Geographical Inequality in Access to Aortic Valve Intervention in England: A Report from the UK Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Registry and National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit.

Background: For patients with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a less invasive but equally effective treatment option compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). In 2019, we reported low rates of TAVI in the UK compared with other countries in western Europe and highlighted profound geographical variation in TAVI care. Here, we provide contemporary data on access to aortic valve replacement by either TAVI or SAVR across clinical commissioning groups in England. Methods: We obtained aggregated data from the UK TAVI registry and the National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit between 2019 and 2023. Rates of TAVI and SAVR procedures per million population were reported by clinical commissioning groups. The relationship between TAVI and SAVR rates was determined using Pearson correlation coefficients. Results: In 2022/23, the rates of TAVI and SAVR in England were 136 per million population and 60 per million population, respectively. The observed increase in TAVI rates since 2019/20 corresponded with a decline in SAVR rates. There remains substantial variation in access to both procedures, with an over tenfold variation in TAVI rates, and an over fourfold variation in SAVR rates across clinical commissioning groups in England. No relationship was identified between the rates of TAVI and those for SAVR (correlation coefficient 0.06). Conclusion: Geographical heterogeneity in access to TAVI persists over time, with the low rates of TAVI in many areas not compensated for by higher rates of SAVR, indicating an overall inequality in the treatment of severe aortic stenosis.

Percutaneous Valvular and Structural Heart Disease Interventions.2024 Core Curriculum of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC in collaboration with the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Cardiovascular Surgery Working Group (WG CVS) of the European Society of Cardiology.

The percutaneous treatment of structural, valvular, and non-valvular heart disease (SHD) is rapidly evolving. The Core Curriculum (CC) proposed by the EAPCI describes the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that define competency levels required by newly trained SHD interventional cardiologists (IC) and provides guidance for training centres. SHD ICs are cardiologists who have received complete interventional cardiology training. They are multidisciplinary team specialists who manage adult SHD patients from diagnosis to follow-up and perform percutaneous procedures in this area. They are competent in interpreting advanced imaging techniques and master planning software. The SHD ICs are expected to be proficient in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. They may have selective skills in either the aortic area or mitral/tricuspid areas. In this case, they must still have common transversal competencies in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. Additional SHD domain competencies are optional. Completing dedicated SHD training, aiming for full aortic, mitral, and tricuspid competencies, requires at least 18 months. For full training in the aortic area, with basic competencies in mitral/tricuspid areas, the training can be reduced to 1 year. The same is true for training in the mitral/tricuspid area, with competencies in the aortic area. The SHD IC CC promotes excellence and homogeneous training across Europe and is the cornerstone of future certifications and patient protection. It may be a reference for future CC for national associations and other SHD specialities, including imaging and cardiac surgery.

Percutaneous Valvular and Structural Heart Disease Interventions. 2024 Core Curriculum of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) of the ESC.

The percutaneous treatment of structural, valvular, and non-valvular heart disease (SHD) is rapidly evolving. The Core Curriculum (CC) proposed by the EAPCI describes the knowledge, skills, and attitudes that define competency levels required by newly trained SHD interventional cardiologists (IC) and provides guidance for training centres. SHD ICs are cardiologists who have received complete interventional cardiology training. They are multidisciplinary team specialists who manage adult SHD patients from diagnosis to follow-up and perform percutaneous procedures in this area. They are competent in interpreting advanced imaging techniques and master planning software. The SHD ICs are expected to be proficient in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. They may have selective skills in either the aortic area or mitral/tricuspid areas. In this case, they must still have common transversal competencies in the aortic, mitral, and tricuspid areas. Additional SHD domain competencies are optional. Completing dedicated SHD training, aiming for full aortic, mitral, and tricuspid competencies, requires at least 18 months. For full training in the aortic area, with basic competencies in mitral/tricuspid areas, the training can be reduced to 1 year. The same is true for training in the mitral/tricuspid area, with competencies in the aortic area. The SHD IC CC promotes excellence and homogeneous training across Europe and is the cornerstone of future certifications and patient protection. It may be a reference for future CC for national associations and other SHD specialities, including imaging and cardiac surgery.

