Preoperative computed tomography-imaging with patient-specific computer simulation in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Design and rationale of the GUIDE-TAVI trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment option for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, but is still associated with relatively high rates of pacemaker implantation and paravalvular regurgitation. Routine preoperative computed tomography (CT) combined with patient-specific computer modelling can predict the interaction between the TAVI device and the patient's unique anatomy, allowing physicians to assess the risk for paravalvular regurgitation and conduction disorders in advance to the procedure. The aim of this trial is to assess potential improvement in the procedural outcome of TAVI by applying CT-based patient-specific computer simulations in patients with suitable anatomy for TAVI. METHODS: The GUIDE-TAVI trial is an international multicenter randomized controlled trial including patients accepted for TAVI by the Heart Team. Patients enrolled in the study will be randomized into 2 arms of each 227 patients. In patients randomized to the use of FEops HEARTGuide (FHG), patient-specific computer simulation with FHG is performed in addition to routine preoperative CT imaging and results of the FHG are available to the operator(s) prior to the scheduled intervention. In patients randomized to no use of FHG, only routine preoperative CT imaging is performed. The primary objective is to evaluate whether the use of FHG will reduce the incidence of mild to severe PVR, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3. Secondary endpoints include the incidence of new conduction disorders requiring permanent pacemaker implantation, the difference between preoperative and final selected valve size, the difference between target and final implantation depth, change of preoperative decision, failure to implant valve, early safety composite endpoint and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The GUIDE-TAVI trial is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the value of 3-dimensional computer simulations in addition to standard preprocedural planning in TAVI procedures.

TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multivessel or advanced coronary disease: The transcatheter valve and vessels trial (TCW trial): Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently present with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). In those, current guidelines recommend combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the preferred treatment option, although this surgical approach is associated with a high rate of clinical events. Combined transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with or without FFR have evolved as a valid alternative for cardiac surgery in patients with AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. To date, no dedicated trial has prospectively evaluated the outcomes of a percutaneous versus surgical treatment for patients with both severe AS and CAD. AIMS: To investigate whether fractional-flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI and TAVI is noninferior to combined CABG and SAVR for the treatment of severe AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. METHODS: The Transcatheter Valve and Vessels (TCW) trial (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03424941) is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, international trial. Patients ≥ 70 years with severe AS and multivessel (≥ 2 vessels) or advanced CAD, deemed feasible by the heart team for both; a full percutaneous or surgical treatment, will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either FFR-guided PCI followed by TAVI (intervention arm) vs. CABG and SAVR (control arm). The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, unscheduled clinically-driven target vessel revascularization, valve reintervention, and life threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year. The TCW trial is powered for noninferiority, and if met, superiority will be tested. Assuming a primary endpoint rate of 30% in the CABG-SAVR arm, with a significance level α of 5%, a noninferiority limit delta of 15% and a loss to follow-up of 2%, a total of 328 patients are needed to obtain a power of 90%. The primary endpoint analysis is performed on an intention-to-treat basis. SUMMARY: The TCW Trial is the first prospective randomized trial that will study if a less invasive percutaneous treatment for severe AS and concomitant advanced CAD (i.e., FFR-guided PCI-TAVI) is noninferior to the guidelines recommended approach (CABG-SAVR).

Upper extremity versus lower extremity for secondary access during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the randomised TAVI XS trial.

BACKGROUND: During transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), secondary access is required for angiographic guidance and temporary pacing. The most commonly used secondary access sites are the femoral artery (angiographic guidance) and the femoral vein (temporary pacing). An upper extremity approach using the radial artery and an upper arm vein instead of the lower extremity approach using the femoral artery and femoral vein may reduce clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications, but robust evidence is lacking. TRIAL DESIGN: The TAVI XS trial is a multicentre, randomised, open-label clinical trial with blinded evaluation of endpoints. A total of 238 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI will be included. The primary endpoint is the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding (i.e. Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding) of the randomised secondary access site (either diagnostic or pacemaker access, or both) within 30 days after TAVI. Secondary endpoints include time to mobilisation after TAVI, duration of hospitalisation, any BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding, and early safety at 30 days according to Valve Academic Research Consortium­3 criteria. CONCLUSION: The TAVI XS trial is the first randomised trial comparing an upper extremity approach to a lower extremity approach with regard to clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications. The results of this trial will provide important insights into the safety and efficacy of an upper extremity approach in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

