Incidence and Predictors of Cerebrovascular Accidents in Patients Who Underwent Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair With MitraClip.

Transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge repair (TEER) with transcatheter devices has become a mainstay in the minimally invasive treatment of patients with severe mitral regurgitation at increased surgical risk. Despite its apparently favorable risk profile, there is uncertainty on the risk and features of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) early and long after transcatheter mitral valve repair. We aimed to appraise the incidence and predictors of CVA in patients who underwent TEER. We explicitly queried the data set of an ongoing multicenter prospective observational study dedicated to TEER with MitraClip (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California). The incidence of CVAs after TEER was formally appraised, and we explored potential predictors of such events. Descriptive, bivariate, and diagnostic accuracy analyses were performed. Of 2,238 patients who underwent TEER, CVAs occurred in 33 patients (1.47% [95% confidence interval 1.02% to 2.06%]), including 6 (0.27% [0.10% to 0.58%]) in-hospital strokes and 27 events after discharge (0.99% [0.66% to 1.44%]), over a median follow-up of 14 months. Most CVAs were major ischemic strokes during and after the in-hospital phase. Overall, CVAs were more common in patients with atrial fibrillation (p = 0.018), renal dysfunction (p = 0.032), higher EuroSCORE II (p = 0.033), and, as expected, higher CHA2DS2-VASc score (p = 0.033), despite the limited prognostic accuracy of the score. Notably, the occurrence of CVA did not confer a significantly increased risk of long-term (p = 0.136) or cardiac death (p = 0.397). The incidence of CVA in patients who underwent TEER is low, with most events occurring after discharge and being associated with preexisting risk features. These findings, although reassuring on the safety of TEER, call for proactive antithrombotic therapy whenever CVA risk is increased before and after TEER.

Coronary Access and PCI after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with Different Self-Expanding Platforms in Failed Surgical Valves.

BACKGROUND: Coronary access (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) might be challenging after valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with supra-annular self-expanding valves (SS-TAVs) in surgical aortic valves (SAVs). Our study aim was to compare feasibility, predictors and techniques of CA and PCI following ViV-TAVR with ACURATE neo2 (Boston Scientific, Marlborough) and Evolut PRO+ (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). METHODS: Fifteen computed tomography (CT)-based patient-specific aortic models were 3D-printed and implanted with specific SAVs and with the two SS-TAVs with commissural alignment. Two operators attempted CA (n=120) and PCI (n=120) of each coronary artery in a pulsatile-flow-simulator, under real catheterization laboratory conditions. The primary endpoints were the rate of successful CA and PCI. Outcomes with different SS-TAVs were directly compared. An internally mounted borescope camera was utilized to assess procedures. CT of the models was obtained. RESULTS: ACURATE neo2 showed significantly higher rates of successful CA (96.7%vs.75%, p=0.001) and PCI (98.3%vs.85%, p=0.008), and was associated with a shorter procedural time as compared to Evolut PRO+. Independent predictors of unsuccessful CA and PCI were smaller SAV size and Evolut PRO+. The advantage of ACURATE neo2 was mediated by a larger valve-to-anatomy distance at the top of the leaflet plane (11.3vs.4.8 mm), facilitating more often an external cannulation approach for both CA (36.7%vs.15%, p<0.001) and PCI (36.7%vs.21.7%, p=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of successful CA and PCI following ViV-TAVR was higher with ACURATE neo2 as compared to Evolut PRO+. The differences in SS-TAVs design impacted the cannulation approach and subsequent procedural outcomes.

A novel balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve bioprosthesis: Myval and Myval Octacor.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past two decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded its application across all surgical risk levels, including low-risk patients, where, due to longer life expectancy, reducing common pitfalls of TAVR is essential. To address these needs, many technological advancements have been developed. Myval and the new generation Myval Octacor (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd) are novel balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems designed for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis. AREAS COVERED: This review aims to illustrate the design features of these novel THVs and the main evidence from available studies. Furthermore, we provide evidence of these THVs' performance in challenging scenarios such as extra-large aortic annuli, bicuspid aortic valves, and valve-in-valve/valve-in-ring procedures. EXPERT OPINION: Myval and Myval Octacor have demonstrated comparable early safety and clinical efficacy to the leading contemporary THVs, exhibiting remarkably low rates of moderate to severe paravalvular leak (PVL) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). The wide range of sizes offered by the Myval family may minimize the risk of under-/oversizing, potentially explaining the lower rates of the aforementioned phenomena. Moreover, the presence of both internal skirt and external reinforced cuff may also explain the low rate of moderate to severe PVL.

