Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided PCI as Compared with Coronary Bypass Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease have been found to have better outcomes with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) than with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but studies in which PCI is guided by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been lacking. METHODS: In this multicenter, international, noninferiority trial, patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo CABG or FFR-guided PCI with current-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary end point was the occurrence within 1 year of a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event, defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. Noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI to CABG was prespecified as an upper boundary of less than 1.65 for the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. Secondary end points included a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; safety was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 1500 patients underwent randomization at 48 centers. Patients assigned to undergo PCI received a mean (±SD) of 3.7±1.9 stents, and those assigned to undergo CABG received 3.4±1.0 distal anastomoses. The 1-year incidence of the composite primary end point was 10.6% among patients randomly assigned to undergo FFR-guided PCI and 6.9% among those assigned to undergo CABG (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.2), findings that were not consistent with noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI (P = 0.35 for noninferiority). The incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was 7.3% in the FFR-guided PCI group and 5.2% in the CABG group (hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1). The incidences of major bleeding, arrhythmia, and acute kidney injury were higher in the CABG group than in the FFR-guided PCI group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided PCI was not found to be noninferior to CABG with respect to the incidence of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year. (Funded by Medtronic and Abbott Vascular; FAME 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02100722.).

Transcatheter heart valve explant with infective endocarditis-associated prosthesis failure and outcomes: the EXPLANT-TAVR international registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Surgical explantation of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) is rapidly increasing, but there are limited data on patients with THV-associated infective endocarditis (IE). This study aims to assess the outcomes of patients undergoing THV explant for IE. METHODS: All patients who underwent THV explant between 2011 and 2022 from 44 sites in the EXPLANT-TAVR registry were identified. Patients with IE as the reason for THV explant were compared to those with other mechanisms of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (BVD). RESULTS: A total of 372 patients from the EXPLANT-TAVR registry were included. Among them, 184 (49.5%) patients underwent THV explant due to IE and 188 (50.5%) patients due to BVD. At the index transcatheter aortic valve replacement, patients undergoing THV explant for IE were older (74.3 ± 8.6 vs. 71 ± 10.6 years) and had a lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score [2.6% (1.8-5.0) vs. 3.3% (2.1-5.6), P = .029] compared to patients with BVD. Compared to BVD, IE patients had longer intensive care unit and hospital stays (P < .05) and higher stroke rates at 30 days (8.6% vs. 2.9%, P = .032) and 1 year (16.2% vs. 5.2%, P = .010). Adjusted in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality was 12.1%, 16.1%, and 33.8%, respectively, for the entire cohort, with no significant differences between groups. Although mortality was numerically higher in IE patients 3 years postsurgery (29.6% for BVD vs. 43.9% for IE), Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant differences between groups (P = .16). CONCLUSIONS: In the EXPLANT-TAVR registry, patients undergoing THV explant for IE had higher 30-day and 1-year stroke rates and longer intensive care unit and hospital stays. Moreover, patients undergoing THV explant for IE had a higher 3-year mortality rate, which did not reach statistical significance given the relatively small sample size of this unique cohort and the reduced number of events.

Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided PCI or Coronary Bypass Surgery for 3-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: 3-Year Follow-Up of the FAME 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary disease not involving the left main have shown significantly lower rates of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke after CABG. These studies did not routinely use current-generation drug-eluting stents or fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide PCI. METHODS: FAME 3 (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, international, randomized trial involving patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease (not involving the left main coronary artery) in 48 centers worldwide. Patients were randomly assigned to receive FFR-guided PCI using zotarolimus drug-eluting stents or CABG. The prespecified key secondary end point of the trial reported here is the 3-year incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke. RESULTS: A total of 1500 patients were randomized to FFR-guided PCI or CABG. Follow-up was achieved in >96% of patients in both groups. There was no difference in the incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke after FFR-guided PCI compared with CABG (12.0% versus 9.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.3 [95% CI, 0.98-1.83]; P=0.07). The rates of death (4.1% versus 3.9%; HR, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.6-1.7]; P=0.88) and stroke (1.6% versus 2.0%; HR, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.4-1.7]; P=0.56) were not different. MI occurred more frequently after PCI (7.0% versus 4.2%; HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.1-2.7]; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: At 3-year follow-up, there was no difference in the incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke after FFR-guided PCI with current-generation drug-eluting stents compared with CABG. There was a higher incidence of MI after PCI compared with CABG, with no difference in death or stroke. These results provide contemporary data to allow improved shared decision-making between physicians and patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02100722.

