30-Day Clinical Outcomes of a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve: The International PORTICO NG Study.

BACKGROUND: The self-expanding, intra-annular Navitor (Abbott Structural Heart) valve includes an outer cuff to reduce paravalvular leak (PVL) and large stent cells for future coronary access. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the PORTICO NG (Evaluation of the Portico NG [Next Generation] Transcatheter Aortic Valve in High and Extreme Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis) study is to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Navitor valve in patients with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis who are at high or extreme surgical risk. METHODS: PORTICO NG is a prospective, multicenter, global study with follow-up at 30 days, 1 year, and annually through 5 years. The primary endpoints are all-cause mortality and moderate or greater PVL at 30 days. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 events and valve performance are assessed by an independent clinical events committee and echocardiographic core laboratory. RESULTS: A total of 260 subjects were treated at 26 clinical sites across Europe, Australia, and the United States between September 2019 and August 2022. The mean age was 83.4 ± 5.4 years, 57.3% were female, and the average Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 3.9% ± 2.1%. At 30 days, the rate of all-cause mortality was 1.9%, and no subjects had moderate or greater PVL. The rate of disabling stroke was 1.9%, life-threatening bleeding was 3.8%, stage 3 acute kidney injury was 0.8%, major vascular complications were 4.2%, and new permanent pacemaker implantation was 19.0%. Hemodynamic performance included a mean gradient of 7.4 ± 3.5 mm Hg and an effective orifice area of 2.00 ± 0.47 cm2. CONCLUSIONS: The Navitor valve is safe and effective for the treatment of subjects with severe aortic stenosis who are at high or greater risk for surgery, which is supported by low rates of adverse events and PVL. (Evaluation of the Portico NG [Next Generation] Transcatheter Aortic Valve in High and Extreme Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis [PORTICO NG]; NCT04011722).

The International Society for Minimally Invasive Cardiothoracic Surgery Expert Consensus Statement on Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low- and Intermediate-Risk Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized and Propensity-Matched Studies.

OBJECTIVE: There is an increasing amount of evidence supporting use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for treatment of aortic stenosis in patients at low or intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). TAVR is now approved for use in all patient cohorts. Despite this, there remains debate about the relative efficacy of TAVR compared with SAVR in lower-risk cohorts and various subgroups of patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched trials to guide a consensus among expert cardiologists and surgeons. METHODS: Studies comparing TAVR and SAVR in low- and intermediate-risk patients were identified by a thorough search of the major databases. Mortality, stroke, and other perioperative outcomes were assessed at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: Early mortality was lower in TAVR compared to SAVR in RCTs, but not propensity-matched studies in low-risk cohorts (0.66% vs 1.5%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.20 to 0.98, I2 = 0%). No difference in mortality between TAVR and SAVR was identified in intermediate-risk patients at early or later time points. Incidence of perioperative stroke in 3 low-risk RCTs was significantly lower in TAVR (0.4%) than SAVR (1.4%; OR = 0.33, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.81, I2 = 0%). There was no difference in stroke for intermediate-risk patients between TAVR and SAVR. The expert panel of cardiologists and cardiac surgeons provided recommendations for TAVR and SAVR in various clinical scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: In RCTs comparing TAVR and SAVR in low-risk patients, early mortality and stroke were lower in TAVR, but did not differ at 1 year. There was no difference in mortality and stroke in intermediate-risk patients. The Multidisciplinary Heart Team must consider individual patient characteristics and preferences when recommending TAVR or SAVR. The decision must consider the long-term management of each patient's aortic valve disease.

