Long-term follow-up of balloon-expandable valves according to the implantation strategy: insight from the DIRECTAVI trial.

BACKGROUND: Safety and feasibility of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) using the SAPIEN 3 balloon-expandable device has been previously demonstrated. The impact on long-term valve hemodynamic performances and outcomes remains however unknown. We evaluate long-term clinical and hemodynamic results according to the implant strategy (direct TAVR vs BAV pre-TAVR) in patients included in the DIRECTAVI randomized trial (NCT02729519). METHODS: Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up until January 2023 was performed for all patients included in the DIRECTAVI trial since 2016 (n = 228). The primary endpoint was incidence of moderate/severe hemodynamic valve deterioration (HVD), according to the Valve Academic Research defined Consortium-3 criteria (increase in mean gradient ≥10 mmHg resulting in a final mean gradient ≥20 mmHg, or new/worsening aortic regurgitation of 1 grade resulting in ≥ moderate aortic regurgitation). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 3.8 (2.2-4.7) years. Mean age at follow-up was 87 ± 6.7 years. No difference in incidence of HVD in the direct implantation group compared to the BAV group was found (incidence of 1.97 per 100 person-years and 1.45 per 100 person-years, respectively, P = 0.6). Prevalence of predicted prothesis-patient mismatch was low (n = 13 [11.4%] in the direct TAVR group vs n = 15 [13.2%] in BAV group) and similar between both groups (P = .7). Major outcomes including death, stroke, hospitalization for heart failure and pacemaker implantation were similar between both groups, (P = .4, P = .7, P = .3, and P = .3 respectively). CONCLUSION: Direct implantation of the balloon-expandable device in TAVR was not associated with an increased risk of moderate/severe HVD or major outcomes up to 6-year follow-up. These results guarantee wide use of direct balloon-expandable valve implantation, when feasible. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05140317.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement performed with selective telemetry monitoring: A prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Telemetry monitoring (TM) with or without intensive care unit (ICU) admission is the standard of care after Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Regarding to improvements of the technique and procedural results, TM may be considered only in selected patients. We aimed to confirm feasibility and safety of selective TM in patients undergoing TAVR. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 449 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR. Patients were transferred to general cardiology ward (GCW) without TM after the procedure when stable clinical state, transfemoral access, no baseline right bundle branch block (RBBB), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) > 40%, and no complication including any electrocardiogram (ECG) change within 1 h after the procedure ("low-risk" group). Others patients were considered for TM in ICU ("high-risk" group). The primary endpoint evaluated in-hospital major adverse events after unit admission according to VARC-2 criteria. RESULTS: The mean age was 81.8 ± 7.5 years and mean EuroSCORE II was 7.5 ± 4.8%. In total, 116 patients (25.8%) were considered as "low-risk" patients and 163 patients (36.3%) were referred to GCW, including those with immediate pacemaker implantation. A total of 96 patients (21.3%) reached the primary endpoint including mainly conductive disorders (12.8%). No major adverse events, particularly no late severe conductive disorder, occurred in the "low-risk" group (negative predictive value of 100%). Baseline RBBB (p < 0.01), LVEF < 40% (p = 0.02) and "high-risk" group (p < 0.01) were predictive of outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Using rigorous periprocedural selection criteria, patients' admission in GCW without TM can be routinely and safely performed in 1/3 of patients after TAVR.

Myocardial Injury After Balloon Predilatation Versus Direct Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the DIRECTAVI Trial.

Background Myocardial injury is associated with higher mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and might be increased by prior balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV). We aimed to evaluate the impact of prior BAV versus direct prosthesis implantation on myocardial injury occurring after (TAVR) with balloon-expandable prostheses. Methods and Results The DIRECTAVI (Direct Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial, an open-label randomized study, demonstrated noninferiority of TAVR without BAV (direct TAVR group) compared with systematic BAV (BAV group) with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve. High-sensitivity troponin was assessed before and the day after the procedure. Incidence of myocardial injury after the procedure (high-sensitivity troponin elevation >15× the upper reference limit [14 ng/L]) was the main end point. Impact of myocardial injury on 1-month adverse events (all-cause mortality, stroke, major bleeding, major vascular complications, transfusion, acute kidney injury, heart failure, pacemaker implantation, and aortic regurgitation) was evaluated. Preprocedure and postprocedure high-sensitivity troponin levels were available in 211 patients. The mean age of patients was 83 years (78-87 years), with 129 men (61.1%). Mean postprocedure high-sensitivity troponin was 124.9±81.4 ng/L in the direct TAVR group versus 170.4±127.7 ng/L in the BAV group (P=0.007). Myocardial injury occurred in 42 patients (19.9%), including 13 patients (12.2%) in the direct TAVR group and 29 (27.9%) in the BAV group (P=0.004). BAV increased by 2.8-fold (95% CI, 1.4-5.8) myocardial injury probability. Myocardial injury was associated with 1-month adverse events (P=0.03). Conclusions BAV increased the incidence and magnitude of myocardial injury after TAVR with new-generation balloon-expandable valves. Myocardial injury was associated with 1-month adverse events. These results argue in favor of direct SAPIEN 3 valve implantation. Registration URL: https://www.Clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02729519.

