov. NCT02556203.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year follow-up data from the GALILEO trial indicate that successful TAVI either with self-expanding or balloon-expandable THVs according to physician discretion did not show difference in rates of MACCE.

Rationale, Definitions, Techniques, and Outcomes of Commissural Alignment in TAVR: From the ALIGN-TAVR Consortium

Given the expanding indications of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in younger patients with longer life expectancies, the ability to perform postprocedural coronary access represents a priority in their lifetime management. A growing body of evidence suggests that commissural (and perhaps coronary) alignment in TAVR impacts coronary access and valve hemodynamics as well as coronary flow and access after redo-TAVR. Recent studies have provided modified delivery system insertion and rotation techniques to obtain commissural alignment with available transcatheter heart valve devices. Moreover, patient-specific preprocedural planning and postprocedural imaging tools have been developed to facilitate and evaluate commissural alignment. Future efforts should aim to refine transcatheter heart valve and delivery system designs to make neocommissural alignment easier and more reproducible. The aim of this review is to present an in-depth insight of commissural alignment in TAVR, including its rationale, standardized definitions, technical steps, outcomes, and future directions.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerated transcatheter aortic valves: the TRANSIT-PPM international project

Background

A severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is associated with adverse outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for de novo aortic stenosis or a failed surgical bioprosthesis. The impact of severe PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR is unknown.

Aim

We sought to investigate the incidence and 1-year outcomes of different grades of PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR.

Materials and methods

The TRANSIT-PPM is an international registry, including cases of degenerated TAVR treated with a second TAVR. PPM severity, as well as in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year outcomes were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria.

Results

Among 28 centers, 155 patients were included. Severe PPM was found in 6.5% of patients, whereas moderate PPM was found in 14.2% of patients. The rate of severe PPM was higher in patients who underwent TAV-in-TAVR with a second supra-annular self-expanding (S-SE) TAVR (10%, p = 0.04). Specifically, the rate of severe PPM was significantly higher among cases of a SE TAVR implanted into a balloon-expandable (BE) device (19%, p = 0.003). At 1-year follow-up, the rate of all-cause mortality, and the rate of patients in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV were significantly higher in the cohort of patients with severe PPM (p = 0.016 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Almost all the patients with a severe PPM after the first TAVR had a failed &lt; 23 mm BE transcatheter heart valve (THV): the treatment with an S-SE resolved the severe PPM in the majority of the cases.

Conclusion

After TAV-in-TAVR, in a fifth of the cases, a moderate or severe PPM occurred. A severe PPM is associated with an increased 1-year all-cause mortality.

Clinical trial registration

[https://clinicaltrials.gov], identifier [NCT04500964].

Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation to treat aortic Para-valvular regurgitation after TAVI

BACKGROUND

Para-valvular regurgitation (PVR) after transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) implantation is associated with increased mortality. Redo-TAVI may be applied to treat PVR, yet with unknown efficacy. We thought to assess redo-TAVI efficacy in reducing PVR using the Redo-TAVI registry (45 centers; 600 TAV-in-TAV cases).

METHODS

Patients were excluded if redo-TAVI was done urgently (N = 253), for isolated TAV stenosis (N = 107) or if regurgitation location at presentation remained undetermined (N = 123). The study group of patients with PVR (N = 70) were compared against patients with intra-valvular regurgitation (IVR) (N = 41). Echocardiographic examinations of 67 (60%) patients were reassessed in a core-lab for data accuracy validation.

RESULTS

Core-lab examination validated the jet location in 66 (98.5%) patients. At 30 days, the rate of residual AR ≥ moderate was 7 (10%) in the PVR cohort vs. 1 (2.4%) in the IVR cohort, p = 0.137. The rate of procedural success was 53 (75.7%) vs. 33 (80.5%), p = 0.561; procedural safety 51 (72.8%) vs. 31 (75.6%), p = 0.727; and mortality 2 (2.9%) vs. 1 (2.4%), p = 0.896 at 30 days and 7 (18.6%) vs. 2 (11.5%), p = 0.671 at 1 year, respectively. Of patients with residual PVR ≥ moderate at 30 days, 5/7 occurred after implanting balloon-expandable in self-expanding TAV and 2/7 after balloon-expandable in balloon-expandable TAV.

