Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement for Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: For patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, current guidelines recommend routine clinical surveillance every 6 to 12 months. Data from randomized trials examining whether early intervention with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) will improve outcomes in these patients are lacking. METHODS: At 75 centers in the United States and Canada, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis to undergo early TAVR with transfemoral placement of a balloon-expandable valve or clinical surveillance. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or unplanned hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. Superiority testing was performed in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 901 patients underwent randomization; 455 patients were assigned to TAVR and 446 to clinical surveillance. The mean age of the patients was 75.8 years, the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 1.8% (on a scale from 0 to 100%, with higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after surgery), and 83.6% of patients were at low surgical risk. A primary end-point event occurred in 122 patients (26.8%) in the TAVR group and in 202 patients (45.3%) in the clinical surveillance group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.40 to 0.63; P<0.001). Death occurred in 8.4% of the patients assigned to TAVR and in 9.2% of the patients assigned to clinical surveillance, stroke occurred in 4.2% and 6.7%, respectively, and unplanned hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 20.9% and 41.7%. During a median follow-up of 3.8 years, 87.0% of patients in the clinical surveillance group underwent aortic-valve replacement. There were no apparent differences in procedure-related adverse events between patients in the TAVR group and those in the clinical surveillance group who underwent aortic-valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis, a strategy of early TAVR was superior to clinical surveillance in reducing the incidence of death, stroke, or unplanned hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; EARLY TAVR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03042104.).

Transcatheter Valve Replacement in Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Severe tricuspid regurgitation is associated with disabling symptoms and an increased risk of death. Data regarding outcomes after percutaneous transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement are needed. METHODS: In this international, multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 400 patients with severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation in a 2:1 ratio to undergo either transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement and medical therapy (valve-replacement group) or medical therapy alone (control group). The hierarchical composite primary outcome was death from any cause, implantation of a right ventricular assist device or heart transplantation, postindex tricuspid-valve intervention, hospitalization for heart failure, an improvement of at least 10 points in the score on the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary (KCCQ-OS), an improvement of at least one New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class, and an improvement of at least 30 m on the 6-minute walk distance. A win ratio was calculated for the primary outcome by comparing all possible patient pairs, starting with the first event in the hierarchy. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were assigned to the valve-replacement group and 133 to the control group. At 1 year, the win ratio favoring valve replacement was 2.02 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.56 to 2.62; P<0.001). In comparisons of patient pairs, those in the valve-replacement group had more wins than the control group with respect to death from any cause (14.8% vs. 12.5%), postindex tricuspid-valve intervention (3.2% vs. 0.6%), and improvement in the KCCQ-OS score (23.1% vs. 6.0%), NYHA class (10.2% vs. 0.8%), and 6-minute walk distance (1.1% vs. 0.9%). The valve-replacement group had fewer wins than the control group with respect to the annualized rate of hospitalization for heart failure (9.7% vs. 10.0%). Severe bleeding occurred in 15.4% of the valve-replacement group and in 5.3% of the control group (P = 0.003); new permanent pacemakers were implanted in 17.4% and 2.3%, respectively (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation, transcatheter tricuspid-valve replacement was superior to medical therapy alone for the primary composite outcome, driven primarily by improvements in symptoms and quality of life. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; TRISCEND II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04482062.).

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients at Five Years.

BACKGROUND: A previous analysis in this trial showed that among patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite end point of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) than with surgical aortic-valve replacement. Longer-term outcomes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR or surgery. The first primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization related to the valve, the procedure, or heart failure. The second primary end point was a hierarchical composite that included death, disabling stroke, nondisabling stroke, and the number of rehospitalization days, analyzed with the use of a win ratio analysis. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were assessed through 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 1000 patients underwent randomization: 503 patients were assigned to undergo TAVR, and 497 to undergo surgery. A component of the first primary end point occurred in 111 of 496 patients in the TAVR group and in 117 of 454 patients in the surgery group (Kaplan-Meier estimates, 22.8% in the TAVR group and 27.2% in the surgery group; difference, -4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.9 to 1.3; P = 0.07). The win ratio for the second primary end point was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.51; P = 0.25). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for the components of the first primary end point were as follows: death, 10.0% in the TAVR group and 8.2% in the surgery group; stroke, 5.8% and 6.4%, respectively; and rehospitalization, 13.7% and 17.4%. The hemodynamic performance of the valve, assessed according to the mean (±SD) valve gradient, was 12.8±6.5 mm Hg in the TAVR group and 11.7±5.6 mm Hg in the surgery group. Bioprosthetic-valve failure occurred in 3.3% of the patients in the TAVR group and in 3.8% of those in the surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: Among low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR or surgery, there was no significant between-group difference in the two primary composite outcomes. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675114.).

