Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with high-risk symptomatic native aortic regurgitation (ALIGN-AR): a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study.

BACKGROUND: Surgery remains the only recommended intervention for patients with native aortic regurgitation. A transcatheter therapy to treat patients at high risk for mortality and complications with surgical aortic valve replacement represents an unmet need. Commercial transcatheter heart valves in pure aortic regurgitation are hampered by unacceptable rates of embolisation and paravalvular regurgitation. The Trilogy transcatheter heart valve (JenaValve Technology, Irvine, CA, USA) provides a treatment option for these patients. We report outcomes with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with pure aortic regurgitation using this dedicated transcatheter heart valve. METHODS: The ALIGN-AR trial is a prospective, multicentre, single-arm study. We recruited symptomatic patients (aged ≥18 years) with moderate-to-severe or severe aortic regurgitation at high risk for mortality and complications after surgical aortic valve replacement at 20 US sites for treatment with the Trilogy transcatheter heart valve. The 30-day composite primary safety endpoint was compared for non-inferiority with a prespecified performance goal of 40·5%. The primary efficacy endpoint was 1-year all-cause mortality compared for non-inferiority with a performance goal of 25%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04415047, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between June 8, 2018, and Aug 29, 2022, we screened 346 patients. We excluded 166 (48%) patients and enrolled 180 (52%) patients with symptomatic aortic regurgitation deemed high risk by the heart team and independent screening committee assessments. The mean age of the study population was 75·5 years (SD 10·8), and 85 (47%) were female, 95 (53%) were male, and 131 (73%) were White. Technical success was achieved in 171 (95%) patients. At 30 days, four (2%) deaths, two (1%) disabling strokes, and two (1%) non-disabling strokes occurred. Using standard Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions, the primary safety endpoint was achieved, with events occurring in 48 (27% [97·5% CI 19·2-34·0]) patients (pnon-inferiority<0·0001), with new pacemaker implantation in 36 (24%) patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved, with mortality in 14 (7·8% [3·3-12·3]) patients at 1 year (pnon-inferiority<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: This study shows the safety and effectiveness of treating native aortic regurgitation using a dedicated transcatheter heart valve to treat patients with symptomatic moderate-to-severe or severe aortic regurgitation who are at high risk for mortality or complications after surgical aortic valve replacement. The observed short-term clinical and haemodynamic outcomes are promising as are signs of left ventricular remodelling, but long-term follow-up is necessary. FUNDING: JenaValve Technology.

Outcomes of repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement with balloon-expandable valves: a registry study.

BACKGROUND: With increasing numbers of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), data on management of failed TAVR, including repeat TAVR procedure, are needed. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of redo-TAVR in a national registry. METHODS: This study included all consecutive patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry from Nov 9, 2011, to Dec 30, 2022 who underwent TAVR with balloon-expandable valves in failed transcatheter heart valves (redo-TAVR) or native aortic valves (native-TAVR). Procedural, echocardiographic, and clinical outcomes were compared between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR cohorts using propensity score matching. FINDINGS: Among 350 591 patients (1320 redo-TAVR; 349 271 native-TAVR), 1320 propensity-matched pairs of patients undergoing redo-TAVR and native-TAVR were analysed (redo-TAVR cohort: mean age 78 years [SD 9]; 559 [42·3%] of 1320 female, 761 [57·7%] male; mean predicted surgical risk of 30-day mortality 8·1%). The rates of procedural complications of redo-TAVR were low (coronary compression or obstruction: four [0·3%] of 1320; intraprocedural death: eight [0·6%] of 1320; conversion to open heart surgery: six [0·5%] of 1319) and similar to native-TAVR. There was no significant difference between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR populations in death at 30 days (4·7% vs 4·0%, p=0·36) or 1 year (17·5% vs 19·0%, p=0·57), and stroke at 30 days (2·0% vs 1·9%, p=0·84) or 1 year (3·2% vs 3·5%, p=0·80). Redo-TAVR reduced aortic valve gradients at 1 year, although they were higher in the redo-TAVR group compared with the native-TAVR group (15 mm Hg vs 12 mm Hg; p<0·0001). Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation rates were similar between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR groups at 1 year (1·8% vs 3·3%, p=0·18). Death or stroke after redo-TAVR were not significantly affected by the timing of redo-TAVR (before or after 1 year of index TAVR), or by index transcatheter valve type (balloon-expandable or non-balloon-expandable). INTERPRETATION: Redo-TAVR with balloon-expandable valves effectively treated dysfunction of the index TAVR procedure with low procedural complication rates, and death and stroke rates similar to those in patients with a similar clinical profile and predicted risk undergoing TAVR for native aortic valve stenosis. Redo-TAVR with balloon-expandable valves might be a reasonable treatment for failed TAVR in selected patients. FUNDING: Edwards Lifesciences.

Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in lower-risk and higher-risk patients: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.

AIMS: Additional randomized clinical trial (RCT) data comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is available, including longer term follow-up. A meta-analysis comparing TAVI to SAVR was performed. A pragmatic risk classification was applied, partitioning lower-risk and higher-risk patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The main endpoints were death, strokes, and the composite of death or disabling stroke, occurring at 1 year (early) or after 1 year (later). A random-effects meta-analysis was performed. Eight RCTs with 8698 patients were included. In lower-risk patients, at 1 year, the risk of death was lower after TAVI compared with SAVR [relative risk (RR) 0.67; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.47 to 0.96, P = 0.031], as was death or disabling stroke (RR 0.68; 95% CI 0.50 to 0.92, P = 0.014). There were no differences in strokes. After 1 year, in lower-risk patients, there were no significant differences in all main outcomes. In higher-risk patients, there were no significant differences in main outcomes. New-onset atrial fibrillation, major bleeding, and acute kidney injury occurred less after TAVI; new pacemakers, vascular complications, and paravalvular leak occurred more after TAVI. CONCLUSION: In lower-risk patients, there was an early mortality reduction with TAVI, but no differences after later follow-up. There was also an early reduction in the composite of death or disabling stroke, with no difference at later follow-up. There were no significant differences for higher-risk patients. Informed therapy decisions may be more dependent on the temporality of events or secondary endpoints than the long-term occurrence of main clinical outcomes.

Treatment of late paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: prognostic implications.

AIMS: Paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The effect of transcatheter interventions to treat PVR after the index TAVI was investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: A registry of consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter intervention for ≥ moderate PVR after the index TAVI at 22 centers. The principal outcomes were residual aortic regurgitation (AR) and mortality at 1 year after PVR treatment. A total of 201 patients were identified: 87 (43%) underwent redo-TAVI, 79 (39%) plug closure, and 35 (18%) balloon valvuloplasty. Median TAVI-to-re-intervention time was 207 (35; 765) days. The failed valve was self-expanding in 129 (63.9%) patients. The most frequent devices utilized were a Sapien 3 valve for redo-TAVI (55, 64%), an AVP II as plug (33, 42%), and a True balloon for valvuloplasty (20, 56%). At 30 days, AR ≥ moderate persisted in 33 (17.4%) patients: 8 (9.9%) after redo-TAVI, 18 (25.9%) after plug, and 7 (21.9%) after valvuloplasty (P = 0.036). Overall mortality was 10 (5.0%) at 30 days and 29 (14.4%) at 1 year: 0, 8 (10.1%), and 2 (5.7%) at 30 days (P = 0.010) and 11 (12.6%), 14 (17.7%), and 4 (11.4%) at 1 year (P = 0.418), after redo-TAVI, plug, and valvuloplasty, respectively. Regardless of treatment strategy, patients in whom AR was reduced to ≤ mild had lower mortality at 1 year compared with those with AR persisting ≥ moderate [11 (8.0%) vs. 6 (21.4%); P = 0.007]. CONCLUSION: This study describes the efficacy of transcatheter treatments for PVR after TAVI. Patients in whom PVR was successfully reduced had better prognosis. The selection of patients and the optimal PVR treatment modality require further investigation.

Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: There are scant data on long-term clinical outcomes and bioprosthetic-valve function after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk. METHODS: We enrolled 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers. Patients were stratified according to intended transfemoral or transthoracic access (76.3% and 23.7%, respectively) and were randomly assigned to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were followed for 5 years. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke. RESULTS: At 5 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death from any cause or disabling stroke between the TAVR group and the surgery group (47.9% and 43.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.25; P = 0.21). Results were similar for the transfemoral-access cohort (44.5% and 42.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.20), but the incidence of death or disabling stroke was higher after TAVR than after surgery in the transthoracic-access cohort (59.3% vs. 48.3%; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.71). At 5 years, more patients in the TAVR group than in the surgery group had at least mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation (33.3% vs. 6.3%). Repeat hospitalizations were more frequent after TAVR than after surgery (33.3% vs. 25.2%), as were aortic-valve reinterventions (3.2% vs. 0.8%). Improvement in health status at 5 years was similar for TAVR and surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis who were at intermediate surgical risk, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death or disabling stroke at 5 years after TAVR as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