Prospective US investigational device exemption trial of a sutureless aortic bioprosthesis: One-year outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: We performed a prospective, single-arm clinical trial approved under a Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption to assess safety and efficacy of Perceval, a sutureless bovine pericardial aortic valve representing the initial US experience. METHODS: From June 2013 to January 2015, 300 patients (mean age 76.7 ± 7.7 years, 54.3% men, 37.3% ≥80 years, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality 2.8%), underwent Perceval valve implantation at 18 centers across the United States. Twenty patients (6.7%) had a bicuspid aortic valve and 5 (1.7%) patients had previous aortic valve replacement. A minimally invasive approach was used in 80 (26.7%) and concomitant procedures were performed in 113 (37.8%) patients. RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-nine patients (96.3%) were successfully implanted. Operative mortality (≤30 days) was 1.3% (n = 4) (observed to expected ratio of 0.40). One-year results included all-cause mortality in 5.2% (n = 15), stroke in 1% (n = 3), and endocarditis in 1.7% (n = 5). New permanent periprocedural pacemaker rate was 10.7% (n = 30/281); 2.5% (n = 7/281) resulted from third-degree atrioventricular block. One-year valve-related reoperation was 2.1% (n = 6). At 1-year follow-up, 98% of patients were in New York Heart Association class I/II, left ventricular mass index decreased from 103.5 ± 30.1 g/m2 at discharge to 95.8 ± 27.1 g/m2 (P = .001), and 3 (1.3%) moderate paravalvular leaks were identified. Health-related quality of life score increased from 62.7 ± 21.8 before surgery to 85.5 ± 17.8 at 1 year (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm the safety and effectiveness of the Perceval sutureless aortic valve replacement in study patients with lower mortality than expected from a risk prediction model. Persistent hemodynamic benefit and improvement in quality of life at 1 year support the importance of this device in the management of aortic valve disease.

Minimally Invasive Robotically Assisted Repair of Partial Anomalous Venous Connection.

We describe a novel robotically assisted minimally invasive surgical technique for repair of partial anomalous pulmonary vein connection (PAPVC). Partial anomalous pulmonary vein connection is a rare congenital anomaly that consists in drainage of one or more pulmonary veins into the systemic venous system. Traditionally, large thoracotomy incision and sometimes establishment of cardiopulmonary bypass are needed to redirect the abnormal pulmonary vein to the left-sided reservoir. We describe a robotically assisted, minimally invasive, off-pump technique for the treatment of the left PAPVC in a 57-year-old patient with signs of progressive right ventricular dilatation. The Da Vinci robot was used for mediastinal dissection and isolation of the distal aspect of the left superior anomalous pulmonary vein from the brachiocephalic vein. Through a left minithoracotomy, under direct vision, the pulmonary vein was reanastomosed to the left atrial appendage, thus reconstituting a normal venous return pattern. The use of the da Vinci robot is a valid adjunct for correction of the left PAPVC. It helps mediastinal dissection and allows reconnection of the pulmonary vein to the left venous system via a small thoracotomic incision and without the use of cardiopulmonary bypass.

5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on the early results of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable for surgery. However, little information is available about the late clinical outcomes in such patients. METHODS: We did this randomised controlled trial at 21 experienced valve centres in Canada, Germany, and the USA. We enrolled patients with severe symptomatic inoperable aortic stenosis and randomly assigned (1:1) them to transfemoral TAVR or to standard treatment, which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The randomisation was done centrally, and sites learned of the assignment only after a patient had been screened, consented, and entered into the database. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality at 1 year in the intention-to-treat population, here we present the prespecified findings after 5 years. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894. FINDINGS: We screened 3015 patients, of whom 358 were enrolled (mean age 83 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality 11·7%, 54% female). 179 were assigned to TAVR treatment and 179 were assigned to standard treatment. 20 patients crossed over from the standard treatment group and ten withdrew from study, leaving only six patients at 5 years, of whom five had aortic valve replacement treatment outside of the study. The risk of all-cause mortality at 5 years was 71·8% in the TAVR group versus 93·6% in the standard treatment group (hazard ratio 0·50, 95% CI 0·39-0·65; p<0·0001). At 5 years, 42 (86%) of 49 survivors in the TAVR group had New York Heart Association class 1 or 2 symptoms compared with three (60%) of five in the standard treatment group. Echocardiography after TAVR showed durable haemodynamic benefit (aortic valve area 1·52 cm(2) at 5 years, mean gradient 10·6 mm Hg at 5 years), with no evidence of structural valve deterioration. INTERPRETATION: TAVR is more beneficial than standard treatment for treatment of inoperable aortic stenosis. TAVR should be strongly considered for patients who are not surgical candidates for aortic valve replacement to improve their survival and functional status. Appropriate selection of patients will help to maximise the benefit of TAVR and reduce mortality from severe comorbidities. FUNDING: Edwards Lifesciences.