CONCLUSIONS

This study puts in perspective redo-TAVI efficacy and limitations to treat PVR after TAVI. Patient selection for this and other therapies for PVR needs further investigation.

Outcomes in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

The use of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is increasing, but studies evaluating clinical outcomes in these patients are scarce. Also, there are limited data to guide the choice of valve type in ViV-TAVI. Therefore, this CENTER-study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI compared to patients with native valve TAVI (NV-TAVI). In addition, we compared outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI treated with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable valves. A total of 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 11333 patients with NV-TAVI were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching, resulting in 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 512 patients with NV-TAVI. Mean age was 81±7 years, 58% were female, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.3% (4.0% to 12.8%). Mortality rates were comparable between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI patients at 30 days (4.1% vs 5.9%, p = 0.30) and 1 year (14.2% vs 17.3%, p = 0.34). Stroke rates were also similar at 30 days (2.8% vs 1.8%, p = 0.38) and 1 year (4.9% vs 4.3%, p = 0.74). Permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted in patients with ViV-TAVI (8.8% vs 15.0%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.92, p = 0.02). Patients with ViV-TAVI were treated with self-expandable valves (n = 162) and balloon-expandable valves (n = 94). Thirty-day major bleeding was less frequent in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 13%, odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.42 to 18.52, p = 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was numerically lower in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 7%, odds ratio 3.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 14.51, p = 0.11). In conclusion, ViV-TAVI seems a safe and effective treatment for failing bioprosthetic valves with low mortality and stroke rates comparable to NV-TAVI for both valve types.

Mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures: Midterm outcomes in a French nationwide registry

OBJECTIVES

Report contemporary outcomes in patients included in the Mitragister registry and treated with transcatheter mitral valve implantation for failed surgical annuloplasty rings or deteriorated bioprosthesis.

BACKGROUND

Midterm survival rates have been reported, but little is known about contemporary morbimortality endpoints.

METHODS

The primary safety outcome was the technical success rate. The primary efficacy composite endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalizations.

RESULTS

From 2016 to 2021, 102 patients (median age: 81 [74;84] years, 61% female, Euroscore II 11.0% [7.8;16.0]) undergoing valve-in-valve (ViV; n = 89) or valve-in-ring (ViR; n = 13) procedures were consecutively included. At baseline, ViR group patients had worse left ventricular ejection fraction (50% vs. 60%; p = 0.004) and more frequently severe regurgitation (46% vs. 15%; p = 0.014). The primary safety outcome was 95%: 77% and 98% in the ViR and ViV populations, respectively, (p = 0.014). At intermediate follow-up (6-12 months) clinical improvement was notable, 88% of the patients were in NYHA class ≤ II (vs. 25% at baseline; p < 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 17.1 ± 11.0 months, the primary efficacy composite reached 27%. By multivariate analysis, paravalvular leak (PVL) was the only independent predictor (hazard ratio: 2.39, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-5.29; p = 0.031) while ViR was not found statistically associated (p = 0.456).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the safety and efficacy of the mitral ViV procedure. ViR patients appear at higher risk of procedural complications. The presence of PVL could be associated with markedly worse midterm prognosis. Whatever the intervention, procedural strategies to reduce PVL incidence remain to be assessed to prevent latter adverse outcomes.

2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND

The Evolut Low Risk Trial (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients) showed that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a supra-annular, self-expanding valve was noninferior to surgery for the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. This finding was based on a Bayesian analysis performed after 850 patients had reached 1 year of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to report the full 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes for patients enrolled in the Evolut Low Risk Trial.

METHODS

A total of 1,414 low-surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis were randomized to receive TAVR or surgical AVR. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated adverse events, and a central echocardiographic core laboratory assessed hemodynamic endpoints.