Impact of leaflet splitting on coronary access after redo-TAVI for degenerated supra-annular self-expanding platforms.

BACKGROUND: Coronary access (CA) is a major concern in redo-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for failing supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs). AIMS: This ex vivo study evaluated the benefit of leaflet splitting (LS) on subsequent CA after redo-TAVI in anatomies deemed at high risk of unfeasible CA. METHODS: Ex vivo, patient-specific models were printed three-dimensionally. Index TAVI was performed using ACURATE neo2 or Evolut PRO (TAV-1) at the standard implant depth and with different degrees of commissural misalignment (CMA). Redo-TAVI was performed using the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (TAV-2) at different implant depths with commissural alignment. Selective CA was attempted for each configuration before and after LS in a pulsatile flow simulator. The leaflet splay area was assessed on the bench. RESULTS: In matched comparisons of 128 coronary cannulations across 64 redo-TAVI configurations, the overall feasibility of CA significantly increased after LS (60.9% vs 18.7%; p<0.001). The effect of LS varied according to the sinotubular junction height, TAV-1 design, TAV-1 CMA, and TAV-2 implant depth, given TAV-2 alignment. LS enabled CA for up to CMA 45° with the ACURATE neo2 TAV-1 and up to CMA 30° with the Evolut PRO TAV-1. The combination of LS and a low TAV-2 implant provided the highest feasibility of CA after redo-TAVI. The leaflet splay area ranged from 25.60 mm2 to 37.86 mm2 depending on the TAV-1 platform and TAV-2 implant depth. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk anatomies, LS significantly improves CA feasibility after redo-TAVI for degenerated supra-annular self-expanding platforms. Decisions on redo-TAVI feasibility should be carefully individualised, taking into account the expected benefit of LS on CA for each scenario.

Echocardiographic and clinical features of patients developing prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Insights from the Recovery-TAVR registry.