A Guide to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Design and Systematic Planning for a Redo-TAV (TAV-in-TAV) Procedure.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become more common than surgical aortic valve replacement since 2016, with over 200,000 procedures globally each year. As patients increasingly outlive their TAVR devices, managing these cases is a growing concern. Treatment options include surgical removal of the old TAVR device (transcatheter aortic valve [TAV] explant) or implantation of a new transcatheter aortic valve (redo TAV). Redo TAV is complex because of the unique designs of TAV devices; compatibility issues; and the need for individualized planning based on factors such as implant depth, shape, and coronary artery relationships. This review serves as a comprehensive guide for redo TAV, detailing the design characteristics of TAV devices, device compatibility, standardized terminology, and a structured approach for computed tomography analysis. It aims to facilitate decision making, risk identification, and achieving optimal outcomes in redo TAV procedures.

Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in collaboration with the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery.

Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is a frequent finding in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and the management of these two conditions becomes of particular importance with the extension of the procedure to younger and lower-risk patients. Yet, the preprocedural diagnostic evaluation and the indications for treatment of significant CAD in TAVI candidates remain a matter of debate. In this clinical consensus statement, a group of experts from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery aims to review the available evidence on the topic and proposes a rationale for the diagnostic evaluation and indications for percutaneous revascularisation of CAD in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter treatment. Moreover, it also focuses on commissural alignment of transcatheter heart valves and coronary re-access after TAVI and redo-TAVI.

BAlloon expandable vs. SElf expanding transcatheter vaLve for degenerated bioprosthesIs: design and rationale of the BASELINE trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical aortic valve bioprostheses may degenerate over time and require redo intervention. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a less invasive alternative to redo surgery. The BAlloon Expandable vs. SElf Expanding Transcatheter VaLve for Degenerated BioprosthesIs (BASELINE) trial was designed to compare the performance of the balloon-expandable SAPIEN-3 Ultra and the self-expanding EVOLUT PRO+ valve systems in symptomatic patients with a failing surgical bioprosthesis. METHODS: The BASELINE trial is an investigator-initiated, non-funded, prospective, randomized, open-label, superiority trial enrolling a total of 440 patients in up to 50 sites in 12 countries in Europe and North-America. The primary endpoint is device success at 30-days defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 Criteria as the composite of technical success, freedom from mortality, freedom for surgery or intervention related to the device or to a major vascular or access-related or cardiac structural complication with an intended performance of the valve (mean gradient <20 mmHg and less than moderate aortic regurgitation). The co-primary endpoint at 1 year is defined as the composite of all-cause death, disabling stroke, rehospitalization for heart failure or valve related problems. Independent Core Laboratories will conduct uniform analyses of echocardiography (pre-, post-, 1-year post-procedure), multi-sliced computed tomography (pre-, and if available post-procedure) and cine-fluoroscopy studies. CONCLUSIONS: The BASELINE trial is a head-to-head comparative trial investigating the 2 most used contemporary transcatheter heart valves for the treatment of a failing surgical aortic bioprosthesis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT04843072).

Data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart).