RESULTS

An attempted implant was performed in 730 TAVR and 684 surgical patients from March 2016 to May 2019. The Kaplan-Meier rates for the complete 2-year primary endpoint of death or disabling stroke were 4.3% in the TAVR group and 6.3% in the surgery group (P = 0.084). These rates were comparable to the interim Bayesian rates of 5.3% with TAVR and 6.7% with surgery (difference: -1.4%; 95% Bayesian credible interval: -4.9% to 2.1%). All-cause mortality rates were 3.5% vs 4.4% (P = 0.366), and disabling stroke rates were 1.5% vs 2.7% (P = 0.119), respectively. Between years 1 and 2, there was no convergence of the primary outcome curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The complete 2-year follow-up from the Evolut Low Risk Trial found that TAVR is noninferior to surgery for the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke, with event rates that were slightly better than those predicted by using the Bayesian analysis. (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients [Evolut Low Risk Trial]; NCT02701283).

Commissural Versus Coronary Optimized Alignment During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were to determine the rate of noncentered coronary ostia and their risk for coronary overlap (CO) and to develop an improved orientation strategy for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices taking into account anatomical cues to identify patients at risk for CO regardless of commissural alignment and compute an alternative, CO-free TAVR rotation angle for those patients.

BACKGROUND

Commissural alignment during TAVR reduces CO risk. However, eccentricity of coronary ostia from the center of the sinus of Valsalva may result in CO even after perfect alignment of TAVR commissures.

METHODS

Baseline computed tomography from TAVR candidates helped identify distance from commissures to the right coronary artery (RCA) and the left coronary artery (LCA). Then, for each case, a virtual valve was simulated with ideal commissural or coronary alignment, and the degree of CO was determined. On the basis of the potential BASILICA (bioprosthetic or native aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction) efficacy, 3 groups were defined: no risk for CO (>35° from neocommissure to coronary ostia), moderate risk (20°-35°), and severe risk (≤20°).

RESULTS

Computed tomographic studies from 107 patients were included. After excluding 7 patients (poor quality or bicuspid valve), 100 patients were analyzed. The RCA showed greater eccentricity compared with the LCA (18.5° [IQR: 3.3°-12.8°] vs 6.5° [IQR: 3.3°-12.8°]; P < 0.001). The mean intercoronary angle was 140.0° ± 18.7° (95% CI: 136.3°-143.7°). Thirty-two patients had moderate to severe risk for CO (≤35°) despite ideal commissural alignment. Greater coronary eccentricity (cutoff for RCA, 24.5°; cutoff for LCA, 19°) and intercoronary angle >147.5° or <103° were associated with greater risk for moderate to severe CO despite commissural alignment (area under the curve: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.91-0.99). If optimal coronary alignment was simulated, this prevented severe CO in all cases and reduced moderate CO from 27% to 5% (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

One third of patients would have CO during TAVR-in-TAVR despite commissural alignment; a 6-fold decrease in this risk was achieved with optimized coronary alignment. Coronary eccentricity and intercoronary angle were the main predictors.

Outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation with and without bioprosthetic valve fracture

BACKGROUND

Bioprosthetic valve fracture (BVF) is a technique to reduce gradients in valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (VIV-TAVI) procedures. The outcome of VIV-TAVI with BVF has not been compared with VIV-TAVI without BVF.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of VIV-TAVI with BVF compared to VIV-TAVI without BVF.

METHODS

In total, 81 cases of BVF VIV-TAVI (BVF group) from 14 centres were compared to 79 cases of VIV-TAVI without BVF (control group).

RESULTS

VARC-2-defined device success was 93% in the BVF group and 68.4% in the control group (p<0.001). The mean transvalvular gradient decreased from 37±13 mmHg to 10.8±5.9 mmHg (p<0.001) in the BVF group and from 35±16 mmHg to 15.8±6.8 mmHg (p<0.001) in the control group with a significantly higher final gradient in the control group (p<0.001). The transvalvular gradients did not change significantly over time. In-hospital major adverse events occurred in 3.7% in the BVF group and 7.6% in the control group (p=0.325). A linear mixed model identified BVF, self-expanding transcatheter heart valves (THVs) and other surgical aortic valve (SAV) types other than Mitroflow as predictors of lower transvalvular gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to VIV-TAVI alone, VIV-TAVI with BVF resulted in a significantly lower transvalvular gradient acutely and at follow-up. Independent predictors of lower gradients were the use of self-expanding THVs and the treatment of SAVs other than Mitroflow, irrespective of BVF performance. BVF significantly reduced the gradient independently from transcatheter or surgical valve type.