Infection of Transcatheter Valvular Devices.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores the epidemiology, clinical traits, and diagnosis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement-Associated Infective Endocarditis (TAVR-IE) and mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair infective endocarditis (TEER-IE), focusing on a multimodal imaging approach. It addresses the rising prevalence of TAVR and TEER, emphasizing the need to understand long-term complications and clinical consequences, which poses significant challenges despite advancements in valve technology. RECENT FINDINGS: Studies report a variable incidence of TAVR-IE and TEER-IE influenced by diverse patient risk profiles and procedural factors. Younger age, male gender, and certain comorbidities emerge as patient-related risk factors. Procedure-related factors include intervention location, valve type, and technical aspects. Microbiologically, Staphylococcus aureus, Viridans Group Streptococcus, and Enterococcus are frequently encountered pathogens. TAVR-IE and TEER-IE diagnosis involves a multimodal imaging approach due to limitations in echocardiography. Blood cultures and imaging aid identification, with Fluorescence in situ hybridization is showing promise. Treatment encompasses medical management with antibiotics and, when necessary, surgical intervention. The management approach requires a multidisciplinary "Endocarditis Team." This review underscores the need for continued research to refine risk prediction, enhance diagnostic accuracy, and optimize management strategies for TAVR-IE, considering the evolving landscape of transcatheter interventions.

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.

Quality of Life After Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided PCI Compared With Coronary Bypass Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that quality of life improves after coronary revascularization more so after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) than after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study aimed to evaluate the effect of fractional flow reserve guidance and current generation, zotarolimus drug-eluting stents on quality of life after PCI compared with CABG. METHODS: The FAME 3 trial (Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) is a multicenter, international trial including 1500 patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease who were randomly assigned to either CABG or fractional flow reserve-guided PCI. Quality of life was measured using the European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) questionnaire at baseline and 1 and 12 months. The Canadian Cardiovascular Class angina grade and working status were assessed at the same time points and at 6 months. The primary objective was to compare EQ-5D summary index at 12 months. Secondary end points included angina grade and work status. RESULTS: The EQ-5D summary index at 12 months did not differ between the PCI and CABG groups (difference, 0.001 [95% CI, -0.016 to 0.017]; P=0.946). The trajectory of EQ-5D during the 12 months differed (P<0.001) between PCI and CABG: at 1 month, EQ-5D was 0.063 (95% CI, 0.047 to 0.079) higher in the PCI group. A similar trajectory was found for the EQ (EuroQol) visual analogue scale. The proportion of patients with Canadian Cardiovascular Class 2 or greater angina at 12 months was 6.2% versus 3.1% (odds ratio, 2.5 [95% CI, 0.96-6.8]), respectively, in the PCI group compared with the CABG group. A greater percentage of younger patients (<65 years old) were working at 12 months in the PCI group compared with the CABG group (68% versus 57%; odds ratio, 3.9 [95% CI, 1.7-8.8]). CONCLUSIONS: In the FAME 3 trial, quality of life after fractional flow reserve-guided PCI with current generation drug-eluting stents compared with CABG was similar at 1 year. The rate of significant angina was low in both groups and not significantly different. The trajectory of improvement in quality of life was significantly better after PCI, as was working status in those <65 years old. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02100722.

ARISE: First-In-Human Evaluation of a Novel Stent Graft to Treat Ascending Aortic Dissection.

BACKGROUND: Operative mortality for type A aortic dissection is still 10-20% at centers of excellence. Additionally, 10-20% are not considered as viable candidates for open surgical repair and not offered life-saving emergency surgery. ARISE is a multicenter investigation evaluating the novel GORE® Ascending Stent Graft (ASG; Flagstaff, AZ). OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to assess early feasibility of using these investigational devices to treat ascending aortic dissection. METHODS: This a prospective, multicenter, non-randomized, single-arm study that enrolls patients at high surgical risk with appropriate anatomical requirements based on computed tomography imaging at 7 of 9 US sites. Devices are delivered transfemorally under fluoroscopic guidance. Primary endpoint is all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary endpoints include major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 30 days, 6 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were enrolled with a mean age of 75.7 years (range 47-91) and 11 (57.9%) were female. Ten (52.6%) had DeBakey type I disease, and the rest were type II. Sixteen (84.2%) of the patients were acute. Patients were treated with safe access, (7/19 (36.8%) percutaneous, 10/19 (52.6%) transfemoral, 2/19 (10.5%) iliac conduit), delivery, and deployment completed in all cases. Median procedure time was 154 mins (range 52-392) and median contrast used was 111 mL (range 75-200). MACCE at 30 days occurred in 5 patients including mortality 3/19 (15.8%), disabling stroke in 1/19 (5.3%), and myocardial infarction in 1/19 (5.3%). CONCLUSION: Results from the ARISE early feasibility study of a specific ascending stent graft device to treat ascending aortic dissection are promising.