AIMS: Standardized data definitions are necessary for the quantification of quality of care and patient outcomes in observational studies and randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The European Unified Registries for Heart Care Evaluation and Randomised Trials (EuroHeart) project of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) aims to create pan-European data standards for cardiovascular diseases and interventions, including transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We followed the EuroHeart methodology for cardiovascular data standard development. A Working Group of 29 members representing 12 countries was established and included a patient representative, as well as experts in the management of valvular heart disease from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), the European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) and the Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery. We conducted a systematic review of the literature and used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on a final set of variables. For each variable, the Working Group provided a definition, permissible values, and categorized the variable as mandatory (Level 1) or additional (Level 2) based on its clinical importance and feasibility. In total, 93 Level 1 and 113 Level 2 variables were selected, with the level 1 variables providing the dataset for registration of patients undergoing TAVI on the EuroHeart IT platform. CONCLUSION: This document provides details of the EuroHeart data standards for TAVI processes of care and in-hospital outcomes. In the context of EuroHeart, this will facilitate quality improvement, observational research, registry-based RCTs and post-marketing surveillance of devices, and pharmacotherapies. ONE-SENTENCE SUMMARY: The EuroHeart data standards for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are a set of internationally agreed data variables and definitions that once implemented will facilitate improvement of quality of care and outcomes for patients receiving TAVI.

Mitral valve TEER in the UK: what you need to know as TEER becomes routinely available in the NHS.

Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) was first performed in 2003, and is now established across the developed world as an effective, minimally invasive treatment option for patients with mitral regurgitation (MR). Multiple large registries have established the efficacy of mitral TEER in patients with primary or degenerative MR in whom surgery is considered prohibitive or high risk, while ongoing randomised-controlled trials will determine its role in younger and lower- risk patients. In patients with secondary or functional MR, in whom mitral valve surgery is not routinely recommended, the pivotal COAPT trial showed a profound reduction in both mortality and heart failure hospitalisation in carefully selected patients. NHS England approved the routine commissioning of mitral TEER in 2019, and following a substantial delay, due in large part to the COVID pandemic, the procedure is now widely available across the UK. This review article describes the TEER procedure, currently available devices, the underlying evidence base, and the key facts needed for clinicians to understand who, how, and where to refer patients for consideration of mitral TEER. The emerging role of TEER in patients with severe symptomatic tricuspid regurgitation is also considered.

Expert Consensus on Sizing and Positioning of SAPIEN 3/Ultra in Bicuspid Aortic Valves.

Severe aortic stenosis patients with bicuspid anatomy have been excluded from the major transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) randomized clinical trials. As a result, there is no official recommendation on bicuspid TAVI. A panel of bicuspid experts was created to fill this gap. In this consensus statement, an algorithm is proposed to guide the choice of surgery or TAVI within this complex patient population, depending on aortic dilatation, age, surgical risk score, and anatomy. A step-by-step guide for sizing and positioning of the SAPIEN 3/Ultra TAVI bioprostheses is presented. Annular sizing remains the primary strategy in most bicuspid patients. However, some anatomies may require sizing at the supra-annular level, for which patients the panel recommends the circle method, a dedicated sizing and positioning approach for SAPIEN 3/Ultra. The consensus provides valuable pre-operative insights on the interactions between SAPIEN 3/Ultra and the bicuspid anatomy; understanding the valve-anatomy relationship is critical to avoid complications and to optimize outcomes for patients.

In-hospital stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A UK observational cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify baseline demographics and procedural factors that might independently predict in-hospital stroke following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). BACKGROUND: Stroke is a recognized, albeit infrequent, complication of TAVI. Established predictors of procedure-related in-hospital stroke; however, remain poorly defined. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort analysis of the multicenter UK TAVI registry. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of in-hospital stroke. RESULTS: A total of 8,652 TAVI procedures were performed from 2007 to 2015. There were 205 in-hospital strokes reported by participating centers equivalent to an overall stroke incidence of 2.4%. Univariate analysis showed that the implantation of balloon-expandable valves caused significantly fewer strokes (balloon-expandable 96/4,613 [2.08%] vs. self-expandable 95/3,272 [2.90%]; p = .020). After multivariable analysis, prior cerebrovascular disease (CVD) (odds ratio [OR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.05-2.17]; p = .03), advanced age at time of operation (OR 1.02 [0.10-1.04]; p = .05), bailout coronary stenting (OR 5.94 [2.03-17.39]; p = .008), and earlier year of procedure (OR 0.93 [0.87-1.00]; p = .04) were associated with an increased in-hospital stroke risk. There was a reduced stroke risk in those who had prior cardiac surgery (OR 0.62 [0.41-0.93]; p = .01) and a first-generation balloon-expandable valve implanted (OR 0.72 [0.53-0.97]; p = .03). In-hospital stroke significantly increased 30-day (OR 5.22 [3.49-7.81]; p < .001) and 1-year mortality (OR 3.21 [2.15-4.78]; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital stroke after TAVI is associated with substantially increased early and late mortality. Factors independently associated with in-hospital stroke were previous CVD, advanced age, no prior cardiac surgery, and deployment of a predominantly first-generation self-expandable transcatheter heart valve.

Outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated bioprostheses, failed annuloplasty rings, and mitral annular calcification.

Aims: We sought to evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with degenerated bioprostheses [valve-in-valve (ViV)], failed annuloplasty rings [valve-in-ring (ViR)], and severe mitral annular calcification [valve-in-mitral annular calcification (ViMAC)]. Methods and results: From the TMVR multicentre registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of ViV, ViR, and ViMAC were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) criteria. A total of 521 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.0% underwent TMVR (322 patients with ViV, 141 with ViR, and 58 with ViMAC). Trans-septal access and the Sapien valves were used in 39.5% and 90.0%, respectively. Overall technical success was excellent at 87.1%. However, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction occurred more frequently after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV (39.7% vs. 5.0% vs. 2.2%; P < 0.001), whereas second valve implantation was more frequent in ViR compared with ViMAC and ViV (12.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 2.5%; P < 0.001). Accordingly, technical success rate was higher after ViV compared with ViR and ViMAC (94.4% vs. 80.9% vs. 62.1%; P < 0.001). Compared with ViMAC and ViV groups, ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation ≥moderate (18.4% vs. 13.8% vs. 5.6%; P < 0.001) and subsequent paravalvular leak closure (7.8% vs. 0.0% vs. 2.2%; P = 0.006). All-cause mortality was higher after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV at 30 days (34.5% vs. 9.9% vs. 6.2%; log-rank P < 0.001) and 1 year (62.8% vs. 30.6% vs. 14.0%; log-rank P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with failed annuloplasty rings and severe MAC were at increased risk of mortality after TMVR [ViR vs. ViV, hazard ratio (HR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.12; P = 0.003; ViMAC vs. ViV, HR 5.29, 95% CI 3.29-8.51; P < 0.001]. Conclusion: The TMVR provided excellent outcomes for patients with degenerated bioprostheses despite high surgical risk. However, ViR and ViMAC were associated with higher rates of adverse events and mid-term mortality compared with ViV.

Incidence and outcomes of emergent cardiac surgery during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): insights from the European Registry on Emergent Cardiac Surgery during TAVI (EuRECS-TAVI).