A Controlled Trial of Rivaroxaban after Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Whether the direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban can prevent thromboembolic events after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1644 patients without an established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR to receive rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg daily (with aspirin at a dose of 75 to 100 mg daily for the first 3 months) (rivaroxaban group) or aspirin at a dose of 75 to 100 mg daily (with clopidogrel at a dose of 75 mg daily for the first 3 months) (antiplatelet group). The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of death or thromboembolic events. The primary safety outcome was major, disabling, or life-threatening bleeding. The trial was terminated prematurely by the data and safety monitoring board because of safety concerns. RESULTS: After a median of 17 months, death or a first thromboembolic event (intention-to-treat analysis) had occurred in 105 patients in the rivaroxaban group and in 78 patients in the antiplatelet group (incidence rates, 9.8 and 7.2 per 100 person-years, respectively; hazard ratio with rivaroxaban, 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01 to 1.81; P = 0.04). Major, disabling, or life-threatening bleeding (intention-to-treat analysis) had occurred in 46 and 31 patients, respectively (4.3 and 2.8 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.37; P = 0.08). A total of 64 deaths occurred in the rivaroxaban group and 38 in the antiplatelet group (5.8 and 3.4 per 100 person-years, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.53). CONCLUSIONS: In patients without an established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR, a treatment strategy including rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg daily was associated with a higher risk of death or thromboembolic complications and a higher risk of bleeding than an antiplatelet-based strategy. (Funded by Bayer and Janssen Pharmaceuticals; GALILEO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02556203.).

Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair for chronic functional mitral regurgitation in patients with very severe left ventricular dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: There is scarce data on transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) for chronic functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) in the setting of very severe left ventricular dysfunction (LVD), defined by a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of <20%. METHODS: We retrospectively explored periprocedural characteristics and one-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of consecutive patients with chronic FMR and very severe LVD who underwent an isolated, first-time TEER. The composite of all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalizations constituted the primary outcome. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients (median age 69 [IQR, 55-76] years, 64 (66.7%) males, median LVEF 15 [IQR, 12-17] %) were included. In 47 (49.0%), TEER was performed urgently or in the setting of hemodynamic instability. Almost all procedures (98.0%) were technically successful, leading to ≤moderate MR in 94.7% and 90.7% of cases by 1-month and 1-year, respectively. New York Heart Association class ≤II was maintained in 60.0% of patients. One-year survival and freedom from the primary outcome were 74.0% and 50.0%, respectively. Functional and echocardiographic improvement compared to baseline was independent of procedural urgency, hemodynamic stability, and downstream left ventricular assist device implantation / heart transplantation (n = 12). Mortality was not predicted by COAPT exclusion criteria, nor was the primary outcome discriminated by published risk models. CONCLUSION: TEER for chronic FMR is feasible, safe, and efficacious in selected patients with very severe LVD. Preprocedural risk stratification in this population may be optimized.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair for Degenerative Mitral Regurgitation.

Importance: There are limited data on the outcomes of transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair for degenerative mitral regurgitation (MR) in a real-world setting. Objective: To evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve repair for degenerative MR. Design, Setting, and Participants: Cohort study of consecutive patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry who underwent nonemergent transcatheter mitral valve repair for degenerative MR in the US from 2014 through 2022. Exposure: Transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair with the MitraClip device (Abbott). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was MR success, defined as moderate or less residual MR and a mean mitral gradient of less than 10 mm Hg. Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on the degree of residual MR (mild or less MR or moderate MR) and mitral valve gradients (≤5 mm Hg or >5 to <10 mm Hg). Results: A total of 19 088 patients with isolated moderate to severe or severe degenerative MR who underwent transcatheter mitral valve repair were analyzed (median age, 82 years; 48% women; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality with surgical mitral valve repair, 4.6%). MR success was achieved in 88.9% of patients. At 30 days, the incidence of death was 2.7%; stroke, 1.2%; and mitral valve reintervention, 0.97%. MR success compared with an unsuccessful procedure was associated with significantly lower mortality (14.0% vs 26.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.42-0.56; P < .001) and heart failure readmission (8.4% vs 16.9%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.41-0.54; P < .001) at 1 year. Among patients with MR success, the lowest mortality was observed in patients who had both mild or less residual MR and mean mitral gradients of 5 mm Hg or less compared with those with an unsuccessful procedure (11.4% vs 26.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.34-0.47; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this registry-based study of patients with degenerative MR undergoing transcatheter mitral valve repair, the procedure was safe and resulted in successful repair in 88.9% of patients. The lowest mortality was observed in patients with mild or less residual MR and low mitral gradients.