Concomitant Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is associated with increased risk of bleeding and stroke. While left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is approved as an alternative to anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with AF, placement of these devices in patients with severe aortic stenosis, or when performed at the same time as TAVR, has not been extensively studied. METHODS: WATCH-TAVR (WATCHMAN for Patients with AF Undergoing TAVR) was a multicenter, randomized trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of concomitant TAVR and LAAO with WATCHMAN in AF patients. Patients were randomized 1:1 to TAVR + LAAO or TAVR + medical therapy. WATCHMAN patients received anticoagulation for 45 days followed by dual antiplatelet therapy until 6 months. Anticoagulation was per treating physician preference for patients randomized to TAVR + medical therapy. The primary noninferiority end point was all-cause mortality, stroke, and major bleeding at 2 years between the 2 strategies. RESULTS: The study enrolled 349 patients (177 TAVR + LAAO and 172 TAVR + medical therapy) between December 2017 and November 2020 at 34 US centers. The mean age of patients was 81 years, and the mean scores for CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/alcohol concomitantly) were 4.9 and 3.0, respectively. At baseline, 85.4% of patients were taking anticoagulants and 71.3% patients were on antiplatelet therapy. The cohorts were well-balanced for baseline characteristics. The incremental LAAO procedure time was 38 minutes, and the median contrast volume used for combined procedures was 119 mL versus 70 mL with TAVR alone. At the 24-month follow-up, 82.5% compared with 50.8% of patients were on any antiplatelet therapy, and 13.9% compared with 66.7% of patients were on any anticoagulation therapy in TAVR + LAAO compared with TAVR + medical therapy group, respectively. For the composite primary end point, TAVR + LAAO was noninferior to TAVR + medical therapy (22.7 versus 27.3 events per 100 patient-years for TAVR + LAAO and TAVR + medical therapy, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.60-1.22]; Pnoninferiority<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant WATCHMAN LAAO and TAVR is noninferior to TAVR with medical therapy in severe aortic stenosis patients with AF. The increased complexity and risks of the combined procedure should be considered when concomitant LAAO is viewed as an alternative to medical therapy for patients with AF undergoing TAVR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03173534.

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.

Leaflet modification before transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients at risk for coronary obstruction: the ShortCut study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This trial sought to assess the safety and efficacy of ShortCut, the first dedicated leaflet modification device, prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients at risk for coronary artery obstruction. METHODS: This pivotal prospective study enrolled patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves scheduled to undergo TAVI and were at risk for coronary artery obstruction. The primary safety endpoint was procedure-related mortality or stroke at discharge or 7 days, and the primary efficacy endpoint was per-patient leaflet splitting success. Independent angiographic, echocardiographic, and computed tomography core laboratories assessed all images. Safety events were adjudicated by a clinical events committee and data safety monitoring board. RESULTS: Sixty eligible patients were treated (77.0 ± 9.6 years, 70% female, 96.7% failed surgical bioprosthetic valves, 63.3% single splitting and 36.7% dual splitting) at 22 clinical sites. Successful leaflet splitting was achieved in all [100%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 94%-100.0%, P < .001] patients. Procedure time, including imaging confirmation of leaflet splitting, was 30.6 ± 17.9 min. Freedom from the primary safety endpoint was achieved in 59 [98.3%; 95% CI (91.1%-100%)] patients, with no mortality and one (1.7%) disabling stroke. At 30 days, freedom from coronary obstruction was 95% (95% CI 86.1%-99.0%). Within 90 days, freedom from mortality was 95% [95% CI (86.1%-99.0%)], without any cardiovascular deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Modification of failed bioprosthetic aortic valve leaflets using ShortCut was safe, achieved successful leaflet splitting in all patients, and was associated with favourable clinical outcomes in patients at risk for coronary obstruction undergoing TAVI.