Aims: Life-threatening complications occur during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) which can require emergent cardiac surgery (ECS). Risks and outcomes of patients needing ECS during or immediately after TAVI are still unclear. Methods and results: Incidence, risk factors, management, and outcomes of patients requiring ECS during transfemoral (TF)-TAVI were analysed from a contemporary real-world multicentre registry. Between 2013 and 2016, 27 760 patients underwent TF-TAVI in 79 centres. Of these, 212 (0.76%) patients required ECS (age 82.4 ± 6.3 years, 67.5% females, logistic EuroSCORE: 17.1%, STS-score 5.8%). The risk of ECS declined from 2013 (1.07%) to 2014 (0.70%) but remained stable since. Annual TF-TAVI numbers have more than doubled from 2013 to 2016. Leading causes for ECS were left ventricular perforation by the guidewire (28.3%) and annular rupture (21.2%). Immediate procedural mortality (<72 h) of TF-TAVI patients requiring ECS was 34.6%. Overall in-hospital mortality was 46.0%, and highest in case of annular rupture (62%). Independent predictors of in-hospital mortality following ECS were age > 85 years [odds ratio (OR) 1.87, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) (1.02-3.45), P = 0.044], annular rupture [OR 1.96, 95% CI (0.94-4.10), P = 0.060], and immediate ECS [OR 3.12, 95% CI (1.07-9.11), P = 0.037]. One year of survival of the 114 patients surviving the in-hospital period was only 40.4%. Conclusion: Between 2014 and 2016, the need for ECS remained stable around 0.7%. Left ventricular guidewire perforation and annular rupture were the most frequent causes, accounting for almost half of ECS cases. Half of the patients could be salvaged by ECS-nevertheless, 1 year of all-cause mortality was high even in those ECS patients surviving the in-hospital period.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprosthetic Valves and Failed Annuloplasty Rings.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with failed mitral valve replacement and repair. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the outcomes of TMVR in patients with failed mitral bioprosthetic valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) and annuloplasty rings (valve-in-ring [ViR]). METHODS: From the TMVR multicenter registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of mitral ViV and ViR were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria. RESULTS: A total of 248 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 8.9 ± 6.8% underwent TMVR. Transseptal access and the balloon-expandable valve were used in 33.1% and 89.9%, respectively. Compared with 176 patients undergoing ViV, 72 patients undergoing ViR had lower left ventricular ejection fraction (45.6 ± 17.4% vs. 55.3 ± 11.1%; p < 0.001). Overall technical and device success rates were acceptable, at 92.3% and 85.5%, respectively. However, compared with the ViV group, the ViR group had lower technical success (83.3% vs. 96.0%; p = 0.001) due to more frequent second valve implantation (11.1% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.008), and lower device success (76.4% vs. 89.2%; p = 0.009) due to more frequent reintervention (16.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.03). Mean mitral valve gradients were similar between groups (6.4 ± 2.3 mm Hg vs. 5.8 ± 2.7 mm Hg; p = 0.17), whereas the ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation moderate or higher (19.4% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.003). Furthermore, the ViR group had more frequent life-threatening bleeding (8.3% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.03), acute kidney injury (11.1% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.03), and subsequent lower procedural success (58.3% vs. 79.5%; p = 0.001). The 1-year all-cause mortality rate was significantly higher in the ViR group compared with the ViV group (28.7% vs. 12.6%; log-rank test, p = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, failed annuloplasty ring was independently associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 2.70; 95% confidence interval: 1.34 to 5.43; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The TMVR procedure provided acceptable outcomes in high-risk patients with degenerated bioprostheses or failed annuloplasty rings, but mitral ViR was associated with higher rates of procedural complications and mid-term mortality compared with mitral ViV.

Safety and efficacy of a repositionable and fully retrievable aortic valve used in routine clinical practice: the RESPOND Study.

AIMS: RESPOND is a prospective, open-label, single-arm study evaluating the outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the repositionable and fully retrievable Lotus Valve used in routine clinical practice for the treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: RESPOND enrolled 1014 patients at sites across Europe, New Zealand, and Latin America; 996 patients received a Lotus Valve (mean age: 80.8 years; 50.8% female; Society of Thoracic Surgeons score: 6.0 ± 6.9). Repositioning was attempted in 29.2% of patients, with 99% success. The rate of all-cause mortality in the intent-to-treat population at 30 days (primary endpoint) was 2.6% (P < 0.001 vs. pre-specified performance goal). Thirty-day clinical follow-up was completed for 97.3% of patients. Among patients who received a Lotus Valve, the 30-day overall and disabling stroke rates were 3.0% and 2.2%, respectively. The 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 30.0% in all patients, and 34.6% in pacemaker-naïve patients. Echocardiographic data at baseline and pre-discharge were assessed by an independent core laboratory. Mean aortic valve gradient declined from 37.7 ± 15.2 mmHg at baseline to 10.8 ± 4.6 mmHg at hospital discharge (P < 0.001). Aortic valve area increased from 0.7 ± 0.2 cm2 at baseline to 1.8 ± 0.4 cm2 at discharge (P < 0.001). At hospital discharge, paravalvular leak (PVL) was absent or trace in 92% of patients; no patients had severe PVL, 0.3% of patients exhibited moderate PVL, and 7.7% of patients had mild PVL. Clinical follow-up in RESPOND will extend to 5 years. CONCLUSION: The results of RESPOND confirm the safety and efficacy of TAVI with the Lotus Valve in routine clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov #NCT 02031302.