Emergency and Compassionate Use of a Novel Ascending Endograft for Ascending and Arch Aortic Pathology.

PURPOSE: Patients with complicated ascending aortic pathology, including patients with acute type A aortic dissection may be at extreme risk for open repair. Thoracic endovascular aortic repair (TEVAR), infrequently used for the ascending aorta, may be considered an alternative in this setting. We describe early results for emergency and compassionate (E&C) use of a novel endograft, specifically designed for use to treat pathology of the ascending aorta. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This case series evaluated 19 patients (mean age, 68.84±13.12 years; 57.9% female) treated with ascending TEVAR for acute and chronic acute (4), subacute (1), or chronic (1) aortic dissection or pseudoaneurysm (13). Six of the 19 patients (31.5%) were treated under compassionate use and 13 patients (68.4%) were treated under the emergency use exemption. Ten patients (52.6%) received additional devices to extend treatment into the arch and descending aorta. RESULTS: Device delivery was achieved in all patients (100%). Thirty-day mortality and stroke occurred in 3 patients (15.8%) and in 1 patient (5.3%), respectively. In 1 patient (5.3%), with an Unanticipated Adverse Device Event, the aorta ruptured when the endograft eroded into the adventitial portion of dissection site at the posterior aspect of the ascending wall. Devices were explanted in 2 patients (10.5%), 353 and 610 days after the index procedure, respectively. Six patients had endoleaks (31.6%), including type I (n=2, 10.5%), type II endoleaks (n=3, 15.8%), and indeterminate endoleak (n=1, 5.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Delivery and deployment of a novel ascending thoracic stent graft with or without an additional branched arch extension is feasible in patients with complex anatomy and pathology, including acute aortic dissection and pseudoaneurysm. Additional experience with this novel device will further refine the patient population most suitable for endovascular ascending aortic repair for these pathologies. CLINICAL IMPACT: This study describes a novel stent graft specifically designed for treatment of ascending aortic pathology, including acute type A dissection. The patients described in this series constituted a group outside the formal US FDA sponsored clinical trial, and were those accepted as part of an emergency and compassionate use basis.

Minimally Invasive Aortic Valve Replacement in Contemporary Practice: Clinical and Hemodynamic Performance from a Prospective Multicenter Trial.

BACKGROUND: The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (AVR) has led to an increased emphasis on reducing the invasiveness of surgical procedures. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance achieved with minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MI-AVR) as compared with conventional AVR. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgical AVR with the Avalus bioprosthesis, as part of a prospective multicenter non-randomized trial, were included in this analysis. Surgical approach was left to the discretion of the surgeons. Patient characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between MI-AVR and conventional AVR groups in the entire cohort (n = 1077) and in an isolated AVR subcohort (n = 528). Propensity score adjustment was performed to estimate the effect of MI-AVR on adverse events. RESULTS: Patients treated with MI-AVR were younger, had lower STS scores, and underwent concomitant procedures less often. Valve size implanted was comparable between the groups. MI-AVR was associated with longer procedural times in the isolated AVR subcohort. Postprocedural hemodynamic performance was comparable. There were no significant differences between MI-AVR and conventional AVR in early and 3-year all-cause mortality, thromboembolism, reintervention, or a composite of those endpoints within either the entire cohort or the isolated AVR subcohort. After propensity score adjustment, there remained no association between MI-AVR and the composite endpoint (hazard ratio: 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.47-1.55, p = 0.61). CONCLUSION: Three-year outcomes after MI-AVR with the Avalus bioprosthetic valve were comparable to conventional AVR. These results provide important insights into the overall ability to reduce the invasiveness of AVR without compromising outcomes.