Final 3-year clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a supra-annular self-expanding repositionable valve in a real-world setting: Results from the multicenter FORWARD study

Objectives

The Evolut R FORWARD study confirmed safety and effectivenesss of the Evolut R THV in routine clinical practice out to 1 year. Herein, we report the final 3‐year clinical follow up of the FORWARD study.

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a proven alternative to surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Long‐term clinical outcome data with the Evolut R platform are scarce.

Methods

FORWARD is a prospective multicenter observational study that evaluated the Evolut R system in routine clinical practice at 53 centres. Eligible patients had symptomatic native aortic valve stenosis or failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis and elevated operative risk per Heart‐Team assessment. TAVR was attempted in 1039 patients.

Results

Mean age was 81.8 ± 6.2 years, 64.9% were women, STS score was 5.5 ± 4.5% and 34.2% were frail. Rates of all‐cause mortality and disabling stroke were 24.8% and 4.8% at 3 years. Early need for a new pacemaker implantation after TAVR (all‐cause mortality: with new PPI; 21.0% vs. without; 22.8%, p = 0.55) and the presence of > trace paravalvular regurgitation (all‐cause mortality: no or trace; 22.0% vs. ≥ mild; 25.5%, p = 0.29) did not affect survival. Between 1 and 3 years incidence rates of valve related intervention, endocarditis and clinically relevant valve thrombosis were low.

Conclusions

The Evolut R valve maintained a favorable safety profile through 3 years in routine clinical practice. Rates of transcatheter heart valve‐related adverse events were low.

Incidence, predictors and clinical impact of permanent pacemaker insertion in women following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Insights from a prospective multinational registry

OBJECTIVES

To describe the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of permanent pacemaker insertion (PPI) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in women.

BACKGROUND

Data on pacemaker insertion complicating TAVR in women are scarce.

METHODS

The Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve implantation (WIN-TAVI) is a prospective registry evaluating the safety and efficacy of TAVR in women. We included patients without preprocedural pacemakers and divided them into two groups: (1) PPI and (2) no-PPI. We identified PPI predictors using logistic regression and studied its clinical impact on the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 efficacy and safety endpoints.

RESULTS

Out of 1019 patients, 922 were included in the analysis. Post-TAVR PPI occurred in 132 (14.3%) patients. Clinical and procedural characteristics were similar in both groups. Pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB) was associated with a high risk of post-TAVR PPI (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.85-7.06, p < 0.001), while implantation of balloon-expandable prosthesis was associated with a lower risk (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.74, p < 0.001). Post-TAVR PPI prolonged in-hospital stay by a median of 2 days (11 [9-16] days in PPI vs. 9 [7-14] days in no-PPI, p = 0.005), yet risks of VARC-2 efficacy and safety endpoints at 1 year were similar in both groups (_adj HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.60-1.52, p = 0.84 and _adj HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.83-1.79, p = 0.31, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Pacemaker implantation following TAVR is frequent among women and is associated with pre-existing RBBB and valve type. PPI prolongs hospital stay, albeit without any significant impact on 1-year outcomes.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Degenerated Transcatheter Aortic Valves: The TRANSIT International Project

[Figure: see text].

Impact of body mass index on outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Objective

This study sought to investigate the effect of body mass index on outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Methods

A total of 12,381 patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation were divided into body mass index categories: underweight (<18.5 kg/m²), normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m²), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m²), and obesity (>30 kg/m²). Primary endpoints were differences in 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints included all other clinical endpoints such as stroke. Univariate and multivariate odds ratios were calculated using logistic and cox regression analyses.

Results

Two percent (n = 205) of patients were underweight, 29% (n = 3564) were normal weight, 44% (n = 5460) were overweight, and 25% (n = 3152) were obese. Thirty-day mortality was lower in overweight (5.3%, odds ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval, 0.61-0.88; P = .001) and obese patients (5.2%, odds ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.92; P = .006), but higher in underweight (9.8%, odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.92-2.47; P = .010) as compared to normal weight patients (6.9%). After multivariate adjustment, 30-day mortality was not significantly different across body mass index categories. However, 1-year mortality was higher in underweight patients (hazard ratio, 1.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-2.09; P = .011). Stroke rates were comparable between body mass index groups.