Repositionable percutaneous aortic valve implantation with the LOTUS valve: 30-day and 1-year outcomes in 250 high-risk surgical patients.

AIMS: The REPRISE IIE trial aimed to evaluate outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation of the fully repositionable and retrievable LOTUS valve with a unique seal designed to minimise paravalvular leak (PVL). METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective, multicentre study enrolled 250 patients with severe aortic stenosis considered high-risk for surgery by a multidisciplinary Heart Team. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated events per Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria. Mean age was 84 years; 77% were in NYHA Class III/IV. LOTUS valve implantation produced significant haemodynamic improvements at one year without valve embolisation, ectopic valve deployment, or additional valve implantation. Primary endpoints were met as the 30-day mortality rate in the extended cohort (4.4%, N=250), and mean valve gradient in the main cohort (11.5±5.2 mmHg, N=120) were below (p<0.001) their predefined performance objectives. At 30 days, disabling stroke was 2.8% and new pacemaker implantation was 28.9% in all patients and 32.0% in pacemaker-naïve patients. By one year, all-cause mortality was 11.6%, disabling stroke was 3.6%, 95% of patients alive were in NYHA Class I/II, and there was no core laboratory-adjudicated moderate/severe PVL. CONCLUSIONS: LOTUS valve implantation produced good valve haemodynamics, minimal PVL, sustained significant improvement in functional status, and good clinical outcomes one year post implant.

The impact of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement induced left-bundle branch block on cardiac reverse remodeling.

BACKGROUND: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) is common following trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and has been linked to increased mortality, although whether this is related to less favourable cardiac reverse remodeling is unclear. The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of TAVR induced LBBB on cardiac reverse remodeling. METHODS: 48 patients undergoing TAVR for severe aortic stenosis were evaluated. 24 patients with new LBBB (LBBB-T) following TAVR were matched with 24 patients with a narrow post-procedure QRS (nQRS). Patients underwent cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) prior to and 6 m post-TAVR. Measured cardiac reverse remodeling parameters included left ventricular (LV) size, ejection fraction (LVEF) and global longitudinal strain (GLS). Inter- and intra-ventricular dyssynchrony were determined using time to peak radial strain derived from CMR Feature Tracking. RESULTS: In the LBBB-T group there was an increase in QRS duration from 96 ± 14 to 151 ± 12 ms (P < 0.001) leading to inter- and intra-ventricular dyssynchrony (inter: LBBB-T 130 ± 73 vs nQRS 23 ± 86 ms, p < 0.001; intra: LBBB-T 118 ± 103 vs. nQRS 13 ± 106 ms, p = 0.001). Change in indexed LV end-systolic volume (LVESVi), LVEF and GLS was significantly different between the two groups (LVESVi: nQRS -7.9 ± 14.0 vs. LBBB-T -0.6 ± 10.2 ml/m2, p = 0.02, LVEF: nQRS +4.6 ± 7.8 vs LBBB-T -2.1 ± 6.9%, p = 0.002; GLS: nQRS -2.1 ± 3.6 vs. LBBB-T +0.2 ± 3.2%, p = 0.024). There was a significant correlation between change in QRS and change in LVEF (r = -0.434, p = 0.002) and between change in QRS and change in GLS (r = 0.462, p = 0.001). Post-procedure QRS duration was an independent predictor of change in LVEF and GLS at 6 months. CONCLUSION: TAVR-induced LBBB is associated with less favourable cardiac reverse remodeling at medium term follow up. In view of this, every effort should be made to prevent TAVR-induced LBBB, especially as TAVR is now being extended to a younger, lower risk population.