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Valve in Low-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at increased risk for death from surgery; less is known about TAVR in low-risk patients. METHODS: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in which TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients who had severe aortic stenosis and were at low surgical risk. When 850 patients had reached 12-month follow-up, we analyzed data regarding the primary end point, a composite of death or disabling stroke at 24 months, using Bayesian methods. RESULTS: Of the 1468 patients who underwent randomization, an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure was performed in 1403. The patients' mean age was 74 years. The 24-month estimated incidence of the primary end point was 5.3% in the TAVR group and 6.7% in the surgery group (difference, -1.4 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval for difference, -4.9 to 2.1; posterior probability of noninferiority >0.999). At 30 days, patients who had undergone TAVR, as compared with surgery, had a lower incidence of disabling stroke (0.5% vs. 1.7%), bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 7.5%), acute kidney injury (0.9% vs. 2.8%), and atrial fibrillation (7.7% vs. 35.4%) and a higher incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation (3.5% vs. 0.5%) and pacemaker implantation (17.4% vs. 6.1%). At 12 months, patients in the TAVR group had lower aortic-valve gradients than those in the surgery group (8.6 mm Hg vs. 11.2 mm Hg) and larger effective orifice areas (2.3 cm2 vs. 2.0 cm2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was noninferior to surgery with respect to the composite end point of death or disabling stroke at 24 months. (Funded by Medtronic; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02701283.).

Current and future transcatheter aortic valve replacement valves.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review analyzes currently available commercial transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) valves as well as valves in investigational status and those in preclinical testing. The design features and clinical outcomes of the Edwards SAPIEN S3 and Medtronic Evolut PRO+ are described and compared with highlight clinical circumstances where one may be favoured over the other. RECENT FINDINGS: Multiple randomized and nonrandomized trials have compared commercial and investigational TAVR valves. The results of these are summarized and discussed within this review with a focus on how the SAPIEN S3 and Evolut PRO+ both compare to each other as well as various valves in different investigational stages. SUMMARY: TAVR is an innovative and ground-breaking technology that will forever have revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis. Though the technology and valves themselves have come a long way, further developments are necessary if we are to continue to expand its indications and achieve a safer perioperative experience with more durable valves.

Redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the supra-annular, self-expandable Evolut platform: Insights from the Transcatheter valve Therapy Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety profile of redo-TAVR procedures from patients in the transcatheter valve therapy (TVT) Registry. BACKGROUND: The use of transcatheter aortic valves (TAV) to treat previously implanted failing TAVS (TAV-in-TAV) has been an increasingly important topic as indications for TAVR move to younger and lower-risk patients, but data on the safety and efficacy of redo-TAVR is limited. METHODS: Patients undergoing redo-TAVR procedures using the Evolut R, Evolut PRO or Evolut PRO+ valve in the TVT Registry between April 2015 and March 2020 were included. In-hospital, 30-day and 1-year outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: Redo-TAVR was performed in 292 patients (213 patients received the Evolut R valve and 79 received the Evolut PRO or PRO+ valve). Device success was achieved in 94.5%. In-hospital mortality was 2.1%, stroke occurred in 2.7%, and 77.2% of patients were discharged home. There were no cases of coronary compression/obstruction or myocardial infarction that occurred in index hospitalization. Mean gradient at 30-days was 11.9 ± 6.9 mmHg, and 73.1% had none/trace total aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Results from the TVT Registry demonstrate good short-term outcomes after redo-TAVR with the supra-annular, self-expandable Evolut platform. Long-term follow-up is necessary to further expand understanding this complex scenario.

Conventional versus modified delivery system technique in commissural alignment from the Evolut low-risk CT substudy.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the impact of conventional delivery system (DS) insertion technique on "Hat-marker" orientation/commissural alignment in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the Evolut Low Risk Trial CT substudy versus a modified technique. BACKGROUND: Unlike surgical aortic valve replacement, where alignment of the surgical valve commissures with native commissures can be achieved virtually 100% of the time, commissural alignment during TAVR is not achieved consistently. This may subsequently impact the feasibility of both coronary access and reintervention after TAVR. METHODS: "Hat-marker" orientations during deployment were characterized as outer curve (OC), center front (CF), inner curve, and center back. Severe commissure-to-CA overlap was 0-20°. "Hat-marker" orientations and CA overlap were compared to 240 patients from a single center using the modified 3-o'clock flush port DS technique. RESULTS: In the CT substudy in which conventional DS insertion was performed (flush port at 12 o'clock); 154/249 had both analyzable CT and procedural fluoroscopy to validate "Hat-marker" to C-tab/commissural orientation. On post-TAVR CT, Evolut valve commissural orientation and coronary artery (CA) ostia were identified. Compared to conventional DS technique in the CT substudy, the modified technique had higher rates of "Hat-marker" at OC/CF orientation, improved commissural alignment and reduced severe CA overlap; (left main, 14.2 vs. 27.9%; right coronary artery, 11.7 vs. 27.3% both, 5.0 vs. 13.6%; 1 or both CA, 20.8 vs. 41.6%, all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The modified technique improved initial "Hat-marker" orientation during Evolut deployment and resulted in better commissural alignment and reduced CA overlap.