Conclusions

For overweight and obese patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation, there was no 30-day difference in mortality compared with patients with normal weight. However, underweight patients showed higher rates of 1-year mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Bioprosthetic valve fracture: Predictors of outcome and follow-up. Results from a multicenter study

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate outcome and its predictors of bioprosthetic valve fracture (BVF) in patients undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV-TAVR).

BACKGROUND

BVF is feasible and reduces transvalvular gradients in VIV-TAVR-procedures, but follow-up-data and information on factors influencing the outcome are missing.

METHODS

The 81 cases of BVF-VIV-TAVR were collected from 14 international centers.

RESULTS

Predominantly transcatheter heart valve (THV) was implanted first, followed by BVF. VARC-2 defined device success was 93%, most failures were attributed to residual high gradients. Mean gradients decreased from 37 ± 13 mmHg to 10.8 ± 5.9 mmHg (p < 0.001). BVF reduced the gradient by 16 mmHg. During follow-up (FU, 281 ± 164 days) mean gradient remained stable (10.8 ± 5.9 mmHg at discharge, 12.4 ± 6.3 mmHg at FU, p = ns). In-hospital major adverse events occurred in 3.7%. Event-free survival at 276 ± 237.6 days was 95.4%. The linear mixed model identified balloon-expandable valves (BEV), Mitroflow surgical valve, stenotic surgical bioprostheses and balloon only 1 mm larger than the true internal diameter of the surgical valve as predictors for higher gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

BVF is safe and can significantly reduce gradients, which remain stable at FU. BEV, Mitroflow surgical valve, stenotic bioprostheses and balloon larger than the true internal diameter of the surgical valve of only 1 mm are predictors for higher final gradients.

ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Among patients with acute coronary syndrome following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are at highest risk.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of STEMI after TAVR.

METHODS

This was a multicenter study including 118 patients presenting with STEMI at a median of 255 days (interquartile range: 9 to 680 days) after TAVR. Procedural features of STEMI after TAVR managed with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were compared with all-comer STEMI: 439 non-TAVR patients who had primary PCI within the 2 weeks before and after each post-TAVR STEMI case in 5 participating centers from different countries.

RESULTS

Median door-to-balloon time was higher in TAVR patients (40 min [interquartile range: 25 to 57 min] vs. 30 min [interquartile range: 25 to 35 min]; p = 0.003). Procedural time, fluoroscopy time, dose-area product, and contrast volume were also higher in TAVR patients (p < 0.01 for all). PCI failure occurred more frequently in patients with previous TAVR (16.5% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001), including 5 patients in whom the culprit lesion was not revascularized owing to coronary ostia cannulation failure. In-hospital and late (median of 7 months [interquartile range: 1 to 21 months]) mortality rates were 25.4% and 42.4%, respectively (20.6% and 38.2% in primary PCI patients), and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42 to 6.43; p = 0.004), Killip class ≥2 (HR: 2.74; 95% CI: 1.37 to 5.49; p = 0.004), and PCI failure (HR: 3.23; 95% CI: 1.42 to 7.31; p = 0.005) determined an increased risk.

CONCLUSIONS

STEMI after TAVR was associated with very high in-hospital and mid-term mortality. Longer door-to-balloon times and a higher PCI failure rate were observed in TAVR patients, partially due to coronary access issues specific to the TAVR population, and this was associated with poorer outcomes.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Failed Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses Using a Self-Expanding Device (from the Prospective VIVA Post Market Study)

Patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis are often treated with a surgical valve replacement. Surgical bioprosthetic valves degenerate over time and therefore may necessitate a redo surgery. This analysis reports the 2-year clinical outcomes of the Valve-in-Valve study, which evaluated transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the CoreValve and Evolut R devices in patients with degenerated surgical aortic bioprostheses at high risk for surgery. The prospective Valve-in-Valve study enrolled 202 eligible patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses due to stenosis, regurgitation, or a combination of both. The Evolut R bioprosthesis was used in 90.5% of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation cases. Two-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality rates were 16.5% and 11.1%, respectively. Other clinical events included stroke (7.9%), disabling stroke (1.7%), and new pacemaker implantation (10.1%). The 2-year all-cause mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with discharge mean gradients ≥20 mmHg vs. those with lower mean gradients (21.0% vs 7.6%, p = 0.025). Discharge mean gradients ≥20 mm Hg were associated with smaller surgical bioprostheses (OR, 7.2 [95% CI 2.3 to 22.1]. In patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses, valve-in-valve treatment using a supra-annular self-expanding bioprosthesis provides significant functional improvements with acceptable rates of complications, especially if a postprocedural mean gradient of <20 mmHg can be achieved.

Adjunctive Antithrombotic Therapy for Patients With Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Importance

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established alternative to surgery for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Adjunctive antithrombotic therapy used to mitigate thrombotic risks in patients undergoing TAVR must be balanced against bleeding complications, since both are associated with increased mortality.

Observation

Stroke risk associated with TAVR is lower than that associated with surgical aortic valve replacement in recent trials including patients at intermediate or low risk, but it is constant beginning at the time of implant and accrues over time based on patient risk factors. Patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR also have a sizable risk of life-threatening or major bleeding. Although dual antiplatelet therapy for 3 to 6 months after TAVR is the guideline-recommended regimen, this practice is not well supported by current evidence. In patients with no indication for oral anticoagulation, current registry-based evidence suggests that single antiplatelet therapy may be safer than dual antiplatelet therapy. Similarly, oral anticoagulation monotherapy appears superior to anticoagulation plus antiplatelet therapy in those where oral anticoagulant use is indicated. To date, no risk prediction models have been established to guide antithrombotic therapy.

Conclusions and Relevance

Despite the growing volume of TAVR procedures to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis, evidence for adjunctive antithrombotic therapy remains rather scarce. Ongoing clinical trials will provide better understanding to guide antithrombotic therapy.

Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to test the superiority in terms of efficacy and safety of a dedicated plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over a suture-based VCD.

BACKGROUND

Vascular complications after TAVR are relevant and often associated with VCD failure.

METHODS

The MASH (MANTA vs. Suture-based vascular closure after transcatHeter aortic valve replacement) trial is an international, 2-center pilot randomized controlled trial comparing the MANTA VCD (Teleflex, Wayne, Pennsylvania) versus 2 ProGlides (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois). The primary composite endpoint consisted of access site-related major or minor vascular complications at 30-days' follow-up. Secondary endpoints included clinically relevant access site bleeding, time to hemostasis, and modified VCD failure (defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 min or requiring additional endovascular maneuvers such as endovascular stenting, surgical techniques, or additional closure devices). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to the VARC-2 definitions.

RESULTS

A total of 210 TAVR patients were included between October 2018 and January 2020. Median age was 81 years, 54% were male, and the median STS score was 2.7%. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of access site-related vascular complications between MANTA and ProGlide (10% vs. 4%; p = 0.16). Clinically significant access site bleedings were similar with both closure techniques (9% vs. 6%; p = 0.57). Modified VCD failure occurred less frequently in MANTA versus ProGlide (20% vs. 40%; p < 0.01). Suture-based closure required more often additional closure devices, whereas MANTA numerically needed more covered stents and surgical bailouts.

CONCLUSIONS

Plug-based large-bore arteriotomy closure was not superior to suture-based closure. Plug-based closure required fewer, but a different kind of bailout maneuvers.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the LOTUS Edge System: Early European Experience

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the LOTUS Edge system.

BACKGROUND

The LOTUS Edge system was commercially re-released in April 2019. The authors report the first European experience with this device.

METHODS

A multicenter, single-arm, retrospective registry was initiated to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes. Included cases are the first experience with this device and new implantation technique in Europe. Clinical, echocardiographic, and computed tomographic data were analyzed. Endpoints were defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 and were site reported.