Economic Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis and Low Surgical Risk: Results from the PARTNER 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at low surgical risk, transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve has been shown to reduce the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 2-year follow-up compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Whether TAVR is cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients remains uncertain. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2017, 1000 low-risk patients with aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve or SAVR in the PARTNER 3 trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves). Of these patients, 929 underwent valve replacement, were enrolled in the United States, and were included in the economic substudy. Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource use. Other costs were determined by linkage with Medicare claims or by regression models when linkage was not feasible. Health utilities were estimated using the EuroQOL 5-item questionnaire. With the use of a Markov model informed by in-trial data, lifetime cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the US health care system was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Although procedural costs were nearly $19 000 higher with TAVR, total index hospitalization costs were only $591 more with TAVR compared with SAVR. Follow-up costs were lower with TAVR such that TAVR led to 2-year cost savings of $2030/patient compared with SAVR (95% CI, -$6222 to $1816) and a gain of 0.05 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, -0.003 to 0.102). In our base-case analysis, TAVR was projected to be an economically dominant strategy with a 95% probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TAVR would be <$50 000/quality-adjusted life-year gained (consistent with high economic value from a US health care perspective). These findings were sensitive to differences in long-term survival, however, such that a modest long-term survival advantage with SAVR would render SAVR cost-effective (although not cost saving) compared with TAVR. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk similar to those enrolled in the PARTNER 3 trial, transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost saving compared with SAVR at 2 years and is projected to be economically attractive in the long run as long as there are no substantial differences in late death between the 2 strategies. Long-term follow-up will be critical to ultimately determine the preferred treatment strategy for low-risk patients from both a clinical and economic perspective.

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.

Design and rationale of the evaluation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared to surveillance for patients with asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis: The EARLY TAVR trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with asymptomatic, severe aortic stenosis (AS) and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction, current guidelines recommend clinical surveillance every 6 to 12 months. To date, no randomized trials have examined whether an early intervention with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) will improve outcomes among these patients. STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES: EARLY TAVR is a prospective, randomized, controlled, and multicenter trial, with an event-based design. Asymptomatic severe AS patients (n = 900) are randomized 1:1 to either clinical surveillance or TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN 3/SAPIEN 3 Ultra transcatheter heart valve. Patients are stratified by whether they are able to perform a treadmill stress test. The primary end point is death, stroke, or unplanned cardiovascular hospitalization. Patients who are asymptomatic but have a positive stress test will be followed in a registry and undergo aortic valve replacement as per current guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: EARLY TAVR is the largest randomized trial to date assessing the role of early intervention among patients with asymptomatic severe AS compared to clinical surveillance and the first to study the role of TAVR. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03042104.

Long term safety and outcomes after atrial shunting for heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction: 5-year and 3-year follow-up in the REDUCE LAP-HF I and II trials.

BACKGROUND: There is a little evidence regarding long-term safety and efficacy for atrial shunt devices in heart failure (HF). METHODS: The REDUCE LAP-HF I (n = 44) and II (n = 621) trials (RCT-I and -II) were multicenter, randomized, sham-controlled trials of patients with HF and ejection fraction >40%. Outcome data were analyzed from RCT-I, a mechanistic trial with 5-year follow-up, and RCT-II, a pivotal trial identifying a responder group (n = 313) defined by exercise PVR <1.74 WU and no cardiac rhythm management device with 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: At 5 years in RCT I, there were no differences in cardiovascular (CV) mortality, HF events, embolic stroke, or new-onset atrial fibrillation between groups. After 3 years in RCT II, there was no difference in the primary outcome (hierarchical composite of CV mortality, stroke, HF events, and KCCQ) between shunt and sham in the overall trial. Compared to sham, those with responder characteristics in RCT-II had a better outcome with shunt (win ratio 1.6 [95% CI 1.2-2.2], P = .006; 44% reduction in HF events [shunt 9 vs. control 16 per 100 patient-years], P = .005; and greater improvement in KCCQ overall summary score [+17.9 ± 20.0 vs. +7.6 ± 20.4], P < .001), while nonresponders had significantly more HF events. Shunt treatment at 3 years was associated with a higher rate of ischemic stroke (3.2% vs. 0%, 95% CI 2%-6.1%, P = .032) and lower incidence of worsening kidney dysfunction (10.7% vs. 19.3%, P = .041). CONCLUSIONS: With up to 5 years of follow up, adverse events were low in patients receiving atrial shunts. In the responder group, atrial shunt treatment was associated with a significantly lower HF event rate and improved KCCQ compared to sham through 3 years of follow-up. GOV REGISTRATION: NCT02600234, NCT03088033.