Impact of latest generation cardiac interventional X-ray equipment on patient image quality and radiation dose for trans-catheter aortic valve implantations.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the impact on radiation dose and image quality of a new cardiac interventional X-ray system for trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients compared to the previously-used cardiac X-ray system. METHODS: Patient dose and image data were retrospectively collected from a Philips AlluraClarity (new) and Siemens Axion Artis (reference) X-ray system. Patient dose area product (DAP) and fluoroscopy duration of 41 patient cases from each X-ray system were compared using a Wilcoxon test. Ten patient aortograms from each X-ray system were scored by 32 observers on a continuous scale to assess the clinical image quality at the given phase of the TAVI procedure. Scores were dichotomised by acceptability and analysed using a Chi-squared test. RESULTS: Significant reductions in patient dose (p << 0.001) were found for the new system with no significant change in fluoroscopy duration (p = 0.052); procedure DAP reduced by 55%, fluoroscopy DAP by 48% and "cine" acquisition DAP by 61%. There was no significant difference between image quality scores of the two X-ray systems (p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: The new cardiac X-ray system demonstrated a very significant reduction in patient dose with no loss of clinical image quality. Advances in Knowledge: The huge growth of TAVI may impact on the radiation exposure of cardiac patients and particularly on operators including anaesthetists; cumulative exposure of interventional cardiologists performing high volume TAVI over 30-40 years may be harmful. The Phillips Clarity upgrade including improved image enhancement and optimised X-ray settings significantly reduced radiation without reducing clinically acceptable image quality.

Infarct Size Following Treatment With Second- Versus Third-Generation P2Y12 Antagonists in Patients With Multivessel Coronary Disease at ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction in the CvLPRIT Study.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation P2Y12 antagonists (prasugrel and ticagrelor) are recommended in guidelines on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Mechanisms translating their more potent antiplatelet activity into improved clinical outcomes versus the second-generation P2Y12 antagonist clopidogrel are unclear. The aim of this post hoc analysis of the Complete Versus Lesion-Only PRImary PCI Trial-CMR (CvLPRIT-CMR) substudy was to assess whether prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with reduced infarct size compared with clopidogrel in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: CvLPRIT-CMR was a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded end point trial in 203 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with either infarct-related artery-only or complete revascularization. P2Y12 inhibitors were administered according to local guidelines. The primary end point of infarct size on cardiovascular magnetic resonance was not significantly different between the randomized groups. P2Y12 antagonist administration was not randomized. Patients receiving clopidogrel (n=70) compared with those treated with either prasugrel or ticagrelor (n=133) were older (67.8±12 versus 61.5±10 years, P<0.001), more frequently had hypertension (49% versus 29%, P=0.007), and tended to have longer symptom-to-revascularization time (234 versus 177 minutes, P=0.05). Infarct size (median 16.1% [quartiles 1-3, 10.5-27.7%] versus 12.1% [quartiles 1-3, 4.8-20.7%] of left ventricular mass, P=0.013) and microvascular obstruction incidence (65.7% versus 48.9%, P=0.022) were significantly greater in patients receiving clopidogrel. Infarct size remained significantly different after adjustment for important covariates using both generalized linear models (P=0.048) and propensity score matching (P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of CvLPRIT-CMR, third-generation P2Y12 antagonists were associated with smaller infarct size and lower microvascular obstruction incidence versus the second-generation P2Y12 antagonist clopidogrel for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN70913605.

Strategies to attenuate micro-vascular obstruction during P-PCI: the randomized reperfusion facilitated by local adjunctive therapy in ST-elevation myocardial infarction trial.