Differential proteome profile, biological pathways, and network relationships of osteogenic proteins in calcified human aortic valves.

Calcific aortic valve disease (CAVD) is the most common heart valve disease requiring intervention. Most research on CAVD has focused on inflammation, ossification, and cellular phenotype transformation. To gain a broader picture into the wide range of cellular and molecular mechanisms involved in this disease, we compared the total protein profiles between calcified and non-calcified areas from 5 human valves resected during surgery. The 1413 positively identified proteins were filtered down to 248 proteins present in both calcified and non-calcified segments of at least 3 of the 5 valves, which were then analyzed using Ingenuity Pathway Analysis. Concurrently, the top 40 differentially abundant proteins were grouped according to their biological functions and shown in interactive networks. Finally, the abundance of selected osteogenic proteins (osteopontin, osteonectin, osteocalcin, osteoprotegerin, and RANK) was quantified using ELISA and/or immunohistochemistry. The top pathways identified were complement system, acute phase response signaling, metabolism, LXR/RXR and FXR/RXR activation, actin cytoskeleton, mineral binding, nucleic acid interaction, structural extracellular matrix (ECM), and angiogenesis. There was a greater abundance of osteopontin, osteonectin, osteocalcin, osteoprotegerin, and RANK in the calcified regions than the non-calcified ones. The osteogenic proteins also formed key connections between the biological signaling pathways in the network model. In conclusion, this proteomic analysis demonstrated the involvement of multiple signaling pathways in CAVD. The interconnectedness of these pathways provides new insights for the treatment of this disease.

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging in suspected cardiac tumour: a multicentre outcomes study.

AIMS: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is a key diagnostic tool for the evaluation of patients with suspected cardiac tumours. Patient management is guided by the CMR diagnosis, including no further testing if a mass is excluded or if only a pseudomass is found. However, there are no outcomes studies validating this approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this multicentre study of patients undergoing clinical CMR for suspected cardiac tumour, CMR diagnoses were assigned as no mass, pseudomass, thrombus, benign tumour, or malignant tumour. A final diagnosis was determined after follow-up using all available data. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Among 903 patients, the CMR diagnosis was no mass in 25%, pseudomass in 16%, thrombus in 16%, benign tumour in 17%, and malignant tumour in 23%. Over a median of 4.9 years, 376 patients died. Compared with the final diagnosis, the CMR diagnosis was accurate in 98.4% of patients. Patients with CMR diagnoses of pseudomass and benign tumour had similar mortality to those with no mass, whereas those with malignant tumour [hazard ratio (HR) 3.31 (2.40-4.57)] and thrombus [HR 1.46 (1.00-2.11)] had greater mortality. The CMR diagnosis provided incremental prognostic value over clinical factors including left ventricular ejection fraction, coronary artery disease, and history of extracardiac malignancy (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with suspected cardiac tumour, CMR has high diagnostic accuracy. Patients with CMR diagnoses of no mass, pseudomass, and benign tumour have similar long-term mortality. The CMR diagnosis is a powerful independent predictor of mortality incremental to clinical risk factors.

Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: updated endpoint definitions for aortic valve clinical research.

AIMS: The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC), founded in 2010, was intended to (i) identify appropriate clinical endpoints and (ii) standardize definitions of these endpoints for transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical trials. Rapid evolution of the field, including the emergence of new complications, expanding clinical indications, and novel therapy strategies have mandated further refinement and expansion of these definitions to ensure clinical relevance. This document provides an update of the most appropriate clinical endpoint definitions to be used in the conduct of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical research. METHODS AND RESULTS: Several years after the publication of the VARC-2 manuscript, an in-person meeting was held involving over 50 independent clinical experts representing several professional societies, academic research organizations, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives to (i) evaluate utilization of VARC endpoint definitions in clinical research, (ii) discuss the scope of this focused update, and (iii) review and revise specific clinical endpoint definitions. A writing committee of independent experts was convened and subsequently met to further address outstanding issues. There were ongoing discussions with FDA and many experts to develop a new classification schema for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure. Overall, this multi-disciplinary process has resulted in important recommendations for data reporting, clinical research methods, and updated endpoint definitions. New definitions or modifications of existing definitions are being proposed for repeat hospitalizations, access site-related complications, bleeding events, conduction disturbances, cardiac structural complications, and bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure (including valve leaflet thickening and thrombosis). A more granular 5-class grading scheme for paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) is being proposed to help refine the assessment of PVR. Finally, more specific recommendations on quality-of-life assessments have been included, which have been targeted to specific clinical study designs. CONCLUSIONS: Acknowledging the dynamic and evolving nature of less-invasive aortic valve therapies, further refinements of clinical research processes are required. The adoption of these updated and newly proposed VARC-3 endpoints and definitions will ensure homogenous event reporting, accurate adjudication, and appropriate comparisons of clinical research studies involving devices and new therapeutic strategies.