Outcomes of ultra-low contrast percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with increased risk of contrast induced nephropathy (CIN) and requirement for renal replacement therapy (RRT). OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate our single center experience of ultra-low contrast PCI in patients with CKD and to characterize 1 year outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of ultra-low contrast PCI at our institution between 2016 and 2022. Patients with CKD3b-5 (eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73m2), not on RRT who underwent ultra-low contrast PCI ( < 30 mL of contrast during PCI) were included. Primary outcomes included change in eGFR post-procedurally, and death, RRT requirement, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred patients were included in the study. The median age was 67 years old and 28% were female. The median baseline eGFR was 21.5 mL/min/1.73m2 (IQR 14.08-32.0 mL/min/1.73m2). A median of 8.0 mL (IQR 0-15 mL) of contrast was used during PCI. Median contrast use to eGFR ratio was 0.37 (IQR 0-0.59). There was no significant difference between pre-and postprocedure eGFR (p = 0.84). At 1 year, 8% of patients died, 11% required RRT and 33% experienced MACE. The average time of RRT initiation was 7 months post-PCI. Forty-four patients were undergoing renal transplant evaluation, of which 17 (39%) received a transplant. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced CKD, ultra-low contrast PCI is feasible and safe with minimal need for peri-procedural RRT. Moreover, ultra-low contrast PCI may allow for preservation of renal function in anticipation of renal transplantation.

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.

Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.

Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options.

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.

Sex-related characteristics and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention for tricuspid regurgitation.

AIMS: The impact of sexuality in patients with significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI) is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate sex-specific outcomes in patients with significant TR treated with TTVI vs. medical therapy alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies (TriValve) registry collected data on patients with significant TR from 24 centres who underwent TTVI from 2016 to 2021. A control cohort was formed by medically managed patients with ≥severe isolated TR diagnosed in 2015-18. The primary endpoint was freedom from all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were heart failure (HF) hospitalization, New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional status, and TR severity. One-year outcomes were assessed for the TriValve cohort and compared with the control cohort with the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). A total of 556 and 2072 patients were included from the TriValve and control groups, respectively. After TTVI, there was no difference between women and men in 1-year freedom from all-cause mortality 80.9% vs. 77.9%, P = 0.56, nor in HF hospitalization (P = 0.36), NYHA Functional Classes III and IV (P = 0.17), and TR severity >2+ at last follow-up (P = 0.42). Multivariable Cox-regression weighted by IPTW showed improved 1-year survival after TTVI compared with medical therapy alone in both women (adjusted hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.83, P = 0.01) and men (adjusted hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.18-0.89, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: After TTVI in high-risk patients, there were no sex-related differences in terms of survival, HF hospitalization, functional status, and TR reduction up to 1 year. The IPTW analysis shows a survival benefit of TTVI over medical therapy alone in both women and men.

Transfemoral tricuspid valve replacement and one-year outcomes: the TRISCEND study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: For patients with symptomatic, severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), early results of transcatheter tricuspid valve (TV) intervention studies have shown significant improvements in functional status and quality of life associated with right-heart reverse remodelling. Longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm sustained improvements in these outcomes. METHODS: The prospective, single-arm, multicentre TRISCEND study enrolled 176 patients to evaluate the safety and performance of transcatheter TV replacement in patients with ≥moderate, symptomatic TR despite medical therapy. Major adverse events, reduction in TR grade and haemodynamic outcomes by echocardiography, and clinical, functional, and quality-of-life parameters are reported to one year. RESULTS: Enrolled patients were 71.0% female, mean age 78.7 years, 88.0% ≥ severe TR, and 75.4% New York Heart Association classes III-IV. Tricuspid regurgitation was reduced to ≤mild in 97.6% (P < .001), with increases in stroke volume (10.5 ± 16.8 mL, P < .001) and cardiac output (0.6 ± 1.2 L/min, P < .001). New York Heart Association class I or II was achieved in 93.3% (P < .001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score increased by 25.7 points (P < .001), and six-minute walk distance increased by 56.2 m (P < .001). All-cause mortality was 9.1%, and 10.2% of patients were hospitalized for heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: In an elderly, highly comorbid population with ≥moderate TR, patients receiving transfemoral EVOQUE transcatheter TV replacement had sustained TR reduction, significant increases in stroke volume and cardiac output, and high survival and low hospitalization rates with improved clinical, functional, and quality-of-life outcomes to one year. Funded by Edwards Lifesciences, TRISCEND ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04221490.