BACKGROUND: The impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on major endpoints after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is controversial and the effects on progression of heart damage are poorly investigated. Therefore, our study aims to evaluate the prevalence and predictors of PPM in a "real world" cohort of patients at intermediate and low surgical risk, its impact on mortality and the clinical-echocardiographic progression of heart damage. METHODS: 963 patients who underwent TAVR procedure between 2017 and 2021, from the RECOVERY-TAVR international multicenter observational registry, were included in this analysis. Multiparametric echocardiographic data of these patients were analyzed at 1-year follow-up (FU). Clinical and echocardiographic features were stratified by presence of PPM and PPM severity, as per the most current international recommendations, using VARC-3 criteria. RESULTS: 18% of patients developed post-TAVR. PPM, and 7.7% of the whole cohort had severe PPM. At baseline, 50.3% of patients with PPM were male (vs 46.2% in the cohort without PPM, P = .33), aged 82 (IQR 79-85y) years vs 82 (IQR 78-86 P = .46), and 55.6% had Balloon-Expandable valves implanted (vs 46.8% of patients without PPM, P = .04); they had smaller left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) diameter (20 mm, IQR 19-21 vs 20 mm, IQR 20-22, P = .02), reduced SVi (34.2 vs 38 mL/m2, P < .01) and transaortic flow rate (190.6 vs 211 mL/s, P < .01). At predischarge FU patients with PPM had more paravalvular aortic regurgitation (moderate-severe AR 15.8% vs 9.2%, P < .01). At 1-year FU, maladaptive alterations of left ventricular parameters were found in patients with PPM, with a significant increase in end-systolic diameter (33 mm vs 28 mm, P = .03) and a significant increase in left ventricle end systolic indexed volume in those with moderate and severe PPM (52 IQR 42-64 and 52, IQR 41-64 vs 44 IQR 35-59 in those without, P = .02)). No evidence of a significant impact of PPM on overall (P = .71) and CV (P = .70) mortality was observed. Patients with moderate/severe PPM had worse NYHA functional class at 1 year (NYHA III-IV 13% vs 7.8%, P = .03). Prosthesis size≤23 mm (OR 11.6, 1.68-80.1) was an independent predictor of PPM, while SVi (OR 0.87, 0.83-0.91, P < .001) and LVOT diameter (OR 0.79, 0.65-0.95, P = .01) had protective effect. CONCLUSIONS: PPM was observed in 18% of patients undergoing TAVR. Echocardiographic evaluations demonstrated a PPM-related pattern of early ventricular maladaptive alterations, possibly precursor to a reduction in cardiac function, associated with a significant deterioration in NYHA class at 1 year. These findings emphasize the importance of prevention of PPM of any grade in patients undergoing TAVR procedure, especially in populations at risk.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair With the MitraClip Device for Prior Mitral Valve Repair Failure: Insights From the GIOTTO-FAILS Study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive mitral valve repair has a favorable risk-benefit profile in patients with significant de novo mitral regurgitation. Its role in patients with prior mitral valve repair is uncertain. We aimed to appraise the outcome of patients undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) with prior transcatheter or surgical mitral valve repair (SMVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: We queried the Italian multicenter registry on TEER with MitraClip, distinguishing naïve patients from those with prior TEER or (SMVR). Inhospital and long-term clinical/echocardiographic outcomes were appraised. The primary outcome was the occurrence of death or rehospitalization for heart failure. A total of 2238 patients were included, with 2169 (96.9%) who were naïve to any mitral intervention, 29 (1.3%) with prior TEER, and 40 (1.8%) with prior SMVR. Several significant differences were found in baseline clinical and imaging features. Respectively, device success was obtained in 2120 (97.7%), 28 (96.6%), and 38 (95.0%, P=0.261) patients; procedural success in 2080 (95.9%), 25 (86.2%), and 38 (95.0%; P=0.047); and inhospital death in 61 (2.8%), 1 (3.5%), and no (P=0.558) patients. Clinical follow-up after a mean of 14 months showed similar rates of death, cardiac death, rehospitalization, rehospitalization for heart failure, and their composite (all P>0.05). Propensity score-adjusted analysis confirmed unadjusted analysis, with lower procedural success for the prior TEER group (odds ratio, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.09-0.81]; P=0.019) but similar odds ratios and hazard ratios for all other outcomes in the naïve, TEER, and SMVR groups (all P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In carefully selected patients, TEER can be performed using the MitraClip device even after prior TEER or SMVR.

Transcatheter mitral valve repair with MitraClip: comparison of NT, NTr, and XTr Devices.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) has become an established minimally invasive treatment for significant mitral regurgitation. Ongoing refinements and the availability of different clipping devices have expanded the indications for and effectiveness of TEER, but comprehensive comparative data on this issue are lacking. In this study, we compared NT, NTr, and XTr MitraClip devices (Abbot) for TEER. METHODS: Details on patient, imaging, and procedural details, as well as short- and long-term outcomes, were sought from a national prospective clinical registry on TEER with MitraClip. The primary outcome of interest was discharge after procedural success without major clinical complications. RESULTS: A total of 2236 patients were included, 1228 (54.9%) in whom NT implantation only was attempted, 233 (10.4%) in whom NTr but not XTr implantation was attempted, and 775 (34.7%) in whom XTr implantation was attempted. Clinical and imaging features differed substantially across the groups, reflecting expanding indications with NTr and XTr devices. In-hospital outcomes were largely similar among the 3 groups, including death. Long-term unadjusted estimates of effect showed significant differences in several outcomes, including death, rehospitalization, and their composite, which demonstrated that NT was associated with more unfavorable outcomes compared with the other devices (all P less than .05). However, most differences depended on baseline features, as adjusted analysis showed no significant differences for early as well as long-term outcomes, including long-term death, rehospitalization, and their composite (all P greater than .05). CONCLUSIONS: New-generation MitraClip devices are associated with favorable procedural and clinical outcomes, despite being used in patients with more adverse features, when compared with patients treated with previous devices.