Quality of Life Measures in Aortic Stenosis Research: A Narrative Review.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with aortic stenosis (AS) not only have a reduced life expectancy but also a reduced quality of life (QoL). The benefits of an AS intervention may be considered a balance between a good QoL and a reasonably extended life. However, the different questionnaires being used to determine the QoL were generally not developed for the specific situation of patients with AS and come with strengths and considerable weaknesses. The objective of this article was to provide an overview of the available QoL instruments in AS research, describe their strengths and weaknesses, and provide our assessment of the utility of the available scoring instruments for QoL measurements in AS. SUMMARY: We identified and reviewed the following instruments that are used in AS research: Short Form Health Survey (SF-36/SF-12), EuroQol-5D (EQ-5D), the Illness Intrusiveness Rating Scale (IIRS), the HeartQoL, the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHF), the MacNew Questionnaire, and the Toronto Aortic Stenosis Quality of Life Questionnaire (TASQ). KEY MESSAGES: There is no standardized assessment of QoL in patients with AS. Many different questionnaires are being used, but they are rarely specific for AS. There is a need for AS-specific research into the QoL of patients as life prolongation may compete for an improved QoL in this elderly patient group.

Heterogeneity in Standard Operating Procedures for Catheter Directed Thrombolysis for Peripheral Arterial Occlusions in The Netherlands: A Nationwide Overview.

OBJECTIVE: Catheter directed thrombolysis (CDT) for acute arterial occlusions of the lower extremities is associated with a risk of major bleeding complications. Strict monitoring of vital functions is advised for timely adjustment or discontinuation of thrombolytic treatment. Nevertheless, current evidence on the optimal application of CDT and use of monitoring during CDT is limited. In this study the different standard operating procedures (SOPs) for CDT in Dutch hospitals were compared against a national guideline in a nationwide analysis. METHODS: SOPs, landmark studies, and national and international guidelines for CDT for acute lower extremity arterial occlusions were compared. The protocols of 34 Dutch medical centres where CDT is performed were assessed. Parameters included contraindications to CDT, co-administration of heparin, thrombolytic agent administration, angiographic control, and patient monitoring. RESULTS: Thirty-four SOPs were included, covering 94% of medical centres performing CDT in the Netherlands. None of the SOPs had identical contraindications and a strong divergence in relative and absolute grading was found. Heparin and urokinase dosages differed by a factor of five. In 18% of the SOPs heparin co-administration was not mentioned. Angiographic control varied between once every 6 h to once every 24 h. In 76% of the SOPs plasma fibrinogen levels were used for CDT dose adjustments. However, plasma fibrinogen level threshold values for treatment adjustments varied between 2.0 g/L and 0.5 g/L. CONCLUSION: The SOPs for CDT for acute arterial occlusions of the lower extremities differ greatly on five major operating aspects among medical centres in the Netherlands. None of the SOPs exactly conforms to current national or international guidelines. This study provides direction on how to increase homogeneity in guideline recommendations and to improve guideline adherence in CDT.

Does Mechanical Bowel Preparation Reduce the Risk of Developing Infectious Complications in Pediatric Colorectal Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the application of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) before colorectal surgery reduces the risk of developing infectious complications in children. STUDY DESIGN: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched to identify all articles comparing pediatric patients receiving MBP with pediatric patients not receiving MBP before colorectal surgery. Results are presented with weighted risk differences based on the number of events and sample size per study. RESULTS: Six original studies were included comparing MBP (n = 810) and no MBP (n = 1167). The overall risk of developing infectious complications was 10.1% in patients with MBP, compared with 9.1% in patients without MBP, resulting in a nonsignificant risk difference of -0.03% (95% CI, -0.09% to 0.03%). Concerning the number of wound infections and anastomotic leaks, we found nonsignificant risk differences of -0.03% (95% CI, -0.08% to 0.02%) and 0.01% (95% CI, -0.01% to 0.02%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Based on the current literature, there is insufficient evidence to indicate that the use of MBP leads to a significant difference in the risk of developing infectious complications in pediatric colorectal surgery.