Native Aortic Valve Disease Progression and Bioprosthetic Valve Degeneration in Patients With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: Major uncertainties remain regarding disease activity within the retained native aortic valve, and regarding bioprosthetic valve durability, after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We aimed to assess native aortic valve disease activity and bioprosthetic valve durability in patients with TAVI in comparison with subjects with bioprosthetic surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: In a multicenter cross-sectional observational cohort study, patients with TAVI or bioprosthetic SAVR underwent baseline echocardiography, computed tomography angiography, and 18F-sodium fluoride (18F-NaF) positron emission tomography. Participants (n=47) were imaged once with 18F-NaF positron emission tomography/computed tomography either at 1 month (n=9, 19%), 2 years (n=22, 47%), or 5 years (16, 34%) after valve implantation. Patients subsequently underwent serial echocardiography to assess for changes in valve hemodynamic performance (change in peak aortic velocity) and evidence of structural valve dysfunction. Comparisons were made with matched patients with bioprosthetic SAVR (n=51) who had undergone the same imaging protocol. RESULTS: In patients with TAVI, native aortic valves demonstrated 18F-NaF uptake around the outside of the bioprostheses that showed a modest correlation with the time from TAVI (r=0.36, P=0.023). 18F-NaF uptake in the bioprosthetic leaflets was comparable between the SAVR and TAVI groups (target-to-background ratio, 1.3 [1.2-1.7] versus 1.3 [1.2-1.5], respectively; P=0.27). The frequencies of imaging evidence of bioprosthetic valve degeneration at baseline were similar on echocardiography (6% versus 8%, respectively; P=0.78), computed tomography (15% versus 14%, respectively; P=0.87), and positron emission tomography (15% versus 29%, respectively; P=0.09). Baseline 18F-NaF uptake was associated with a subsequent change in peak aortic velocity for both TAVI (r=0.7, P<0.001) and SAVR (r=0.7, P<0.001). On multivariable analysis, 18F-NaF uptake was the only predictor of peak velocity progression (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with TAVI, native aortic valves demonstrate evidence of ongoing active disease. Across imaging modalities, TAVI degeneration is of similar magnitude to bioprosthetic SAVR, suggesting comparable midterm durability. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02304276.

Characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with prior chest radiation undergoing TAVR: Observations from PARTNER-2.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study is to investigate the viability of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with prior chest radiation therapy (cXRT). BACKGROUND: Since patients with prior cXRT perform poorly with surgical aortic valve replacement, TAVR can be a viable alternative. However, clinical outcomes after TAVR in this patient population have not been well studied. METHODS: From the pooled registry of the placement of aortic transcatheter valves II trial, we identified patients with and without prior cXRT who underwent TAVR (n = 64 and 3923, respectively). The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause death and any stroke at 2 years. Time to event analyses were shown as Kaplan-Meier event rates and compared by log-rank testing. Hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated and compared by Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the primary outcome between the patients with and without prior cXRT (30.7% vs. 27.0%; p = 0.75; HR, 1.08; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-1.77). Rates of myocardial infarction, vascular complications, acute kidney injury, or new pacemaker implant after TAVR were not statistically different between the two groups. The rate of immediate reintervention with a second valve for aortic regurgitation after TAVR was higher among the patients with prior cXRT. However, no further difference was observed during 2 years follow-up after discharge from the index-procedure hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR is a viable alternative for severe symptomatic AS in patients who had cXRT in the past.

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.