Embolization of percutaneous left atrial appendage closure devices: Timing, management and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder embolization is an infrequent but serious complication. OBJECTIVES: We aim to describe timing, management and clinical outcomes of device embolization in a multi-center registry. METHODS: Patient characteristics, imaging findings and procedure and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. Device embolizations were categorized according to 1) timing 2) management and 3) clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Sixty-seven centers contributed data. Device embolization occurred in 108 patients. In 70.4 % of cases, it happened within the first 24 h of the procedure. The device was purposefully left in the LA and the aorta in two (1.9 %) patients, an initial percutaneous retrieval was attempted in 81 (75.0 %) and surgery without prior percutaneous retrieval attempt was performed in 23 (21.3 %) patients. Two patients died before a retrieval attempt could be made. In 28/81 (34.6 %) patients with an initial percutaneous retrieval attempt a second, additional attempt was performed, which was associated with a high mortality (death in patients with one attempt: 2.9 % vs. second attempt: 21.4 %, p < 0.001). The primary outcome (bailout surgery, cardiogenic shock, stroke, TIA, and/or death) occurred in 47 (43.5 %) patients. Other major complications related to device embolization occurred in 21 (19.4 %) patients. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of device embolizations after LAA closure occurs early. A percutaneous approach is often the preferred method for a first rescue attempt. Major adverse event rates, including death, are high particularly if the first retrieval attempt was unsuccessful. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: This dedicated multicenter registry examined timing, management, and clinical outcome of device embolization. Early embolization (70.4 %) was most frequent. As a first rescue attempt, percutaneous retrieval was preferred in 75.0 %, followed by surgical removal (21.3 %). In patients with a second retrieval attempt a higher mortality (death first attempt: 2.9 % vs. death second attempt: 24.1 %, p < 0.001) was observed. Mortality (10.2 %) and the major complication rate after device embolization were high.

The Impact of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices on Characteristics and Outcomes of Stroke Complicating TAVR.

BACKGROUND: Acute ischemic stroke remains a serious complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) were developed to mitigate the risk of acute ischemic stroke complicating TAVR (AISCT). However, the existing body of evidence does not clearly support CEPD efficacy in AISCT prevention. OBJECTIVES: In a cohort of patients with AISCT, we aimed to compare the characteristics and outcomes of patients who have had unprotected TAVR (CEPD-) vs CEPD-protected TAVR (CEPD+). METHODS: Data were derived from an international multicenter registry focusing on AISCT. We included all patients who experienced ischemic stroke within 72 hours of TAVR. Stroke severity was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Primary outcomes were neurologic disability status according to the modified Rankin Score at 30 days, and 6-month all-cause death. Propensity score matched analysis was used to control for differences between groups. RESULTS: In 18,725 TAVR procedures, 416 AISCT (2.2%) within 72 hours were documented, of which 376 were in the CEPD- TAVR group and 40 in the CEPD+ TAVR group. Although the middle cerebral artery stroke rate was similar in both groups (29.7% CEPD- vs 33.3% CEPD+; P = 0.71), AISCT in the CEPD+ group was characterized by a lower rate of internal carotid artery occlusion (0% vs 4.7%) and higher rate of vertebrobasilar system strokes (15.4% vs 5.7%; P = 0.04). AISCT was severe (NIHSS ≥15) in 21.6% CEPD- and 23.3% CEPD+ AISCT (P = 0.20). Disabling stroke rates (modified Rankin Score >1 at 30 days) were 47.3% vs 42.5% (P = 0.62), and 6-month mortality was 31.3% vs 23.3% (P = 0.61), in the CEPD- and CEPD+ groups, respectively. In the propensity score matched cohort, disabling stroke rates were 56.5% vs 41.6% (P = 0.16), and 6-month mortality was 33% vs 19.5% (P = 0.35), in the CEPD- and CEPD+ groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of patients with AISCT, the use of CEPD had little effect on stroke distribution, severity, and outcomes.

Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of comparative data on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in degenerated surgical prostheses (valve-in-valve [ViV]). AIMS: We sought to compare outcomes of using two self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems for ViV. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre registry, we included consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral ViV using either the ACURATE neo/neo2 (ACURATE group) or the Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ (EVOLUT group). The primary outcome measure was technical success according to Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3. Secondary outcomes were 30-day all-cause mortality, device success (VARC-3), coronary obstruction (CO) requiring intervention, rates of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), and aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥moderate. Comparisons were made after 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 835 patients from 20 centres (ACURATE n=251; EVOLUT n=584). In the matched cohort (n=468), technical success (ACURATE 92.7% vs EVOLUT 88.9%; p=0.20) and device success (69.7% vs 73.9%; p=0.36) as well as 30-day mortality (2.8% vs 1.6%; p=0.392) were similar between the two groups. The mean gradients and rates of severe PPM, AR ≥moderate, or CO did not differ between the groups. Technical and device success were higher for the ACURATE platform among patients with a true inner diameter (ID) >19 mm, whereas a true ID ≤19 mm was associated with higher device success - but not technical success - among Evolut recipients. CONCLUSIONS: ViV TAVI using either ACURATE or Evolut THVs showed similar procedural outcomes. However, a true ID >19 mm was associated with higher device success among ACURATE recipients, whereas in patients with a true ID ≤19 mm, device success was higher when using Evolut.

Chimney Stenting vs BASILICA for Prevention of Acute Coronary Obstruction During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Coronary obstruction (CO) is a potentially life-threatening complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Chimney stenting or leaflet laceration with transcatheter electrosurgery (Bioprosthetic or Native Aortic Scallop Intentional Laceration to Prevent Iatrogenic Coronary Artery Obstruction [BASILICA]) are 2 techniques developed to prevent CO. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to compare periprocedural and 1-year outcomes of chimney and BASILICA in TAVR patients at high risk of CO. METHODS: This multicenter observational registry enrolled consecutive TAVR patients at high risk of CO, undergoing either preventive chimney stenting or BASILICA. Clinical success was defined as successful performance of the chimney or BASILICA technique without clinically relevant ostial CO. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned target lesion coronary revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included: 71 (42.3%) received chimney stenting, and 97 (57.7%) underwent BASILICA. Patients undergoing BASILICA had higher preprocedural risk of CO, as indicated by lower sinotubular junction height (18.2 ± 4.8 mm vs 14.8 ± 3.4 mm; P < 0.001) and diameter (28.2 ± 4.5 vs 26.8 ± 3.4; P = 0.029). Rates of periprocedural complications were similar between the 2 groups. Clinical success was 97.2% and 96.9% in chimney and BASILICA, respectively (P = 0.92). At 1-year follow-up, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was 18.7% (95% CI: 11%-30.6%) in the chimney group and 19.9% (95% CI: 12.1%-31.5%) in the BASILICA group (log-rank P = 0.848), whereas chimney was associated with a numerically higher cardiovascular mortality than BASILICA (6.7% vs 1.3%; log-rank P = 0.168). CONCLUSIONS: Chimney stenting and BASILICA effectively prevent TAVR-induced acute CO. Both techniques seem to have comparable acceptable periprocedural and 1-year outcomes.

Long term clinical outcome of sirolimus drug coated balloons in large coronary vessels.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of drug coating balloons (DCB) for the treatment of lesions in large coronary vessel are limited. AIMS: Our study aimed to evaluate the performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary arteries. METHODS: We analyzed all the procedures included in the EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823) enrolling patients with a clinical indication to percutaneous coronary intervention performed by a sirolimus DCB according to investigator judgment. In the present analysis, a cut-off of 2.75 mm was used to define large coronary arteries. Primary endpoint of the study was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 24 months whereas secondary endpoint included procedural success, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death and total mortality. RESULTS: Among the 2123 patients and 2440 lesions enrolled in the EASTBOURNE study between 2016 and 2020, 757 patients/810 lesions fulfilled the criteria for the present analysis. Mean reference vessel diameter was 3.2 ± 0.3 mm with mean lesion length of 22 ± 7 mm. Procedural success was high (96%) and at 2-year follow up the device showed a good efficacy with a TLR rate of 9%. There were 34 deaths (4.5%), 30 MIs (4%) and 8 BARC type 3-5 bleedings (1.1%). In-stent restenosis (629 lesions) and de novo lesions (181) were associated with 11% and 4% rates of TLR at 2 years, respectively (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary artery vessels shows promising signals at 2-year follow up, both in de novo and in-stent restenosis lesions.

Comparison of Mid-Term Prognosis in Intermediate-to-Low-Risk Contemporary Population with Guidelines-Oriented Age Cutoff.

