Rationale and design of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter heart valve replacement in female patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve intervention (Randomized researcH in womEn all comers wIth Aortic stenosis [RHEIA] trial).

BACKGROUND: Limited data suggest that transcatheter (TAVR) as compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) may be more effective in female than male patients. To date, most evidence is derived from subgroup analyses of large trials, and a dedicated randomized trial evaluating whether there is a difference in outcomes between these interventions in women is warranted. The RHEIA trial will compare the safety and efficacy of TAVR with SAVR in women with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve intervention, irrespective of surgical risk. METHODS/DESIGN: The RHEIA trial is a prospective, randomized, controlled study that will enroll up to 440 patients across 35 sites in Europe. Women with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis, with any but prohibitive surgical risk status, will be randomized 1:1 to undergo aortic valve intervention with either transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 or SAPIEN 3 Ultra device or SAVR and followed up for 1 year. The objective is to determine whether TAVR is non-inferior to SAVR in this patient population and, if this is fulfilled whether TAVR is actually superior to SAVR. The primary safety/efficacy endpoint is a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, and re-hospitalization (for valve or procedure-related symptoms or worsening congestive heart failure) at 1 year post-procedure. Other outcomes (assessed at 30 days and/or 1 year) include all-cause mortality; bleeding, vascular, cardiac, cerebrovascular and renal complications; aortic valve prosthesis and left ventricular function; cognitive function, health status, and quality of life. DISCUSSION: The RHEIA study has been designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TAVR compared with SAVR specifically in women with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis, irrespective of the level of surgical risk. The results will be the first to provide specific randomized evidence to guide treatment selection in female patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04160130.

Degree of valve calcification in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation with and without balloon aortic valvuloplasty: Findings from the multicenter EASE-IT TF registry.

AIMS: We aimed to assess whether the level of aortic root calcification is associated with BAV performance/omission during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and to explore related outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: EASE-IT TF was a prospective, observational, multicenter registry of patients undergoing TF-TAVI with the Edwards SAPIEN 3, with or without BAV predilation. Valvular calcification was quantified from pre-procedural multi-slice computed tomography images and compared between BAV and no BAV patients. Data for 178 patients (55 BAV; 123 no BAV) were analyzed. There were no significant differences between groups in terms of regional/leaflet sector calcification volumes, maximum asymmetry between the different leaflet sectors, or total calcification scores. Overall, a greater-than-average leaflet calcification volume was independently predictive of ≥mild PVL (OR: 5.116; 95% CI: 1.042-38.35) and the need for post-dilation (OR: 3.592; 95% CI: 1.173-12.14). The latter effect was abated in patients with BAV (OR: 1.837; 95% CI: 0.223-18.00) and intensified in those without BAV (OR: 5.575; 95% CI: 1.114-38.74). No other BAV-dependent effects of calcification on outcomes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of transfemoral valve implantations, calcification does not appear to be the main driving factor in the decision to perform/omit BAV. Predilation may be valuable for reducing post-dilation requirements in patients only with a greater degree of leaflet calcification.

Quality of life after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement using the Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: The Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (TASQ) is a validated instrument for assessing quality of life (QoL) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). In this study, we evaluated health status outcomes, based on the TASQ, in patients with severe AS undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: The TASQ registry was a prospective observational registry. Patients with severe AS from nine centres in Europe and one in Canada underwent either SAVR or transfemoral TAVR. Patients completed the TASQ, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire and Short Form-12 V.2 prior to the intervention, predischarge, and at 30-day and 3-month follow-ups. Primary end point was the TASQ score. RESULTS: In both the TAVR (n=137) and SAVR (n=137) cohorts, significant increases were observed in all three scores. The overall TASQ score improved as did all but one of the individual domains at 3 months after the intervention (p<0.001). TASQ health expectations were the only domain which worsened (p<0.001). Across TASQ subscores, significant changes were evident from the time of discharge in the TAVR and 30-day follow-up in the SAVR cohort. In a categorical analysis of the TASQ, 39.7% of the TAVR group and 35.0% of the SAVR group had a substantially improved health status at 3 months compared with baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The TASQ captured changes in QoL among patients with severe AS who were treated with TAVR or SAVR. QoL improved substantially after either intervention, as indicated by changes in the TASQ overall score at 3 months. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03186339.

Aortic valve replacement: validation of the Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life Questionnaire.