Sex Differences in Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A POPular TAVI Subanalysis.

BACKGROUND: Stroke and bleeding are complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). A higher incidence of bleeding and stroke has been reported in women, but the role of antithrombotic management pre- and post-TAVR has not been studied. OBJECTIVES: The study sought to compare bleeding and ischemic complications after TAVR between women and men stratified by antiplatelet and oral anticoagulant (OAC) regimen. METHODS: The POPular TAVI (Antiplatelet Therapy for Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial was a randomized clinical trial to test the hypothesis that monotherapy with aspirin or OAC after TAVR is safer than the addition of clopidogrel. The primary endpoints of interest of this post hoc subanalysis were: 1) all bleeding; and 2) a composite of ischemic events consisting of stroke and myocardial infarction. Secondary endpoints were: 1) nonprocedural bleeding; 2) major or life-threatening bleeding; 3) minor bleeding; 4) stroke; 5) myocardial infarction; and 6) all-cause death. RESULTS: A total of 978 patients (466 [47.6%] women) were included in this study. All bleeding and the composite of myocardial infarction and stroke rates were similar between sexes (all bleeding: 106 [22.8%] women vs 121 [23.6%] men; P = 0.815; ischemic events: 26 [5.6%] vs 36 [7.0%]; P = 0.429). However, major or life-threatening bleeding occurred more often in women (58 [12.5%]) vs men (38 [7.4%]) (P = 0.011), most of which were access site bleedings. The use of aspirin pre- and post-TAVR increased major or life-threatening bleeding in women but not in men. CONCLUSIONS: After TAVR, overall bleeding and ischemic outcomes were similar between women and men. However, women had more major or life-threatening bleedings, especially those receiving aspirin pre- and post-TAVR.

Periprocedural continuation versus interruption of oral anticoagulant drugs during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the POPular PAUSE TAVI trial.

About one-third of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) use oral anticoagulants (OAC), mainly due to atrial fibrillation. General guidelines advise interrupting OAC in patients with a high risk of bleeding undergoing interventions. However, preliminary observational data suggest that the continuation of OAC during TAVI is safe and may reduce the risk of periprocedural thromboembolic events. The Periprocedural Continuation Versus Interruption of Oral Anticoagulant Drugs During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (POPular PAUSE TAVI) is a multicentre, randomised clinical trial with open-label treatment and blinded endpoint assessment. Patients are randomised 1:1 to periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC and are stratified for vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulant use. The primary endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular mortality, all stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications and type 2-4 bleeding within 30 days after TAVI, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. Secondary endpoints include separate individual and composite outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Since continuation of OAC is associated with the ancillary benefit that it simplifies periprocedural management, the primary outcome is first analysed for non-inferiority; if non-inferiority is proven, superiority will be tested. Recruitment started in November 2020, and the trial will continue until a total of 858 patients have been included and followed for 90 days. In summary, POPular PAUSE TAVI is the first randomised clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC in patients undergoing TAVI.

Evolving concepts in the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Thromboembolic and bleeding complications negatively impact recovery and survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Particularly, there is a considerable risk of ischaemic stroke and vascular access related bleeding, as well as spontaneous gastro-intestinal bleeding. Therefore, benefit and harm of antithrombotic therapy should be carefully balanced. This review summarizes current evidence on peri- and post-procedural antithrombotic treatment. Indeed, in recent years, the management of antithrombotic therapy after TAVI has evolved from intensive, expert opinion-based strategies, towards a deescalated, evidence-based approach. Besides per procedural administration of unfractionated heparin, this encompasses single antiplatelet therapy in patients without a concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation (OAC); and OAC monotherapy in patients with such indication, mainly being atrial fibrillation. Combination therapy should generally be avoided to reduce bleeding risk, except after recent coronary stenting where a period of dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus P2Y12-inhibitor) or P2Y12-inhibitor plus OAC (in patients with an independent indication for OAC) is recommended to prevent stent thrombosis. This new paradigm in which reduced antithrombotic intensity leads to improved patient safety, without a loss of efficacy, may be particularly suitable for elderly and fragile patients. Whether this holds in upcoming populations of younger and lower-risk patients and in specific populations as patients with subclinical valve thrombosis, is yet to be proven. Finally, whether less intensive or alternative approaches should be also applied for the periprocedural management of the antithrombotic therapy, has to be determined by ongoing and future studies.