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

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

Surgical treatment of severe tricuspid regurgitation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Severe tricuspid regurgitation is associated with both significant symptoms as well as decreased survival. Surgical correction is possible in most cases but is markedly under used in this population. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the indications for treating severe tricuspid regurgitation and the surgical options available. RECENT FINDINGS: Surgical correction of isolated severe tricuspid regurgitation has been associated with a high mortality in the surgical literature. This occurs generally from right heart failure associated with the late referral of isolated tricuspid regurgitation for correction. Recent outcomes are improving and tricuspid repair appears to be where mitral valve repair was 30 years ago. SUMMARY: Severe tricuspid regurgitation is associated with severe symptoms as well as decreased survival. Tricuspid valve repair (TVr) for severe regurgitation is almost always technically possible. The high mortality thought to be associated with isolated TVr is likely due to late referral when right heart failure is already far advanced. Consideration for earlier referral for isolated severe tricuspid regurgitation should be considered.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement: an update.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A significant number of patients with mitral valve disease are at high to prohibitive risk for surgical repair or replacement. Transcatheter mitral valve interventions have evolved over the last few years. We review the recent growing evidence on transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). RECENT FINDINGS: Tendyne is the first TMVR device commercially approved in Europe. All TMVR systems remain under investigation in the United States. Several early studies have reported the feasibility and safety outcomes for TMVR implanted via transapical or transseptal approach. TMVR using balloon expandable valve for degenerated bioprosthetic valves, surgical rings and mitral annular calcification appears feasible in selected patients. SUMMARY: Early experience with TMVR systems is promising. Larger ongoing studies will help understand longer term outcomes and offer insights into patient selection.

Comparison of a Complete Percutaneous Versus Surgical Approach to Aortic Valve Replacement and Revascularization in Patients at Intermediate Surgical Risk: Results From the Randomized SURTAVI Trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease, the completely percutaneous approach to aortic valve replacement and revascularization has not been compared with the standard surgical approach. METHODS: The prospective SURTAVI trial (Safety and Efficiency Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System in the Treatment of Severe, Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement) enrolled intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis from 87 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe between June 2012 and June 2016. Complex coronary artery disease with SYNTAX score (Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Trial) >22 was an exclusion criterion. Patients were stratified according to the need for revascularization and then randomly assigned to treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Patients assigned to revascularization in the TAVR group underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, whereas those in the SAVR group had coronary artery bypass grafting. The primary end point was the rate of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. RESULTS: Of 1660 subjects with attempted aortic valve implants, 332 (20%) were assigned to revascularization. They had a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score for mortality (4.8±1.7% versus 4.4±1.5%; P<0.01) and were more likely to be male (65.1% versus 54.2%; P<0.01) than the 1328 patients not assigned to revascularization. After randomization to treatment, there were 169 patients undergoing TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention, 163 patients undergoing SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting, 695 patients undergoing TAVR, and 633 patients undergoing SAVR. No significant difference in the rate of the primary end point was found between TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention and SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting (16.0%; 95% CI, 11.1-22.9 versus 14.0%; 95% CI, 9.2-21.1; P=0.62), or between TAVR and SAVR (11.9%; 95% CI, 9.5-14.7 versus 12.3%; 95% CI, 9.8-15.4; P=0.76). CONCLUSIONS: For patients at intermediate surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis and noncomplex coronary artery disease (SYNTAX score ≤22), a complete percutaneous approach of TAVR and percutaneous coronary intervention is a reasonable alternative to SAVR and coronary artery bypass grafting. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov. Unique identifier: NCT01586910.