5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that mortality at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years is much the same with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. We report here the 5-year outcomes. METHODS: We did this randomised controlled trial at 25 hospitals, in Canada (two), Germany (one), and the USA (23). We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to randomly assign high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to either SAVR or TAVR with a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial tissue valve by either a transfemoral or transapical approach. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat population at 1 year, we present here predefined outcomes at 5 years. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894. FINDINGS: We screened 3105 patients, of whom 699 were enrolled (348 assigned to TAVR, 351 assigned to SAVR). Overall mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 11·7%. At 5 years, risk of death was 67·8% in the TAVR group compared with 62·4% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·24; p=0·76). We recorded no structural valve deterioration requiring surgical valve replacement in either group. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation occurred in 40 (14%) of 280 patients in the TAVR group and two (1%) of 228 in the SAVR group (p<0·0001), and was associated with increased 5-year risk of mortality in the TAVR group (72·4% for moderate or severe aortic regurgitation vs 56·6% for those with mild aortic regurgitation or less; p=0·003). INTERPRETATION: Our findings show that TAVR as an alternative to surgery for patients with high surgical risk results in similar clinical outcomes. FUNDING: Edwards Lifesciences.

Direct percutaneous transaortic approach for treatment of aortic pseudoaneurysms.

Aortic pseudoaneurysms (APAs) can develop months or years after aortic and cardiac surgery. If not treated appropriately, APAs can lead to fatal complications and ultimately death. We describe a case of a 61-year old patient with a diagnosed large pseudoaneurysm 5 years after his aortic valve surgery, who was treated with a novel transcatheter direct transaortic approach. The patient had dilated cardiomyopathy with an APA adjacent to the lower sternal plate. An Amplatzer septal occlusion device followed by coils was delivered transcutaneously through the APA to close its neck and fill the false aneurysm, respectively. Triple fusion multimodality imaging was used to guide the placement of the occlusion devices. The merging of computed tomography (CT) and echocardiography with real-time fluoroscopy was fundamental in procedural planning and guidance. Post-procedural transoesophageal echocardiogram (TOE) and CT angiography showed complete exclusion of the APA. A direct transaortic approach is a valid option for closure of an APA if the surgical risk is prohibitive, and the use of triple fusion technology is an essential tool in the hands of interventionalists and surgeons for preoperative planning and conduction of these procedures.

Percutaneous complete repair of failed mitral valve prosthesis: simultaneous closure of mitral paravalvular leaks and transcatheter mitral valve implantation - single-centre experience.

AIMS: Structural deterioration and paravalvular leak (PVL) are complications associated with surgically implanted prosthetic valves, historically requiring reoperation. We present our experience of complete transcatheter repair of a degenerated mitral bioprosthesis. METHODS AND RESULTS: From March 2012 to October 2012, we reviewed consecutive, high-risk surgical patients (n=5) who underwent transcatheter repair of a failed mitral bioprosthesis with severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). Manufacturer valve sizes ranged from 27 to 33 mm, regurgitation (n=1), stenosis (n=1), or both (n=3). Percutaneous transapical and transseptal access were achieved with PVL closure performed transapically. An arteriovenous rail was created for transseptal delivery of a Melody valve. All patients had successful PVL closure with no residual PVR. Valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation was successful in four patients. Overall, mean transvalvular mitral gradient was 11.2 mmHg pre-procedure which improved to 5 mmHg post-procedure. Improvement of NYHA Class ≥2 was achieved in all patients (19±3 months). One patient had controlled Melody valve embolisation which required emergent surgical replacement. Inner valve diameter was 26 mm, too large for Melody valve implantation. CONCLUSIONS: Complete transcatheter repair of a degenerated mitral bioprosthesis with PVR can be performed in the high-risk patient. Accurate measurement is necessary prior to intervention, with concern for embolisation among the larger valve sizes (>31 mm).

Successful first-in-man percutaneous transapical-transseptal Melody mitral valve-in-ring implantation after complicated closure of a para-annular ring leak.