Self-expanding intra-annular versus commercially available transcatheter heart valves in high and extreme risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (PORTICO IDE): a randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Randomised trial data assessing the safety and efficacy of the self-expanding intra-annular Portico transcatheter aortic valve system (Abbott Structural Heart, St Paul, MN, USA) compared with any commercially available valves are needed to compare performance among designs. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial (the Portico Re-sheathable Transcatheter Aortic Valve System US Investigational Device Exemption trial [PORTICO IDE]), high and extreme risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis were recruited from 52 medical centres experienced in performing transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the USA and Australia. Patients were eligible if they were aged 21 years or older, in New York Heart Association functional class II or higher, and had severe native aortic stenosis. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using permuted block randomisation (block sizes of 2 and 4) and stratified by clinical investigational site, surgical risk cohort, and vascular access method, to transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the first generation Portico valve and delivery system or a commercially available valve (either an intra-annular balloon-expandable Edwards-SAPIEN, SAPIEN XT, or SAPIEN 3 valve [Edwards LifeSciences, Irvine, CA, USA]; or a supra-annular self-expanding CoreValve, Evolut-R, or Evolut-PRO valve [Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA]). Investigational site staff, implanting physician, and study participant were unmasked to treatment assignment. Core laboratories and clinical event assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, life-threatening bleeding requiring transfusion, acute kidney injury requiring dialysis, or major vascular complication at 30 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1 year. Clinical outcomes and valve performance were assessed up to 2 years after the procedure. Primary analyses were by intention to treat and the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate event rates. The non-inferiority margin was 8·5% for primary safety and 8·0% for primary efficacy endpoints. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02000115, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 30 and Sept 12, 2014, and between Aug 21, 2015, and Oct 10, 2017, with recruitment paused for 11 months by the funder, we recruited 1034 patients, of whom 750 were eligible and randomly assigned to the Portico valve group (n=381) or commercially available valve group (n=369). Mean age was 83 years (SD 7) and 395 (52·7%) patients were female. For the primary safety endpoint at 30 days, the event rate was higher in the Portico valve group than in the commercial valve group (52 [13·8%] vs 35 [9·6%]; absolute difference 4·2, 95% CI -0·4 to 8·8 [upper confidence bound {UCB} 8·1%]; pnon-inferiority=0·034, psuperiority=0·071). At 1 year, the rates of the primary efficacy endpoint were similar between the groups (55 [14·8%] in the Portico group vs 48 [13·4%] in the commercial valve group; difference 1·5%, 95% CI -3·6 to 6·5 [UCB 5·7%]; pnon-inferiority=0·0058, psuperiority=0·50). At 2 years, rates of death (80 [22·3%] vs 70 [20·2%]; p=0·40) or disabling stroke (10 [3·1%] vs 16 [5·0%]; p=0·23) were similar between groups. INTERPRETATION: The Portico valve was associated with similar rates of death or disabling stroke at 2 years compared with commercial valves, but was associated with higher rates of the primary composite safety endpoint including death at 30 days. The first-generation Portico valve and delivery system did not offer advantages over other commercially available valves. FUNDING: Abbott.

Impact of Percutaneous Edge-to-Edge Repair in Patients With Atrial Functional Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to clarify the clinical outcomes of patients with atrial functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) who underwent the MitraClip procedure compared with those with conventional FMR and sinus rhythm (SR).Methods and Results:Of 303 patients with FMR who underwent the MitraClip procedure, 40 with "atrial-FMR" defined as FMR with permanent atrial fibrillation and normal left ventricular (LV) function/size and 115 with "sinus-FMR" defined as FMR with SR and LV dysfunction were reviewed. Transthoracic and 3D transesophageal echocardiography, and the cardiac complication rate (composite of all-cause death, heart failure admission, mitral valve (MV) surgery, and redo MitraClip procedure) during the 12-month follow-up were compared between the groups. After the MitraClip procedure, reductions in the mitral annular area and its anteroposterior dimension and in the leaflet closure area were observed in both groups. MV orifice area was smaller with greater transmitral pressure gradient (P<0.05) after the procedure in atrial-FMR patients than in those with sinus-FMR. The prevalence of residual MR was similar, but significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) was more prevalent in the atrial-FMR group at follow-up. Cardiac complication rate was comparable between groups (20% vs. 25%, P=0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Reduction of MR occurred in atrial-FMR probably because of the increase in leaflet coaptation area. Significant TR was more common after the MitraClip procedure in patients with atrial-FMR than with sinus-FMR. However, mid-term outcomes were comparable between patients with atrial-FMR and sinus-FMR.