Latent Pulmonary Vascular Disease May Alter the Response to Therapeutic Atrial Shunt Device in Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: In REDUCE LAP-HF II (A Study to Evaluate the Corvia Medical, Inc IASD System II to Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure), implantation of an atrial shunt device did not provide overall clinical benefit for patients with heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction. However, prespecified analyses identified differences in response in subgroups defined by pulmonary artery systolic pressure during submaximal exercise, right atrial volume, and sex. Shunt implantation reduces left atrial pressures but increases pulmonary blood flow, which may be poorly tolerated in patients with pulmonary vascular disease (PVD). On the basis of these results, we hypothesized that patients with latent PVD, defined as elevated pulmonary vascular resistance during exercise, might be harmed by shunt implantation, and conversely that patients without PVD might benefit. METHODS: REDUCE LAP-HF II enrolled 626 patients with heart failure, ejection fraction ≥40%, exercise pulmonary capillary wedge pressure ≥25 mm Hg, and resting pulmonary vascular resistance <3.5 Wood units who were randomized 1:1 to atrial shunt device or sham control. The primary outcome-a hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal ischemic stroke, recurrent HF events, and change in health status-was analyzed using the win ratio. Latent PVD was defined as pulmonary vascular resistance ≥1.74 Wood units (highest tertile) at peak exercise, measured before randomization. RESULTS: Compared with patients without PVD (n=382), those with latent PVD (n=188) were older, had more atrial fibrillation and right heart dysfunction, and were more likely to have elevated left atrial pressure at rest. Shunt treatment was associated with worse outcomes in patients with PVD (win ratio, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42, 0.86]; P=0.005) and signal of clinical benefit in patients without PVD (win ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.02, 1.68]; P=0.038). Patients with larger right atrial volumes and men had worse outcomes with the device and both groups were more likely to have pacemakers, heart failure with mildly reduced ejection fraction, and increased left atrial volume. For patients without latent PVD or pacemaker (n=313; 50% of randomized patients), shunt treatment resulted in more robust signal of clinical benefit (win ratio, 1.51 [95% CI, 1.14, 2.00]; P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction, the presence of latent PVD uncovered by invasive hemodynamic exercise testing identifies patients who may worsen with atrial shunt therapy, whereas those without latent PVD may benefit.

Long-term outcomes after catheter-based renal artery denervation for resistant hypertension: final follow-up of the randomised SYMPLICITY HTN-3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: The SYMPLICITY HTN-3 (Renal Denervation in Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension) trial showed the safety but not efficacy of the Symplicity system (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) at 6 months follow-up in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. This final report presents the 36-month follow-up results. METHODS: SYMPLICITY HTN-3 was a single-blind, multicentre, sham-controlled, randomised clinical trial, done in 88 centres in the USA. Adults aged 18-80 years, with treatment-resistant hypertension on stable, maximally tolerated doses of three or more drugs including a diuretic, who had a seated office systolic blood pressure of 160 mm Hg or more and 24 h ambulatory systolic blood pressure of 135 mm Hg or more were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive renal artery denervation using the single electrode (Flex) catheter or a sham control. The original primary endpoint was the change in office systolic blood pressure from baseline to 6 months for the renal artery denervation group compared with the sham control group. Patients were unmasked after the primary endpoint assessment at 6 months, at which point eligible patients in the sham control group who met the inclusion criteria (office blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg, 24 h ambulatory systolic blood pressure ≥135 mm Hg, and still prescribed three or more antihypertensive medications) could cross over to receive renal artery denervation. Changes in blood pressure up to 36 months were analysed in patients in the original renal artery denervation group and sham control group, including those who underwent renal artery denervation after 6 months (crossover group) and those who did not (non-crossover group). For comparisons between the renal artery denervation and sham control groups, follow-up blood pressure values were imputed for patients in the crossover group using their most recent pre-crossover masked blood pressure value. We report long-term blood pressure changes in renal artery denervation and sham control groups, and investigate blood pressure control in both groups using time in therapeutic blood pressure range analysis. The primary safety endpoint was the incidence of all-cause mortality, end stage renal disease, significant embolic event, renal artery perforation or dissection requiring intervention, vascular complications, hospitalisation for hypertensive crisis unrelated to non-adherence to medications, or new renal artery stenosis of more than 70% within 6 months. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01418261. FINDINGS: From Sep 29, 2011, to May 6, 2013, 1442 patients were screened, of whom 535 (37%; 210 [39%] women and 325 [61%] men; mean age 57·9 years [SD 10·7]) were randomly assigned: 364 (68%) patients received renal artery denervation (mean age 57·9 years [10·4]) and 171 (32%) received the sham control (mean age 56·2 years [11·2]). 36-month follow-up data were available for 219 patients (original renal artery denervation group), 63 patients (crossover group), and 33 patients (non-crossover group). At 36 months, the change in office systolic blood pressure was -26·4 mm Hg (SD 25·9) in the renal artery denervation group and -5·7 mm Hg (24·4) in the sham control group (adjusted treatment difference -22·1 mm Hg [95% CI -27·2 to -17·0]; p≤0·0001). The change in 24 h ambulatory systolic blood pressure at 36 months was -15·6 mm Hg (SD 20·8) in the renal artery denervation group and -0·3 mm Hg (15·1) in the sham control group (adjusted treatment difference -16·5 mm Hg [95% CI -20·5 to -12·5]; p≤0·0001). Without imputation, the renal artery denervation group spent a significantly longer time in therapeutic blood pressure range (ie, better blood pressure control) than patients in the sham control group (18% [SD 25·0] for the renal artery denervation group vs 9% [SD 18·8] for the sham control group; p≤0·0001) despite a similar medication burden, with consistent and significant results with imputation. Rates of adverse events were similar across treatment groups, with no evidence of late-emerging complications from renal artery denervation. The rate of the composite safety endpoint to 48 months, including all-cause death, new-onset end-stage renal disease, significant embolic event resulting in end-organ damage, vascular complication, renal artery re-intervention, and hypertensive emergency was 15% (54 of 352 patients) for the renal artery denervation group, 14% (13 of 96 patients) for the crossover group, and 14% (10 of 69 patients) for the non-crossover group. INTERPRETATION: This final report of the SYMPLICITY HTN-3 trial adds to the totality of evidence supporting the safety of renal artery denervation to 36 months after the procedure. From 12 months to 36 months after the procedure, patients who were originally randomly assigned to receive renal artery denervation had larger reductions in blood pressure and better blood pressure control compared with patients who received sham control. FUNDING: Medtronic.