AIMS: Transcatheter techniques can theoretically be applied to the treatment of para-annular ring (PAR) leaks. Little is known about their potential application and resultant complications in such cases. We describe the first-in-man percutaneous transapical-transseptal Melody valve-in-ring (ViR) implantation after a complication from percutaneous PAR leak closure. METHODS AND RESULTS: A 49-year-old woman, at high operative risk, presented with congestive heart failure secondary to severe para-ring/extravalvular regurgitation two months after bypass surgery and mitral ring annuloplasty. Successful percutaneous closure of the leak was performed using an AMPLATZER Vascular Plug IV. One month later, she developed haemolysis with severe PAR regurgitation, through and around the device. After device retrieval and placement of an AMPLATZER Muscular VSD occluder, the patient developed severe intravalvular regurgitation. Completely percutaneous, transseptal delivery of a Melody ViR was performed over a transapical-transseptal, arteriovenous rail. Echocardiography revealed trivial residual regurgitation through the implanted valve with mild transvalvular gradients. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous closure of mitral PAR leaks after ring annuloplasty in the high-risk patient is feasible (proof-of-concept), particularly when the leak is para-ring/extravalvular. Potential complications include severe intravalvular mitral regurgitation caused by disruption of the mitral apparatus and/or ring deformation during device deployment, which can be successfully treated via percutaneous transapical-transseptal ViR implantation.

A revised methodology for aortic-valvar complex calcium quantification for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIMS: We sought to optimize a method for quantification of the calcium in the aortic-valvar complex for the prediction of significant paravalvular leak (PVL) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients had severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and were treated with balloon-expandable TAVI (Sapien/Sapien-XT, Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, CA, USA). In order to correct for precise annular sizing, only patients with available contrast computed tomography (CT) data for measurements were included (n = 198). Paravalvular leak was quantified using peri-procedural transoesophageal echocardiography by Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) criteria (grade ≥ moderate was considered significant). A detailed region-of-interest methodology separated quantification of calcium in each of the aortic leaflets to that in the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and was used to predict PVL in receiver operator characteristic curve analyses. For non-contrast scans, the greatest discriminatory value for PVL was seen at the 450 Hounsfield Unit (HU) threshold for detection (volume ≥626 mm(3)), whereas for contrast scans it was at 850 HU (≥235 mm(3)). Left ventricular outflow tract calcium predicted PVL but only as a binary variable with no incremental value of quantification. In a multivariable binary logistic regression model, annulus area ≥ prosthesis area (OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.5-8.2, P = 0.005), contrast leaflet calcium volume (850-HU threshold) ≥235 mm(3) (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2-6.7, P = 0.023), and presence of LVOT calcium (OR 2.8, 95% CI 1.2-7.0, P = 0.022) were independent predictors for PVL ≥ moderate. CONCLUSION: Both leaflet and LVOT calcium are significant predictors of PVL and exert an important synergistic influence on this complication, even in appropriately sized valves. With careful attention to thresholds for detection, clinically relevant leaflet calcium volumes can be identified with either non-contrast or contrast CT scans.

Comprehensive analysis of mortality among patients undergoing TAVR: results of the PARTNER trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who were deemed too high risk or inoperable for conventional aortic valve replacement (AVR) in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial were randomized to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus AVR (PARTNER-A arm) or standard therapy (PARTNER-B arm). OBJECTIVES: This study compared when and how deaths occurred after TAVR versus surgical AVR or standard therapy. METHODS: The PARTNER-A arm included 244 transfemoral (TF) and 104 transapical (TA) TAVR patients, and 351 AVR patients; the PARTNER-B arm included 179 TF-TAVR patients and 179 standard therapy patients. Deaths were categorized as cardiovascular, noncardiovascular, or uncategorizable, and were characterized by multiphase hazard modelling. RESULTS: In the PARTNER-A arm, the risk of death peaked after randomization in the TA-TAVR and AVR groups, falling to low levels commensurate with the U.S. population within 3 months. Early risk was less in TF-TAVR patients, resulting in initial superior survival; between 12 and 18 months, risk increased, such that within 2 years, TF-TAVR and AVR patients had similar survival rates. Cardiovascular, noncardiovascular, and uncategorizable deaths for TF-TAVR were 37%, 43%, and 20%, respectively, versus 22%, 41%, and 37%, respectively, for TA-TAVR and 33%, 43%, and 24%, respectively, for AVR. In the PARTNER-B arm, risk with standard therapy was 60% per year; TF-TAVR reduced risk to 20% per year, resulting in 0.5 years of life added within 2.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: In inoperable AS patients, TAVR substantially reduced the risk of cardiovascular death. In high-risk patients, TA-TAVR and AVR were associated with elevated peri-procedural risk more than with TF-TAVR, although cardiovascular death was higher after TF-TAVR. Therefore, TF-TAVR should be considered the standard of care for severely symptomatic inoperable patients or those at high risk of noncardiovascular mortality after conventional surgery. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894).