Left ventricular outflow tract area after percutaneous transseptal transcatheter mitral valve implantation: A three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography study.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction increases mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) in degenerated bioprostheses, annuloplasty rings, and native mitral valves. We aimed to evaluate the LVOT area after TMVI using 3-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and to investigate the preprocedural cardiac geometry that affects the LVOT area after TMVI. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed echocardiography data in 43 patients who had TMVI. A change in pressure gradient across LVOT from before to after TMVI (∆PG) and postprocedure 3D LVOT cross-sectional area at the level of the most distal portion of the mitral valve stent that was closest to the LV apex were assessed as evidence of LVOT narrowing. RESULTS: Transcatheter mitral valve implantation with the use of balloon-expandable valve system was performed for 24 bioprostheses, 7 annuloplasty rings, and 12 native valves. Compared to patients without increase in LVOT gradient (∆PG <10 mm Hg; n = 33), patients with increase in LVOT gradient (∆PG ≥10 mm Hg; n = 10) had smaller LV end-systolic volume (LVESV), greater LV ejection fraction (LVEF), and smaller aorto-mitral (AM) angle. The LVOT area at the valve stent distal edge showed strong association with ∆PG (r = -.68, P < .0001). Only a small AM angle was associated with a small LVOT area at the valve stent distal edge on multivariable analysis, independent of LVESV and LVEF. CONCLUSION: Small LV size, preserved LVEF, and small AM angle were associated with LVOT narrowing. 3D-derived AM angle might be independently associated with LVOT narrowing in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve, valve-in-ring, and valve-in-native valve implantation, independent of LVESV and LVEF.

Intracoronary ALLogeneic heart STem cells to Achieve myocardial Regeneration (ALLSTAR): a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial.

AIMS: Cardiosphere-derived cells (CDCs) are cardiac progenitor cells that exhibit disease-modifying bioactivity in various models of cardiomyopathy and in previous clinical studies of acute myocardial infarction (MI), dilated cardiomyopathy, and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of intracoronary administration of allogeneic CDCs in the multicentre, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, intracoronary ALLogeneic heart STem cells to Achieve myocardial Regeneration (ALLSTAR) trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: We enrolled patients 4 weeks to 12 months after MI, with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤45% and LV scar size ≥15% of LV mass by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). A pre-specified interim analysis was performed when 6-month MRI data were available. The trial was subsequently stopped due to the low probability of detecting a significant treatment effect of CDCs based on the primary endpoint. Patients were randomly allocated in a 2:1 ratio to receive CDCs or placebo in the infarct-related artery by stop-flow technique. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence, during 1-month post-intracoronary infusion, of acute myocarditis attributable to allogeneic CDCs, ventricular tachycardia- or ventricular fibrillation-related death, sudden unexpected death, or a major adverse cardiac event (death or hospitalization for heart failure or non-fatal MI or need for left ventricular assist device or heart transplant). The primary efficacy endpoint was the relative percentage change in infarct size at 12 months post-infusion as assessed by contrast-enhanced cardiac MRI. We randomly allocated 142 eligible patients of whom 134 were treated (90 to the CDC group and 44 to the placebo group). The mean baseline LVEF was 40% and the mean scar size was 22% of LV mass. No primary safety endpoint events occurred. There was no difference in the percentage change from baseline in scar size (P = 0.51) between CDCs and placebo groups at 6 months. Compared with placebo, there were significant reductions in LV end-diastolic volume (P = 0.02), LV end-systolic volume (P = 0.02), and N-terminal pro b-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (P = 0.02) at 6 months in CDC-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Intracoronary infusion of allogeneic CDCs in patients with post-MI LV dysfunction was safe but did not reduce scar size relative to placebo at 6 months. Nevertheless, the reductions in LV volumes and NT-proBNP reveal disease-modifying bioactivity of CDCs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01458405.

Association Between Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Bicuspid vs Tricuspid Aortic Stenosis and Mortality or Stroke Among Patients at Low Surgical Risk.

