Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR with self-expanding valves

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Impact of predilatation prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding acurate neo device (From the Multicenter NEOPRO Registry)

Safety and feasibility of transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without systematic predilatation are not fully investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of pre-implantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with Acurate neo. The NEOPRO Registry retrospectively included 1,263 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with Acurate neo at 18 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. Information on preBAV was available for 1,262 patients (99.9%). Primary endpoints were pre-discharge moderate-tosevere paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR II+), 30-day new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), and 30-day all-cause mortality or stroke. A total of 1,262 patients who underwent TAVI with (n=1,051) or without predilatation (n=211) were included. A reduction in the pre-BAV rate was observed during the study period (from 95.7% in the first date quintile to 78.4% in the last date quintile). Patients who underwent pre-BAV had higher degrees of aortic valve (AV) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Primary endpoints were similar between pre-BAV and no pre-BAV groups (PAR II+ 5.5% vs. 3.4%, p=0.214; 30-day PPI 9.0% vs. 8.0%, p=0.660; 30-day death or stroke 4.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.743). The need for postdilatation and other procedural outcomes were comparable between groups. Predilatation did not have a significant impact on primary endpoints across AV and LVOT calcification subgroups (subgroup analyses) and was not independently associated with primary endpoints (multivariate analyses). In conclusion, transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without predilatation appears to be feasible and safe, especially in patients with milder degrees of AV and LVOT calcification. (AU)

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with next-generation self-expanding devices: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched comparison of evolut pro versus acurate neo transcatheter heart valves

Abstract OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: (AU)

Biolimus-A9 polymer-free coated stent in high bleeding risk patients with acute coronary syndrome: a Leaders Free ACS sub-study

Aims Although a true clinical challenge, high bleeding risk patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing per cutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have never been specifically studied. Leaders Free ACS, a pre-specified Leaders Free sub-study, determined efficacy, and safety of a combination of 1-month dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) with im plantation of either a polymer-free Biolimus-A9-coated stent (BA9-DCS) or a bare-metal stent (BMS) in these patients. Methods and results Leaders Free included 2466 patients undergoing PCI who had at least 1 of 13 pre-defined factors for an increased bleed ing risk. Of these, 659 ACS patients were included in this analysis (BA9-DCS 330, BMS 329). At 12-month follow-up, treatment with the BA9-DCS was more effective (clinically driven target-lesion revascularization 3.9 vs. 9.0%, P » 0.009) and safer (cumulative incidence of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite or probable stent thrombosis 9.3 vs. 18.5%, P » 0.001), driven by significantly lower rates of cardiac mortality (3.4 vs. 6.9%, P » 0.049) and myocardial infarction (6.9 vs. 13.8%, P » 0.005). Conclusion We believe that the results of this sub-analysis from the Leaders Free trial are likely to significantly impact clinical practice for high bleeding risk patients presenting with an ACS: the use of a BMS can, in our view, no longer be recommended, and, given the paucity of available data for second-generation DES with shortened DAPT in these patients, the BA9- DCS should currently be considered as the device with the strongest evidence to support its use for this indication.

First-in-man use of a novel embolic protection device forpatients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Aims: We describe the first-in-human experience with a novel cerebral embolic protection device used duringtranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). One current challenge of TAVI is the reduction of proceduralstroke. Procedural mobilisation of debris is a known source of cerebral embolisation. Mechanicalprotection by transient filtration of cerebral blood flow might reduce the embolic burden during TAVI. Weaimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of the Claret CE Pro™ cerebral protection device in patientsundergoing TAVI.Methods and results: Patients scheduled for TAVI were prospectively enrolled at three centres. The ClaretCE Pro™ (Claret Medical, Inc. Santa Rosa, CA, USA) cerebral protection device was placed via the right radial/brachial artery prior to TAVI and was removed after the procedure. The primary endpoint was technical successrate. Secondary endpoints encompassed procedural and 30-day stroke rates, as well as device-related complications.Deployment of the Claret CE Pro™ cerebral protection device was intended for use in 40 patients,35 devices were implanted into the aortic arch. Technical success rate with delivery of the proximal and distalfilter was 60% for the first generation device and 87% for the second-generation device. Delivery times for thefirst-generation device were 12.4±12.1 minutes and 4.4±2.5 minutes for the second-generation device (p<0.05).The quantity of contrast used related to the Claret CE Pro System was 19.6±3.8 ml. Captured debris was documentedin at least 19 of 35 implanted devices (54.3%). No procedural transient ischaemic attacks, minor strokesor major strokes occurred. Thirty-day follow-up showed one minor stroke occurring 30 days after the procedure,and two major strokes both occurring well after the patient had completed TAVI.Conclusions: The use of the Claret CE Pro™ system is feasible and safe.