AIMS: There is no quality of life tool specifically developed for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) to assess how this chronic condition and its treatment affect patients. The Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (TASQ) has been developed to overcome this gap. The results of the validation of the TASQ in patients undergoing treatment for severe AS are presented. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective study at 10 centres in Europe and Canada, which enrolled 274 patients with severe symptomatic AS undergoing surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Mean TASQ score at baseline was 71.2 points and increased to 88.9 three months after aortic valve implantation (P < 0.001). Increases were seen for the emotional impact (32.0 to 39.0; P < 0.001), physical limitations (14.8 to 22.0; P < 0.001), and physical symptoms (8.5 vs. 11.0; P < 0.001) domains. Internal consistency was good/excellent for overall TASQ score (α = 0.891) and for the physical limitation, emotional impact, and social limitation domains (α = 0.815-0.950). Test-retest reliability was excellent or strong for the overall TASQ (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.883) and for the physical symptoms, physical limitation, emotional impact, and social limitation domains (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.791-0.895). Responsiveness was medium overall (Cohen's d = 0.637) and medium/large for physical symptoms, emotional impact, and physical limitations (0.661-0.812). Sensitivity to change was significant for physical symptoms, physical limitations (both P < 0.001), emotional impact (P = 0.003), and social limitations (P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: The TASQ is a new, brief, self-administered, and clinically relevant health-specific tool to measure changes in quality of life in patients with AS undergoing an intervention.

Prespecified Risk Criteria Facilitate Adequate Discharge and Long-Term Outcomes After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Background Despite the availability of guidelines for the performance of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), current treatment pathways vary between countries and institutions, which impact on the mean duration of postprocedure hospitalization. Methods and Results This was a prospective, multicenter registry of 502 patients to validate the appropriateness of discharge timing after transfemoral TAVI, using prespecified risk criteria from FAST-TAVI (Feasibility and Safety of Early Discharge After Transfemoral [TF] Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation), based on hospital events within 1-year after discharge. The end point-a composite of all-cause mortality, vascular access-related complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, cardiac rehospitalization, kidney failure, and major bleeding-was reached in 27.0% of patients (95% CI, 23.3-31.2) within 1 year after intervention; 7.5% (95% CI, 5.5-10.2) had in-hospital complications before discharge and 19.6% (95% CI, 16.3-23.4) within 1 year after discharge. Overall mortality within 1 year after discharge was 7.3% and rates of cardiac rehospitalization 13.5%, permanent pacemaker implantation 4.2%, any stroke 1.8%, vascular-access-related complications 0.7%, life-threatening bleeding 0.7%, and kidney failure 0.4%. Composite events within 1 year after discharge were observed in 18.8% and 24.3% of patients with low risk of complications/early (≤3 days) discharge and high risk and discharged late (>3 days) (concordant discharge), respectively. Event rate in patients with discordant discharge was 14.3% with low risk but discharged late and increased to 50.0% in patients with high risk but discharged in ≤3 days. Conclusions The FAST-TAVI risk assessment provides a tool for appropriate, risk-based discharge that was validated with the 1-year event rate after transfemoral TAVI. Registration URL: https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02404467.

Balloon-expandable transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without predilation: findings from the prospective EASE-IT TF multicentre registry.

Background: Predilation of the native valve has long been deemed necessary in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI), despite little trial evidence to support its clinical use. As most evidence is derived from retrospective analyses of observational studies, we conducted a two-armed, prospective multicentre registry. Methods: Patients undergoing TF-TAVI with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve, with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV), were included and their procedural characteristics, short-term safety and short-term efficacy outcomes compared. We hypothesised that BAV may be safely omitted in many patients and omission could be associated with procedural benefits. Results: Overall, 196 consecutive patients underwent TF-TAVI, 56 with BAV and 140 without. The mean age was 81.2±6.2 years, and the mean logistic EuroSCORE I was 17.1±13.6. Device success according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) was achieved in 96.4%. The median procedural duration was shorter without BAV (56 min vs 90 min; p=0.001), as was fluoroscopy time (10 min vs 13 min; p=0.001). The need for balloon postdilation was less frequent in patients without BAV (15.7% vs 30.4%, p=0.029). There was no difference in the proportion of patients meeting the VARC-2 defined composite safety endpoint at 30 days (9.3% without vs 8.9% with BAV; adjusted OR (adjOR) 2.55; 95% CI 0.56 to 18.84) and at 6 months (15.2% without vs 16.4% with BAV; adjOR 1.66; 95% CI 0.49 to 6.55). Conclusions: In the majority of patients, BAV can be safely omitted from the TAVI procedure without adverse effects. The omission of BAV is associated with shorter procedural duration and could be advantageous for the majority of patients. Trial registration number: NCT02760771.