Importance: There are limited data on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for bicuspid aortic stenosis in patients at low surgical risk. Objective: To compare the outcomes of TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis in patients who are at low surgical risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: Registry-based cohort study of patients undergoing TAVR at 684 US centers. Participants were enrolled in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry from June 2015 to October 2020. Among 159 661 patients (7058 bicuspid, 152 603 tricuspid), 37 660 patients (3243 bicuspid and 34 417 tricuspid) who were at low surgical risk (defined as STS risk score <3%) were included in the analysis. Exposures: TAVR for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Coprimary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications and valve hemodynamics. Results: Among 159 661 patients (7058 bicuspid; 152 603 tricuspid), 3168 propensity-matched pairs of patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis at low surgical risk were analyzed (mean age, 69 years; 69.8% men; mean [SD] STS-predicted risk of mortality, 1.7% [0.6%] for bicuspid and 1.7% [0.7%] for tricuspid). There was no significant difference between the bicuspid and tricuspid groups' rates of death at 30 days (0.9% vs 0.8%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.18 [95% CI, 0.68-2.03]; P = .55) and at 1 year (4.6% vs 6.6%; HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.55-1.02]; P = .06) or stroke at 30 days (1.4% vs 1.2%; HR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.73-1.78]; P = .55) and at 1 year (2.0% vs 2.1%; HR 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69-1.53]; P = .89).There were no significant differences between the bicuspid and tricuspid groups in procedural complications, valve hemodynamics (aortic valve gradient: 13.2 mm Hg vs 13.5 mm Hg; absolute risk difference [RD], 0.3 mm Hg [95% CI, -0.9 to 0.3 mm Hg]), and moderate or severe paravalvular leak (3.4% vs 2.1%; absolute RD, 1.3% [95% CI, -0.6% to 3.2%]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this preliminary, registry-based study of propensity-matched patients at low surgical risk who had undergone TAVR for aortic stenosis, patients treated for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis had no significant difference in mortality or stroke at 30 days or 1 year. Because of the potential for selection bias and absence of a control group treated surgically for bicuspid aortic stenosis, randomized trials are needed to adequately assess the efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis in patients at low surgical risk.

Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis After TAVR and SAVR: Insights From the PARTNER Trials.

BACKGROUND: Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) is a rare but critical mechanism of valve failure and death after transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR, SAVR) warranting further analysis in modern aortic valve replacement experience. We characterize the incidence, risk factors, microbiological profile and outcomes of PVE from the PARTNER trials and registries (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve). METHODS: We analyzed a pooled cohort of all patients in PARTNER 1 and PARTNER 2 trials and registries. Patients had severe aortic stenosis, were treated with TAVR or SAVR, and were analyzed with respect to development of PVE. PVE adjudication by a clinical events committee was based on modified Duke Criteria. The incidence, infection timing, organism, and association between PVE and all-cause mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: 8530 patients were included. PVE occurred in 107 cases (5.06 PVE events per 1000 person-years over a mean follow-up of 2.69±1.55 years [95% CI, 4.19-6.12]). The incidence of TAVR-PVE (5.21 PVE per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 4.26-6.38]) was not significantly different from SAVR-PVE (4.10 per 1000 person-years [95% CI, 2.33-7.22]; incident rate ratio, 1.27 [95% CI, 0.70-2.32]; P=0.44). Temporal risk of PVE was similar for TAVR and SAVR, even after adjusting for competing risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.58-2.28]; P=0.69). Through multivariable analysis, PVE was associated with baseline cirrhosis (incident rate ratio, 2.86 [95% CI, 1.33-6.16]; P=0.007), pulmonary disease (incident rate ratio, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.16-2.48]; P=0.006), and renal insufficiency (incident rate ratio, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.03-2.83]; P=0.04). Timing of PVE was similar between TAVR and SAVR (<30 days: 4.2% vs 8.3%; 31 days to 1 year: 52.6% vs 66.7%; >1 year: 43.2% vs 25.0%; P=0.28). Staphylococcus occurred more commonly after SAVR (58.3% vs 28.4% in TAVR; P=0.04). PVE was strongly associated with all-cause mortality after endocarditis diagnosis (hazard ratio, 4.4 [95% CI, 3.42-5.72]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The widespread adoption of TAVR and application to lower-risk patients makes understanding mechanisms of valve failure increasingly important. PVE is an established mechanism of prosthetic valve failure post-SAVR and TAVR with unclear differences between approaches. We herein demonstrate in the largest trials and registries of TAVR that PVE remains rare, but often fatal, in modern AVR experience and that there is no difference in incidence, predictors, or risk of PVE between TAVR and SAVR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT00530894 (PARTNER 1), NCT01314313 (PARTNER 1IA), NCT02184442 (PARTNER 1IB), NCT03222141 (PII S3HR), NCT03222128 (PII S3i).

Allogeneic cardiosphere-derived cells (CAP-1002) in critically ill COVID-19 patients: compassionate-use case series.