RESULTS

Between April and November 2019, 286 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with the LOTUS Edge system at 18 European centers were included. The mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score were 81.2 ± 6.9 years and 5.2 ± 5.4%, respectively. Nearly one-half of all patients (47.9%) were considered to have complex anatomy. Thirty-day major adverse events included death (2.4% [n = 7]) and stroke (3.5% [n = 10]). After TAVR, the mean aortic valve area was 1.9 ± 0.9 cm², and the mean transvalvular gradient was 11.9 ± 5.7 mm Hg. None or trace paravalvular leak (PVL) occurred in 84.4% and moderate PVL in 2.0%. There were no cases of severe PVL. New permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation was required in 25.9% among all patients and 30.8% among PPM-naive patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Early experience with the LOTUS Edge system demonstrated satisfactory short-term safety and efficacy, favorable hemodynamic data, and very low rates of PVL in an anatomically complex cohort. New PPM implantation remained high. Further study will evaluate if increasing operator experience with the device and new implantation technique can reduce the incidence of PPM implantation.

TAVR for Failed Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses Using a Self-Expanding Device: 1-Year Results From the Prospective VIVA Postmarket Study

OBJECTIVES

The VIVA (Valve in Valve) trial was designed to systematically and prospectively collect data regarding the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses at high-risk for reoperation.

BACKGROUND

Surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard of care in symptomatic patients with aortic valve disease. However, bioprosthetic valves degenerate over time, requiring redo surgery.

METHODS

VIVA is an international, observational, single-arm, postmarket study conducted at 23 sites that enrolled 202 patients with symptomatic degeneration of an aortic bioprosthesis eligible for elective treatment with a CoreValve or Evolut R self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve.

RESULTS

Patients were elderly (mean age 79.9 years), 47.5% were men, and they had a mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 6.6%. Although 41.8% of patients had surgical bioprostheses with labeled size ≤21 mm, valve hemodynamic parameters were markedly improved from baseline (mean aortic valve gradient 35.0 ± 16.3 mm Hg) to discharge (17.5 ± 8.6 mm Hg) and were sustained at 1 year (15.5 ± 7.5 mm Hg). At 1 year, total aortic regurgitation greater than mild was measured in 1.1% of patients. Clinical outcomes at 30 days demonstrated low mortality (2.5%), no disabling strokes, a 0.5% rate of acute kidney injury, and an 8.0% rate of new pacemaker implantation. At 1 year, the mortality rate remained low (8.8%), with 1 disabling stroke (0.6%). Five patients (2.5%) experienced coronary artery obstructions, 3 during and 1 immediately after the procedure and 1 several months later.

CONCLUSIONS

Degenerated surgical bioprostheses can be safely treated with the CoreValve or Evolut R platform using the catheter-based valve-in-valve procedure. Excellent 1-year clinical and hemodynamic outcomes were achieved in this real-world patient population. (CoreValve VIVA Study Evaluation of the Clinical Outcomes of CoreValve in Degenerative Surgical Aortic Bioprosthesis; NCT02209298).

Transfemoral TAVR in Nonagenarians: From the CENTER Collaboration

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare differences in patient characteristics and clinical outcomes of nonagenarians undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus patients younger than 90 years of age and to test the predictive accuracy of the logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation), the EuroSCORE II, and the STS-PROM (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality) for mortality after TAVR in nonagenarians.

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of severe aortic valve stenosis is increasing due to the rising life expectancy. However, there are limited data evaluating outcomes in patients older than 90 years of age. Moreover, the predictive accuracy of risk scores for mortality has not been evaluated in nonagenarian patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR.

METHODS

The CENTER (Cerebrovascular EveNts in Patients Undergoing TranscathetER Aortic Valve Implantation) collaboration (N = 12,381) is an international collaboration consisting of 3 national registries, 6 local or multicenter registries, and 1 prospective clinical study, selected through a systematic online search. The primary endpoint of this study was the difference in 30-day all-cause mortality and stroke after TAVR in nonagenarians versus patients younger than 90 years of age. Secondary endpoints included differences in baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and the differences in predictive accuracy of the logistic EuroSCORE, the EuroSCORE II, and STS-PROM.