BACKGROUND: Current European guidelines support transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in intermediate-to-low-risk patients ≥75 years-old, but its prognostic relevance is unknown. METHODS: Intermediate-to-low-risk (The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score <8%) patients enrolled in the HORSE registry were included. We compared the populations aged under 75 with those over 75. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2685 patients were included: 280 (8.6%) < 75 and 2405 ≥ 75 years. Through a mean follow-up of 437 ± 381 days, 198 (8.2%) and 23 (8.2%) patients died in the two arms without statistically significant differences (log-rank p = 0.925). At Cox regression analysis, age did not predict the occurrence of all-cause death, neither as a continuous variable (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.04, p = 0.294) nor dichotomizing according to the prespecified cutoff of 75 years (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63-1.51, p = 0.924). Time-to-event ROC curves showed low accuracy of age to predict all-cause mortality (area under the curve of 0.54 for both 1-year and 2-year outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI has comparable benefits across age strata for intermediate-to-low-risk patients. The age cutoff suggested by the current guidelines is not predictive of the risk of adverse events during hospital stays or of all-cause mortality through a mid-term follow-up.

Comparing two-year outcomes of balloon-expandable Myval and self-expanding Evolut R in severe aortic valve stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The new balloon-expandable (BE) Myval transcatheter heart valves (THV) has shown promising early results with low paravalvular leak (PVL) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates. Limited data are available regarding its long-term performance. We aimed to compare the 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the self-expanding (SE) Evolut R and the BE Myval THVs. METHODS: The EVAL study included 166 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR either with SE Evolut R (n = 108) or BE Myval (n = 58) THV. Primary objectives include comparison on clinical efficacy (freedom from all-cause mortality, stroke, and cardiovascular hospitalization), echocardiographic performance and PPI rates between the two THVs. RESULTS: At 2-year the BE Myval group showed higher clinical efficacy (86% vs. 66%,HR:2.62, 95%CI 2.2-5.1;p = 0.006), with fewer cardiac hospitalizations (3.4% vs. 13.9%,p = 0.03). No significant differences in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or stroke rates were observed. The proportion of patients with ≥moderate PVL was significantly lower in the BE Myval compared to the SE Evolut R group (4%vs. 22%,p = 0.008). The mean transvalvular gradient was significantly higher in the SE group compared to the BE group (9.5 ± 4.3 vs. 6.9 ± 2.2 mmHg,p < 0.001), however there was no difference in the percentage of patients with a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both THVs offer similar 2-year clinical outcomes. The BE Myval THV demonstrated advantages with higher clinical efficacy and lower PVL incidence. Longer follow-up and randomized trials are needed to validate these results and assess Myval's sustained performance and durability.

Procedural success in transaxillary transcatheter aortic valve implantation according to type of transcatheter heart valve: results from the multicenter TAXI registry.

BACKGROUND: Transaxillary (TAx) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a preferred alternative access in patients ineligible for transfemoral TAVI. AIMS: This study used the Trans-AXillary Intervention (TAXI) registry to compare procedural success according to different types of transcatheter heart valves (THV). METHODS: For the TAXI registry anonymized data of patients treated with TAx-TAVI were collected from 18 centers. Acute procedural, early and 1-month clinical outcomes were adjudicated in accordance with standardized VARC-3 definitions. RESULTS: From 432 patients, 368 patients (85.3%, SE group) received self-expanding (SE) THV and 64 patients (14.8%, BE group) received balloon-expandable (BE) THV. Imaging revealed lower axillary artery diameters in the SE group (max/min diameter in mm: 8.4/6.6 vs 9.4/6.8 mm; p < 0.001/p = 0.04) but a higher proportion of axillary tortuosity in BE group (62/368, 23.6% vs 26/64, 42.6%; p = 0.004) with steeper aorta-left ventricle (LV) inflow (55° vs 51°; p = 0.002) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT)-LV inflow angles (40.0° vs 24.5°; 0.002). TAx-TAVI was more often conducted by right sided axillary artery in the BE group (33/368, 9.0% vs 17/64, 26.6%; p < 0.001). Device success was higher in the SE group (317/368, 86.1% vs 44/64, 68.8%, p = 0.0015). In logistic regression analysis, BE THV were a risk factor for vascular complications and axillary stent implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Both, SE and BE THV can be safely used in TAx-TAVI. However, SE THV were more often used and were associated with a higher rate of device success. While SE THV were associated with lower rates of vascular complications, BE THV were more often used in cases with challenging anatomical circumstances.