Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe mitral or tricuspid regurgitation at extreme risk for surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and severe mitral regurgitation or severe tricuspid regurgitation were excluded from the major transcatheter aortic valve replacement trials. We studied these 2 subgroups in patients at extreme risk for surgery in the prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm CoreValve US Expanded Use Study. METHODS: The primary end point was all-cause mortality or major stroke at 1 year. A favorable medical benefit was defined as a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score greater than 45 at 6 months and greater than 60 at 1 year and with a less than 10-point decrease from baseline. RESULTS: There were 53 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics for the severe mitral regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation cohorts were age 84.2 ± 6.4 years and 84.9 ± 6.5 years; male, 29 (54.7%) and 22 (41.5%), and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 9.9% ± 5.0% and 9.2% ± 4.0%, respectively. Improvement in valve regurgitation from baseline to 1 year occurred in 72.7% of the patients with severe mitral regurgitation and in 61.8% of patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation. A favorable medical benefit occurred in 31 of 47 patients (66.0%) with severe mitral regurgitation and 33 of 47 patients (70.2%) with severe tricuspid regurgitation at 6 months, and in 25 of 44 patients (56.8%) with severe mitral regurgitation and 24 of 45 patients (53.3%) with severe tricuspid regurgitation at 1 year. All-cause mortality or major stroke for the severe mitral regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation cohorts were 11.3% and 3.8% at 30 days and 21.0% and 19.2% at 1 year, respectively. There were no major strokes in either group at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe mitral regurgitation or severe tricuspid regurgitation is reasonable and safe and leads to improvement in atrioventricular valve regurgitation.

Good Publication Practice for Communicating Company-Sponsored Medical Research: GPP3.

This updated Good Publication Practice (GPP) guideline, known as GPP3, builds on earlier versions and provides recommendations for individuals and organizations that contribute to the publication of research results sponsored or supported by pharmaceutical, medical device, diagnostics, and biotechnology companies. The recommendations are designed to help individuals and organizations maintain ethical and transparent publication practices and comply with legal and regulatory requirements. These recommendations cover publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations (oral or poster) at scientific congresses. The International Society for Medical Publication Professionals invited more than 3000 professionals worldwide to apply for a position on the steering committee, or as a reviewer, for this guideline. The GPP2 authors reviewed all applications (n = 241) and assembled an 18-member steering committee that represented 7 countries and a diversity of publication professions and institutions. From the 174 selected reviewers, 94 sent comments on the second draft, which steering committee members incorporated after discussion and consensus. The resulting guideline includes new sections (Principles of Good Publication Practice for Company-Sponsored Medical Research, Data Sharing, Studies That Should Be Published, and Plagiarism), expands guidance on the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' authorship criteria and common authorship issues, improves clarity on appropriate author payment and reimbursement, and expands information on the role of medical writers. By following good publication practices (including GPP3), individuals and organizations will show integrity; accountability; and responsibility for accurate, complete, and transparent reporting in their publications and presentations.

First clinical trial of a self-expandable transcatheter heart valve in Japan in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may be a viable solution for inoperable or high-risk patients with aortic stenosis (AS), providing the benefit of valve replacement without the associated risks of surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prospective, multicenter MDT-2111 Japan Trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of a self-expandable TAV in patients with severe AS. A total of 55 patients were enrolled (October 2011 to October 2012). Mean age was 82.5±5.5 years; 30.9% male, 100% NYHA III/IV, and STS 8.0±4.2%. At 6 months, 91.7% of the iliofemoral patients had met the primary endpoint (an improvement of at least 1 NYHA class and an effective orifice area >1.2 cm(2) for iliofemoral patients). For all patients, freedom from all-cause mortality at 6 months was 90.8%. At 30 days, the Kaplan-Meier rate of major vascular complications was 10.9%, the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation was 22.2% and the rate of major stroke was 3.7%. The incidences of paravalvular regurgitation for all implanted patients at 6 months were: 38.3% (none), 25.5% (trace), 31.9% (mild), 4.3% (moderate), and 0.0% (severe). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate a self-expandable TAV in a Japanese patient population. The data show successful achievement of the study's primary objective and demonstrate the functional and anatomical effectiveness of the MDT-2111 TAV system.

Do prehospital discharge pacemaker checks provide any additional clinical benefit?

We performed a retrospective analysis of 250 records of consecutive, newly implanted, pacemaker patients from a single center to determine the rate of postimplant complications and observations discovered before and during the prehospital discharge evaluation. No observations occurred in 246 of 250 patients (98.4%) (1-sided 95% confidence interval 96.4%). Of the 250 patients, 4 had observations that were discovered at the prehospital discharge check and required reprogramming to increase the sensitivity safety margin (3 atrial and 1 ventricular). We documented only 1 complication that was discovered before the predischarge evaluation through telemetry and resulted in an atrial lead revision.