BACKGROUND: Microvascular obstruction (MVO) following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) treatment of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) contributes to infarct expansion, left ventricular (LV) remodelling, and worse clinical outcomes. The REFLO-STEMI trial tested whether intra-coronary (IC) high-dose adenosine or sodium nitroprusside (SNP) reduce infarct size and/or MVO determined by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). METHODS AND RESULTS: REFLO-STEMI, a prospective, open-label, multi-centre trial with blinded endpoints, randomized (1:1:1) 247 STEMI patients with single vessel disease presenting within 6 h of symptom onset to IC adenosine (2-3 mg total) or SNP (500 µg total) immediately following thrombectomy and again following stenting, or to standard PPCI. The primary endpoint was infarct size % LV mass (%LVM) on CMR undertaken 24-96 h after PPCI (n = 197). Clinical follow-up was to 6 months. There was no significant difference in infarct size (%LVM, median, interquartile range, IQR) between adenosine (10.1, 4.7-16.2), SNP (10.0, 4.2-15.8), and control (8.3, 1.9-14.0), P = 0.062 and P = 0.160, respectively, vs. CONTROL: MVO (% LVM, median, IQR) was similar across groups (1.0, 0.0-3.7, P = 0.205 and 0.6, 0.0-2.4, P = 0.244 for adenosine and SNP, respectively, vs. control 0.3, 0.0-2.8). On per-protocol analysis, infarct size (%LV mass, 12.0 vs. 8.3, P = 0.031), major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio, HR, 5.39 [1.18-24.60], P = 0.04) at 30 days and 6 months (HR 6.53 [1.46-29.2], P = 0.01) were increased and ejection fraction reduced (42.5 ± 7.2% vs. 45.7 ± 8.0%, P = 0.027) in adenosine-treated patients compared with control. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose IC adenosine and SNP during PPCI did not reduce infarct size or MVO measured by CMR. Furthermore, adenosine may adversely affect mid-term clinical outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01747174; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01747174.

1-Year Outcomes With the Fully Repositionable and Retrievable Lotus Transcatheter Aortic Replacement Valve in 120 High-Risk Surgical Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: Results of the REPRISE II Study.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis presents the first report of 1-year outcomes of the 120 patients enrolled in the REPRISE II (Repositionable Percutaneous Placement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System-Evaluation of Safety and Performance) study. BACKGROUND: The fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus Valve (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) was designed to facilitate accurate positioning, early valve function, and hemodynamic stability during deployment and to minimize paravalvular regurgitation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. METHODS: The study enrolled 120 symptomatic patients 70 years of age or older at 14 centers in Australia and Europe. Patients had severe calcific aortic stenosis and were deemed to be at high or extreme risk of surgery based on assessment by the heart team. RESULTS: The mean age was 84.4 ± 5.3 years, 57% (68 of 120) of patients were women, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 7.1 ± 4.6. The mean baseline aortic valve area was 0.7 ± 0.2 cm(2), and the mean transvalvular pressure gradient was 46.4 ± 15.0 mm Hg. All patients were successfully implanted with a Lotus Valve, and 1-year clinical follow-up was available for 99.2% (119 of 120 of patients). The mean 1-year transvalvular aortic pressure gradient was 12.6 ± 5.7 mm Hg, and the mean valve area was 1.7 ± 0.5 cm(2). A total of 88.6% patients had no or trivial paravalvular aortic regurgitation at 1 year by independent core lab adjudication, and 97.1% of patients were New York Heart Association functional class I or II. At 1 year, the all-cause mortality rate was 10.9% (13 of 119 patients), disabling stroke rate was 3.4% (4 of 119 patients), disabling bleeding rate was 5.9% (7 of 119 patients), with no repeat procedures for valve-related dysfunction. A total of 31.9% (38 of 119 patients) underwent new permanent pacemaker implantation at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year of follow-up, the Lotus Valve demonstrated excellent valve hemodynamics, no moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation, and significant and sustained improvement in New York Heart Association functional class status, with good clinical outcomes. (Repositionable Percutaneous Placement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System-Evaluation of Safety and Performance [REPRISE II]; NCT01627691).