RESULTS

A total of 882 nonagenarians and 11,499 patients younger than 90 years of age undergoing transfemoral TAVR between 2007 and 2018 were included. Nonagenarians had considerably fewer comorbidities than their counterparts. Nevertheless, rates of 30-day mortality (9.9% vs. 5.4%; relative risk [RR]: 1.8; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4 to 2.3; p = 0.001), in-hospital stroke (3.0% vs. 1.9%; RR: 1.5; 95% CI: 1.0 to 2.3; p = 0.04), major or life-threatening bleeding (8.1% vs. 5.5%; RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.2; p = 0.004), and new-onset atrial fibrillation (7.9% vs. 5.2%; RR: 1.6; 95% CI: 1.1 to 2.2; p = 0.01) were higher in nonagenarians. The STS-PROM adequately estimated mortality in nonagenarians, with an observed-expected mortality ratio of 1.0.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, global, patient-level analysis, mortality after transfemoral TAVR was 2-fold higher in nonagenarians compared with patients younger than 90 years of age, despite the lower prevalence of baseline comorbidities. Moreover, nonagenarians had a higher risk of in-hospital stroke, major or life-threatening bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. The STS-PROM was the only surgical risk score that accurately predicted the risk of mortality in nonagenarians.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in cardiogenic shock: TAVI-shock registry results

OBJECTIVES

Aim of this study is to evaluate safety, feasibility, and mid-term outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in cardiogenic shock (CS).

BACKGROUND

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (SAS) complicated by CS is indicated but associated with a grim prognosis. TAVI might be a more reasonable treatment option in this setting but data are scant.

METHODS

From March 2008 to February 2019, 51 patients with severe aortic valvulopathy (native SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis) and CS treated by TAVI in 11 European centers were included in this multicenter registry. Demographic, clinical, and procedural data were collected, as well as clinical and echocardiographic follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean age of our study population was 75.8 ± 13, 49% were women, and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 19 ± 15%. Device success was achieved in 94.1%, with a 5% incidence of moderate/severe paravalvular leak. The 30-day events were mortality 11.8%, stroke 2.0%, vascular complications 5.9%, and acute kidney injury 34%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 early safety endpoint was reached in 35.3% of cases. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 25.7% and the readmission for congestive heart failure was 8.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI seems to be a therapeutic option for patients with CS and SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis in terms of both safety and efficacy at early and long-term follow-up.

1-Year Outcomes of the CENTERA-EU Trial Assessing a Novel Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to report the 1-year results of the CENTERA-EU trial.

BACKGROUND

The CENTERA transcatheter heart valve (THV) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) is a low-profile (14-F eSheath compatible), self-expanding nitinol valve, with a motorized delivery system allowing for repositionability. The 30-day results of the CENTERA-EU trial demonstrated the short-term safety and effectiveness of the valve.

METHODS

Implantations were completed in 23 centers in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. Transfemoral access was used in all patients. Echocardiographic outcomes were adjudicated by a core laboratory at baseline, discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year. Major adverse clinical events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee.

RESULTS

Between March 2015 and July 2016, 203 high-risk patients (age 82.7 ± 5.5 years, 67.5% women, 68.0% New York Heart Association functional class III or IV, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 6.1 ± 4.2%) with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the CENTERA THV. The primary endpoint of the study was 30-day mortality (1.0%). At 1 year, overall mortality was 9.1%, cardiovascular mortality was 4.6%, disabling stroke was 4.1%, new permanent pacemakers were implanted in 6.5% of patients at risk, and cardiac-related rehospitalization was 6.8%. Hemodynamic parameters were stable at 1 year, with a mean aortic valve gradient of 8.1 ± 4.7 mm Hg, a mean effective orifice area of 1.7 ± 0.42 cm², and no incidences of severe or moderate aortic regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS

The CENTERA-EU trial demonstrated mid-term safety and effectiveness of the CENTERA THV, with low mortality, sustained improvements in hemodynamic performances, and low incidence of permanent pacemaker implantations in high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. (Safety and Performance of the Edwards CENTERA-EU Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve [CENTERA-2]; NCT02458560).