Atrial shunt device for heart failure with preserved and mildly reduced ejection fraction (REDUCE LAP-HF II): a randomised, multicentre, blinded, sham-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Placement of an interatrial shunt device reduces pulmonary capillary wedge pressure during exercise in patients with heart failure and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction. We aimed to investigate whether an interatrial shunt can reduce heart failure events or improve health status in these patients. METHODS: In this randomised, international, blinded, sham-controlled trial performed at 89 health-care centres, we included patients (aged ≥40 years) with symptomatic heart failure, an ejection fraction of at least 40%, and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure during exercise of at least 25 mm Hg while exceeding right atrial pressure by at least 5 mm Hg. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either a shunt device or sham procedure. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to randomisation. The primary endpoint was a hierarchical composite of cardiovascular death or non-fatal ischemic stroke at 12 months, rate of total heart failure events up to 24 months, and change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score at 12 months. Pre-specified subgroup analyses were conducted for the heart failure event endpoint. Analysis of the primary endpoint, all other efficacy endpoints, and safety endpoints was conducted in the modified intention-to-treat population, defined as all patients randomly allocated to receive treatment, excluding those found to be ineligible after randomisation and therefore not treated. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088033. FINDINGS: Between May 25, 2017, and July 24, 2020, 1072 participants were enrolled, of whom 626 were randomly assigned to either the atrial shunt device (n=314) or sham procedure (n=312). There were no differences between groups in the primary composite endpoint (win ratio 1·0 [95% CI 0·8-1·2]; p=0·85) or in the individual components of the primary endpoint. The prespecified subgroups demonstrating a differential effect of atrial shunt device treatment on heart failure events were pulmonary artery systolic pressure at 20W of exercise (pinteraction=0·002 [>70 mm Hg associated with worse outcomes]), right atrial volume index (pinteraction=0·012 [≥29·7 mL/m2, worse outcomes]), and sex (pinteraction=0·02 [men, worse outcomes]). There were no differences in the composite safety endpoint between the two groups (n=116 [38%] for shunt device vs n=97 [31%] for sham procedure; p=0·11). INTERPRETATION: Placement of an atrial shunt device did not reduce the total rate of heart failure events or improve health status in the overall population of patients with heart failure and ejection fraction of greater than or equal to 40%. FUNDING: Corvia Medical.

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.).