There are no definitive therapies for patients with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. Therefore, new therapeutic strategies are needed to improve clinical outcomes, particularly in patients with severe disease. This case series explores the safety and effectiveness of intravenous allogeneic cardiosphere-derived cells (CDCs), formulated as CAP-1002, in critically ill patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Adverse reactions to CAP-1002, clinical status on the World Health Organization (WHO) ordinal scale, and changes in pro-inflammatory biomarkers and leukocyte counts were analyzed. All patients (n = 6; age range 19-75 years, 1 female) required ventilatory support (invasive mechanical ventilation, n = 5) with PaO2/FiO2 ranging from 69 to 198. No adverse events related to CAP-1002 administration were observed. Four patients (67%) were weaned from respiratory support and discharged from the hospital. One patient remains mechanically ventilated as of April 28th, 2020; all survive. A contemporaneous control group of critically ill COVID-19 patients (n = 34) at our institution showed 18% overall mortality at a similar stage of hospitalization. Ferritin was elevated in all patients at baseline (range of all patients 605.43-2991.52 ng/ml) and decreased in 5/6 patients (range of all patients 252.89-1029.90 ng/ml). Absolute lymphocyte counts were low in 5/6 patients at baseline (range 0.26-0.82 × 103/µl) but had increased in three of these five patients at last follow-up (range 0.23-1.02 × 103/µl). In this series of six critically ill COVID-19 patients, intravenous infusion of CAP-1002 was well tolerated and associated with resolution of critical illness in 4 patients. This series demonstrates the apparent safety of CAP-1002 in COVID-19. While this initial experience is promising, efficacy will need to be further assessed in a randomized controlled trial.

Use of a Dual-Filter Cerebral Embolic Protection Device in Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair.

BACKGROUND: The risk of periprocedural stroke after thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR) ranges from 3% to 8%. Although cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) are widely utilized in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, there are currently no Food and Drug Administration approved CEPDs for use in TEVAR. We report our initial experience with the off-label use of a dual-filter CEPD in patients undergoing TEVAR. METHODS: Two patients at high risk for embolic stroke underwent TEVAR for descending thoracic aortic aneurysms (DTAAs) at a single institution. A dual-filter CEPD (Sentinel; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) was used in an off-label fashion in both cases. Patient 1 was a 62-year-old woman with a 6.2-cm DTAA, extending from the left subclavian artery (LSCA) to the diaphragm (Zones 3-5) and associated with extensive atherosclerotic disease of the aortic arch. Patient 2 was a 78-year-old woman with a 6.3-cm DTAA, extending from the LSCA (Zone 2) to the sixth intercostal space (Zone 4) with associated mural thrombus. Given the proximity of the aneurysm to the LSCA, a left carotid-subclavian bypass was performed for planned LSCA coverage. RESULTS: Through a percutaneous right radial artery approach using a 6F sheath, the Sentinel dual-filter CEPD was delivered over a 0.014″ guidewire into the thoracic aorta. Under fluoroscopic guidance, the 2 filters were sequentially deployed in the innominate and left common carotid arteries, respectively. Appropriately sized devices were successfully delivered and deployed in the proximal and distal landing zones, respectively. Two devices were used for each patient. Completion angiograms showed successful exclusion of the DTAAs in both cases, without evidence of endoleak. The CEPD filters were retrieved in standard fashion without difficulty. Pathology demonstrated successful capture of embolic debris and fibrin clot in both patients. Neither patient exhibited neurological deficits or device-related complications. Both patients remained neurologically intact at 1- and 2-month follow-up, respectively. Surveillance angiograms revealed successful exclusion of the aneurysm without any evidence of endoleak. CONCLUSIONS: We report the novel off-label use of a dual-filter CEPD in 2 patients undergoing TEVAR. Pathological confirmation of embolic debris in the filters makes this a potential tool for stroke prevention during TEVAR in high-risk patients.

Standardized Definition of Structural Valve Degeneration for Surgical and Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves.

Bioprostheses are prone to structural valve degeneration, resulting in limited long-term durability. A significant challenge when comparing the durability of different types of bioprostheses is the lack of a standardized terminology for the definition of a degenerated valve. This issue becomes especially important when we try to compare the degeneration rate of surgically inserted and transcatheter bioprosthetic valves. This document, by the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data), proposes practical and standardized definitions of valve degeneration and provides recommendations for the timing of clinical and imaging follow-up assessments accordingly. Its goal is to improve the quality of research and clinical care for patients with deteriorated bioprostheses by providing objective and strict criteria that can be utilized in future clinical trials. We hope that the adoption of these criteria by both the cardiological and surgical communities will lead to improved comparability and interpretation of durability analyses.