Complete percutaneous approach for arterial access in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a comparison with surgical cut-down and closure.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the immediate safety and feasibility of complete percutaneous access/closure of arteriotomy for device deployment compared to the surgical approach for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: The percutaneous approach for arterial access for device deployment in transfemoral TAVR is a potential alternative to the surgical approach. METHODS: In 274 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR using Edward Sapien heart valve, 140 had a complete percutaneous approach using a "pre-closure" technique whereas 134 had surgical cut-down/repair for arterial access/closure of device deployment. Immediate vascular access/closure success, associated complications and clinical outcomes were compared. RESULTS: While overall acute success of access/closure and in-hospital access-related events were similar, significant isolated stenosis/dissection at the access site developed more frequently in the percutaneous group (7.1% vs. 0.7%, P = 0.007). Contrary, wound infections requiring prolonged antibiotics use or surgical debridement occurred more frequently in the surgical group (0.7% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.007). Although the rate of major vascular complications was not different, the surgical group developed more frequent minor bleeding (27.1% vs. 38.8%, P = 0.04) and underwent transfusion of packed red blood cells of ≤3 units (25.7% vs. 43.3%, P = 0.002). Median hospital stay was shorter in the percutaneous group (3 days vs. 4 days, P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The percutaneous approach is a feasible access/closure method with a potential of lowering access site infection and bleeding, and shortening hospital stay, while maintaining similar rates of major vascular complications compared to the surgical approach.

Stratification of outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement according to surgical inoperability for technical versus clinical reasons.

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of reasons for surgical inoperability on outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis may be deemed inoperable due to technical or clinical reasons. The relative impact of each designation on early and late outcomes after TAVR is unclear. METHODS: Patients were studied from the inoperable arm (cohort B) of the randomized PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial and the nonrandomized continued access registry. Patients were classified according to whether they were classified as technically inoperable (TI) or clinically inoperable (CLI). Reasons for TI included porcelain aorta, previous mediastinal radiation, chest wall deformity, and potential for injury to previous bypass graft on sternal re-entry. Reasons for CLI were systemic factors that were deemed to make survival unlikely. RESULTS: Of the 369 patients, 23.0% were considered inoperable for technical reasons alone; the remaining were judged to be CLI. For TI, the most common cause was a porcelain aorta (42%); for CLI, it was multiple comorbidities (48%) and frailty (31%). Quality of life and 2-year mortality were significantly better among TI patients compared with CLI patients (mortality 23.3% vs. 43.8%; p < 0.001). Nonetheless, TAVR led to substantial survival benefits compared with standard therapy in both inoperable cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing TAVR based solely on TI have better survival and quality of life improvements than those who are inoperable due to clinical comorbidities. Both TI and CLI TAVR have significant survival benefit in the context of standard therapy. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894).

Defining the learning curve for robotic-assisted endoscopic harvesting of the left internal mammary artery.

OBJECTIVE: Robotic-assisted techniques are continuing to cement their role in coronary surgery, particularly in facilitating the endoscopic harvesting of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA), regardless of how the subsequent bypass grafting is performed. As more surgeons attempt to become trained in robotic-assisted procedures, we sought to better define the learning curve associated with robotic-assisted endoscopic LIMA harvest. METHODS: Between January 2011 and July 2012, a total of 77 patients underwent robotic-assisted minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery at our institution. The LIMA was harvested endoscopically in all patients, using standard robotic instruments, followed by direct grafting to anterior wall myocardial vessels via a small thoracotomy. Intraoperative times for various components of the procedure were collated and analyzed. RESULTS: The mean ± SD time taken to insert and position the ports for the robotic instruments was 3.9 ± 1.4 minutes. The mean ± SD LIMA harvest time was 31.8 ± 10.1 minutes, and the mean ± SD total robotic time was 44.2 ± 12.9 minutes. All time variables consistently continued to decrease as the experience of the operating surgeon increased, with the greatest magnitude of improvement being evident within the first 20 cases. The logarithmic learning curves for LIMA harvest time and total robot time during our entire experience were both calculated as 90%, correlating to an expected 10% improvement in performance for each doubling of cases completed. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary surgeons can rapidly become proficient in robotic-assisted endoscopic LIMA harvest, with significant improvement in operative times evident within the first 20 cases completed. These data may be useful in designing appropriate training programs for newer surgeons seeking to gain experience in robotic-assisted coronary surgery.