Diagnostic Performance of CCTA and CT-FFR for the Detection of CAD in TAVR Work-Up.

BACKGROUND: The work-up for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) currently uses computed tomography to evaluate the annulus diameter and peripheral vascular access plus invasive coronary angiography (ICA) to assess significant coronary artery disease (CAD). ICA might partially be redundant with the use of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Prior studies found an improvement of the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA with the use of computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR for the diagnosis of CAD in the work-up for TAVR. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR work-up between 2015 and 2019 were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. All patients underwent CCTA and ICA within 3 months, and the diagnostic performance of both CCTA and CT-FFR was assessed using ICA as the reference. RESULTS: Seventy-six of the 338 patients included in the analysis had ≥1 significant coronary stenosis on ICA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy per patient were 76.9%, 64.5%, 34.0%, 92.1%, and 66.9% for CCTA and 84.6%, 88.3%, 63.2%, 96.0%, and 87.6% for CT-FFR. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was significantly different between CCTA and CT-FFR (0.84 vs 0.90, P = 0.02). A CT-FFR-guided approach could avoid ICA in 57.1% versus 43.6% of patients using CCTA. CONCLUSIONS: CT-FFR significantly improves the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA without additional testing and increases the proportion of patients in whom ICA could have been safely avoided. It has the potential to be integrated in the current clinical work-up for TAVR for diagnosing stable CAD requiring treatment.

Haemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the ACURATE neo device has been associated with a non-negligible incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR). The new-generation ACURATE neo2 has been designed to mitigate this limitation. AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare TAVR with the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices. METHODS: The NEOPRO and NEOPRO-2 registries retrospectively included patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with self-expanding valves at 24 and 20 centres, respectively. Patients receiving the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices (from January 2012 to December 2021) were included in this study. Predischarge and 30-day VARC-3 defined outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR. Subgroup analyses per degree of aortic valve calcification were performed. RESULTS: A total of 2,026 patients (neo: 1,263, neo2: 763) were included. Predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR was less frequent for the neo2 group (2% vs 5%; p<0.001), resulting in higher VARC-3 intended valve performance (96% vs 90%; p<0.001). Furthermore, more patients receiving the neo2 had none/trace paravalvular AR (59% vs 38%; p<0.001). The reduction in paravalvular AR with neo2 was mainly observed with heavy aortic valve calcification. New pacemaker implantation and VARC-3 technical and device success rates were similar between the 2 groups; there were more frequent vascular and bleeding complications for the neo device. Similar 1-year survival was detected after TAVR (neo2: 90% vs neo: 87%; p=0.14). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR with the ACURATE neo2 device was associated with a lower prevalence of moderate or severe paravalvular AR and more patients with none/trace paravalvular AR. This difference was particularly evident with heavy aortic valve calcification.

Retrograde Coronary Venous Infusion as a Delivery Strategy in Regenerative Cardiac Therapy: an Overview of Preclinical and Clinical Data.

An important aspect of cell therapy in the field of cardiac disease is safe and effective delivery of cells. Commonly used delivery strategies such as intramyocardial injection and intracoronary infusion both present with advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, alternative delivery routes are explored, such as retrograde coronary venous infusion (RCVI). Our aim is to evaluate safety and efficiency of RCVI by providing a complete overview of preclinical and clinical studies applying RCVI in a broad range of disease types and experimental models. Available data on technical and safety aspects of RCVI are incomplete and insufficient. Improvement of cardiac function is seen after cell delivery via RCVI. However, cell retention in the heart after RCVI appears inferior compared to intracoronary infusion and intramyocardial injection. Adequately powered confirmatory studies on retention rates and safety are needed to proceed with RCVI in the future.