Prior Balloon Valvuloplasty Versus Direct Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the DIRECTAVI Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate device success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using new-generation balloon-expandable prostheses with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV). BACKGROUND: Randomized studies are lacking comparing TAVR without BAV against the conventional technique of TAVR with BAV. METHODS: DIRECTAVI (Direct Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) was an open-label noninferiority study that randomized patients undergoing TAVR using the Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve with or without prior balloon valvuloplasty. The primary endpoint was the device success rate according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria, which was evaluated using a 7% noninferiority margin. The secondary endpoint included procedural and 30-day adverse events. RESULTS: Device success was recorded for 184 of 236 included patients (78.0%). The rate of device success in the direct implantation group (n = 97 [80.2%]) was noninferior to that in the BAV group (n = 87 [75.7%]) (mean difference 4.5%; 95% confidence interval: -4.4% to 13.4%; p = 0.02 for noninferiority). No severe prosthesis-patient mismatch or severe aortic regurgitation occurred in any group. In the direct implantation group, 7 patients (5.8%) required BAV to cross the valve. Adverse events were related mainly to pacemaker implantation (20.9% in the BAV group vs. 19.0% in the direct implantation group; p = 0.70). No significant difference was found between the 2 strategies in duration of procedure, contrast volume, radiation exposure, or rate of post-dilatation. CONCLUSIONS: Direct TAVR without prior BAV was noninferior to the conventional strategy using BAV with new-generation balloon-expandable valves, but without procedural simplification. BAV was needed to cross the valve in a few patients, suggesting a need for upstream selection on the basis of patient anatomy. (TAVI Without Balloon Predilatation [of the Aortic Valve] SAPIEN 3 [DIRECTAVI]; NCT02729519).

Hemodynamic Performances and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve Versus Native Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) emerged has a less invasive treatment than surgery for patients with degenerated bioprosthesis. However, few data are currently available regarding results of ViV versus TAVI in native aortic valve. We aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and 1-year outcomes between patients who underwent ViV procedure and patients who underwent non-ViV TAVI. This bicentric study included all patients who underwent aortic ViV procedure for surgical bioprosthetic aortic failure between 2013 and 2017. All patients who underwent TAVI were included in the analysis during the same period. ViV and non-ViV patients were matched with 1:2 ratio according to size, type of TAVI device, age (±5 years), sex, and STS score. Primary end point was hemodynamic performance including mean aortic gradient and aortic regurgitation at 1-year follow-up. A total of 132 patients were included, 49 in the ViV group and 83 in the non-ViV group. Mean age was 82.8 ± 5.9 years, 55.3% were female. Mean STS score was 5.2% ± 3.1%. Self-expandable valves were implanted in 78.8% of patients. At 1-year follow-up, aortic mean gradient was significantly higher in ViV group (18.1 ± 9.4 mm Hg vs 11.4 ± 5.4 mm Hg; p < 0.0001) and 17 (38.6%) patients had a mean aortic gradient ≥20 mm Hg vs 6 (7.8%) in the non-ViV group (p = 0.0001). Aortic regurgitation > grade 2 were similar in both groups (p = 0.71). In the ViV group, new pacemaker implantation was less frequent (p = 0.01) and coronary occlusions occurred only in ViV group (n = 2 [4.1%]). At 1-year follow-up, 3 patients (2.3%) died from cardiac cause, 1 (2.1%) in the ViV group vs 2 (2.4%) in the non-ViV group (p = 0.9). There was no stroke. In conclusion, compared with TAVI in native aortic stenosis, ViV appears as a safe and feasible strategy in patients with impaired bioprosthesis. As 1-year hemodynamic performances seem better in native TAVI procedure, long-term follow-up should be assessed to determinate the impact of residual stenosis on outcomes and durability.

Vascular Complications and Bleeding After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Performed Through Open Surgical Access.

Major vascular complications (VC) remain frequent after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and may be associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the rate of VC after transfemoral TAVI performed using an exclusive open surgical access strategy. From 2010 to 2014, we included in a monocentric registry all consecutive patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI. The procedures were performed with 16Fr to 20Fr sheath systems. VC were evaluated within 30 days and classified as major or minor according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 definition. The study included 396 patients, 218 were women (55%), median age was 85 years (81 to 88), and the median logistic Euroscore was 15.2% (11 to 23). The balloon-expandable SAPIEN XT and the self-expandable Medtronic Core Valve prosthesis were used in 288 (72.7%) and 108 patients (27.3%), respectively. The total length of the procedure was 68 ± 15 minutes including 13 ± 5 minutes for the open surgical access. Major and minor VC were observed in 9 (2.3%) and 16 patients (4%), respectively, whereas life-threatening and major bleeding concerned 18 patients (4.6%). The median duration of hospitalization was 5 days (interquartile range 2 to 7), significantly higher in patients with VC (7 days [5 to 15], p <0.001). Mortality at 1-month and 1-year follow-up (n = 26, 6.6%; and n = 67, 17.2%, respectively) was not related to major or minor VC (p = 0.6). In multivariable analysis, only diabetes (odds ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 6.1, p = 0.034) and chronic kidney failure (odds ratio 3.0, 95% confidence interval 1.0 to 9.0, p = 0.046) were predictive of VC, whereas body mass index, gender, Euroscore, and lower limb arteriopathy were not. In conclusion, minimal rate of VC and bleeding can be obtained after transfemoral TAVI performed using an exclusive surgical strategy, with a particular advantage observed in high-risk bleeding patients.