Transapical aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis: results from the nonrandomized continued access cohort of the PARTNER trial.

BACKGROUND: Transapical (TA) aortic valve replacement was an integral part of the Placement of Transcatheter Aortic Valves (PARTNER) trial. Enrollment during the randomized trial included 104 transapical (premarket approval TA [PMA-TA]) and 92 surgical aortic valve replacements (SAVR) within the TA cohort. On completion of the trial, enrollment continued in a nonrandomized continued access (NRCA) program. We compared the outcomes of NRCA-TA procedures with those of PMA-TA and SAVR. METHODS: In 22 centers, 975 patients underwent TA aortic valve replacement as part of the NRCA registry. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were unchanged from the previously reported PARTNER trial. All patients were followed up for at least 1 year. RESULTS: Thirty-day or in-hospital mortality was 8.8% for the NRCA-TA cohort, compared with 10.6% and 12.0% for the PMA-TA and SAVR patients, respectively (p = 0.54). One-year mortality in the NRCA-TA cohort was 22.1%, not significantly lower than the mortality in PMA-TA and SAVR patients at 29.0% and 25.3%, respectively (p = 0.27). Thirty-day or in-hospital stroke was 2.2% among NRCA-TA patients in contrast to the 6.7% stroke rate observed in the PMA-TA group and 5.4% in SAVR patients (p = 0.008). Lower rates of neurologic adverse events in the NRCA-TA group persisted at 1 year compared with the PMA-TA and SAVR patients. CONCLUSIONS: Among the 975 patients in the NRCA-TA cohort, rates of major outcomes including death and stroke compared favorably with outcomes of PMA-TA and SAVR patients enrolled in the PARTNER trial. This trend toward improved outcomes may be attributed to improved patient selection, individual centers surmounting the procedural learning curve, and refinements in surgical technique.

Determinants and outcomes of acute transcatheter valve-in-valve therapy or embolization: a study of multiple valve implants in the U.S. PARTNER trial (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial Edwards SAPIEN Transcatheter Heart Valve).

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the determinants and outcomes of acute insertion of a second transcatheter prosthetic valve (TV) within the first (TV-in-TV) or transcatheter valve embolization (TVE) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: TAVR failure can occur with both TV-in-TV and TVE as a consequence of TAVR malpositioning. Only case reports and limited series pertaining to these complications have been reported to date. METHODS: Patients undergoing TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial Edwards SAPIEN Transcatheter Heart Valve) randomized trial (cohorts A and B) and accompanying registries were studied. Data were dichotomized for those with and without TV-in-TV or TVE, respectively. RESULTS: From a total of 2,554 consecutive patients, 63 (2.47%) underwent TV-in-TV and 26 (1.01%) TVE. The indication for TV-in-TV was significant aortic regurgitation in most patients, often due not only to malpositioning but also to leaflet dysfunction. Despite similar aortic valve function on follow-up echoes, TV-in-TV was an independent predictor of 1-year cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.86, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03 to 3.38, p = 0.041), with a nonsignificant trend toward greater all-cause mortality (HR: 1.43, 95% CI: 0.88 to 2.33, p = 0.15). Technical and anatomical reasons accounted for most cases of TVE. A multivariable analysis found TVE to be an independent predictor of 1-year mortality (HR: 2.68, 95% CI: 1.34 to 5.36, p = 0.0055) but not cardiovascular mortality (HR: 1.30, 95% CI: 0.48 to 3.52, p = 0.60). CONCLUSIONS: Acute TV-in-TV and TVE are serious sequelae of TAVR, often resulting in multiple valve implants. They carry an excess of mortality and are caused by anatomic and technical factors, which may be avoidable with judicious procedural planning.

Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is the recommended therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable candidates for surgery. The outcomes beyond 1 year in such patients are not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to transfemoral TAVR or to standard therapy (which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty). Data on 2-year outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 358 patients underwent randomization at 21 centers. The rates of death at 2 years were 43.3% in the TAVR group and 68.0% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001), and the corresponding rates of cardiac death were 31.0% and 62.4% (P<0.001). The survival advantage associated with TAVR that was seen at 1 year remained significant among patients who survived beyond the first year (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.92; P=0.02 with the use of the log-rank test). The rate of stroke was higher after TAVR than with standard therapy (13.8% vs. 5.5%, P=0.01), owing, in the first 30 days, to the occurrence of more ischemic events in the TAVR group (6.7% vs. 1.7%, P=0.02) and, beyond 30 days, to the occurrence of more hemorrhagic strokes in the TAVR group (2.2% vs. 0.6%, P=0.16). At 2 years, the rate of rehospitalization was 35.0% in the TAVR group and 72.5% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). TAVR, as compared with standard therapy, was also associated with improved functional status (P<0.001). The data suggest that the mortality benefit after TAVR may be limited to patients who do not have extensive coexisting conditions. Echocardiographic analysis showed a sustained increase in aortic-valve area and a decrease in aortic-valve gradient, with no worsening of paravalvular aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Among appropriately selected patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVR reduced the rates of death and hospitalization, with a decrease in symptoms and an improvement in valve hemodynamics that were sustained at 2 years of follow-up. The presence of extensive coexisting conditions may attenuate the survival benefit of TAVR. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, the 1-year survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical replacement. However, longer-term follow-up is necessary to determine whether TAVR has prolonged benefits. METHODS: At 25 centers, we randomly assigned 699 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to undergo either surgical aortic-valve replacement or TAVR. All patients were followed for at least 2 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evaluation. RESULTS: The rates of death from any cause were similar in the TAVR and surgery groups (hazard ratio with TAVR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.15; P=0.41) and at 2 years (Kaplan-Meier analysis) were 33.9% in the TAVR group and 35.0% in the surgery group (P=0.78). The frequency of all strokes during follow-up did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.23; P=0.52). At 30 days, strokes were more frequent with TAVR than with surgical replacement (4.6% vs. 2.4%, P=0.12); subsequently, there were 8 additional strokes in the TAVR group and 12 in the surgery group. Improvement in valve areas was similar with TAVR and surgical replacement and was maintained for 2 years. Paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR (P<0.001), and even mild paravalvular regurgitation was associated with increased late mortality (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A 2-year follow-up of patients in the PARTNER trial supports TAVR as an alternative to surgery in high-risk patients. The two treatments were similar with respect to mortality, reduction in symptoms, and improved valve hemodynamics, but paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR and was associated with increased late mortality. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Cross-sectional computed tomographic assessment improves accuracy of aortic annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and reduces the incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation.

OBJECTIVES: In an effort to define the gold standard for annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), we sought to critically analyze and compare the predictive value of multiple measures of the aortic annulus for post-TAVR paravalvular (PV) regurgitation and then assess the impact of a novel cross-sectional computed tomographic (CT) approach to annular sizing. BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown clear discrepancies between conventional 2-dimensional (2D) echocardiographic and CT measurements. In terms of aortic annular measurement for TAVR, such findings have lacked the outcome analysis required to inform clinical practice. METHODS: The discriminatory value of multiple CT annular measures for post-TAVR PV aortic regurgitation was compared with 2D echocardiographic measures. TAVR outcomes with device selection according to aortic annular sizing using a traditional 2D transesophageal echocardiography-guided or a novel CT-guided approach were also studied. RESULTS: In receiver-operating characteristic models, cross-sectional CT parameters had the highest discriminatory value for post-TAVR PV regurgitation: This was with the area under the curve for [maximal cross-sectional diameter minus prosthesis size] of 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 0.94; p < 0.001) and that for [circumference-derived cross-sectional diameter minus prosthesis size] of 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.7 to 0.94; p < 0.001). In contrast, traditional echocardiographic measures were nondiscriminatory in relation to post-TAVR PV aortic regurgitation. The prospective application of a CT-guided annular sizing approach resulted in less PV aortic regurgitation of grade worse than mild after TAVR (7.5% vs. 21.9%; p = 0.045). CONCLUSIONS: Our data lend strong support to 3-dimensional cross-sectional measures, using CT as the new gold standard for aortic annular evaluation for TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN device.