Seven-year outcomes following aortic valve replacement with a novel tissue bioprosthesis.

OBJECTIVE: As bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement (AVR) extends to younger cohorts, tissue durability is of paramount importance. We report 7-year outcomes from an AVR bioprosthesis utilizing novel tissue. METHODS: This was an international investigational device exemption trial for novel AVR with annual follow-up and a subset re-consented at 5 years for extended 10-year follow-up. Safety end points and echocardiographic measurements were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee and by a dedicated core laboratory, respectively. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and March 2016, 689 patients underwent AVR with the study valve. Mean age was 66.9 ± 11.6 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 2.0% ± 1.8%, and 74.3% of patients were New York Heart Association functional class II and III. Five-year follow-up was completed by 512 patients, and 225 re-consented for extended follow-up. Follow-up duration was 5.3 ± 2.2 years (3665.6 patient-years), and 194 and 195 patients completed 6- and 7-year follow-ups, respectively. One-, 5-, and 7-year freedom from all-cause mortality was 97.7%, 89.4%, and 85.4%, respectively. Freedom from structural valve deterioration at 7 years was 99.3%. At 7 years, effective orifice area and mean gradients were 1.82 ± 0.57 cm2 (n = 153), and 9.4 ± 4.5 mm Hg (n = 157), respectively. At 7 years, predominantly none (96.8% [152 out of 157]) or trivial/trace (2.5% [4 out of 157]) paravalvular regurgitation and none (84.7% [133 out of 157]) or trivial/trace (11.5% [18 out of 157]) transvalvular regurgitation were observed. CONCLUSIONS: We report the longest surgical AVR follow-up with novel tissue in an investigational device exemption trial utilizing an independent clinical events committee and an echocardiography core laboratory. This tissue demonstrates excellent outcomes through 7 years and is the benchmark for future surgical and transcatheter prostheses.

Does valve size impact hemodynamic, left ventricular mass regression, and prosthetic valve deterioration with a sutureless aortic valve?

OBJECTIVE: To assess the mid-term clinical outcomes, hemodynamics, left ventricular (LV) mass regression, and structural valve deterioration (SVD) in patients implanted with the Perceval aortic sutureless valve across valve sizes. METHODS: Data were obtained from a multicenter European trial and a US Investigational Device Exemption trial. Echocardiography data were analyzed by an echocardiography core lab. A mixed-effects regression model was used to assess relationships between hemodynamic outcomes, time from the procedure, and valve sizes. The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3 definition for bioprosthetic valve failure was applied. RESULTS: A Perceval sutureless valve was implanted in 970 patients. The median patient age was 77.8 years, 57.2% were female, the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicated risk of mortality was 3.3% (range, 2.1%-6.2%), and 33.4% had a concomitant procedure. The median clinical follow-up was 45.7 months (range, 28.2-76.1 months). Small and medium valves were implanted more commonly in women than in men (16.9% vs 1.9% for small and 55.1% vs 19.5% for medium; P < .001). The mean aortic valve gradients decreased significantly postimplantation and remained stable across all valve sizes throughout the follow-up period. All patients were free from severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (with an effective orifice area/m2 of >0.8). Significant LV mass regression was documented regardless valve sizes, plateaued at -9.1% at 5 years. Freedom from SVD and reintervention were 95.2% and 96.3%, respectively, at 5 years and were independent of implanted valve size (P = .22). The VARC-3 stage 3 bioprosthetic valve failure rate was low, 2.8% at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: The Perceval valve demonstrated low and stable mean gradients, significant LV mass regression, and low SVD and reintervention rates across all valve sizes.

Five-year Outcomes of the COMMENCE Trial Investigating Aortic Valve Replacement With RESILIA Tissue.

BACKGROUND: The COMMENCE trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of aortic valve replacement using a bioprosthesis with novel RESILIA tissue (Edwards Lifesciences). RESILIA tissue is incorporated in the INSPIRIS RESILIA aortic valve (Edwards Lifesciences). METHODS: Patients underwent clinically indicated surgical aortic valve replacement with a bovine pericardial bioprosthesis (model 11000A; Edwards Lifesciences) in a prospective, multinational, multicenter (n = 27), US Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption trial. Events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee, and echocardiograms were analyzed by an independent core laboratory. Outcomes through an observational period of 5 years are reported. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and March 2016, 689 patients received the study valve. Mean patient age was 66.9 ± 11.6 years; Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 2.0% ± 1.8%; and 23.8%, 49.9%, and 24.4% of patients were New York Heart Association functional class I, II, and III at baseline, respectively. Through December 11, 2020 the follow-up duration was 4.3 ± 1.4 years, and the completeness of follow-up over the observational period was 95.5%. Early (<30 days) all-cause mortality was 1.2%, stroke 1.6%, and major paravalvular leak 0.1%. Five-year actuarial freedom from all-cause mortality, structural valve deterioration, and all-cause reintervention were 89.2%, 100%, and 98.7%, respectively. At 5 years the effective orifice area was 1.6 ± 0.5 cm2, mean gradient was 11.5 ± 6.0 mm Hg, 97.8% of patients were class I/II, and 97.8% and 96.3% of patients had none/trace paravalvular and transvalvular regurgitation, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The safety and hemodynamic performance of this aortic bioprosthesis with RESILIA tissue through 5 years are encouraging, with clinically stable hemodynamics, minimal regurgitation, and no evidence of structural valve deterioration.

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.

Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip in Patients with Heart Failure and Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Design and rationale of the COAPT trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with heart failure (HF) and symptomatic secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR) have a poor prognosis, with morbidity and mortality directly correlated with MR severity. Correction of isolated SMR with surgery is not well established in this population, and medical management remains the preferred approach in most patients. The Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients with Functional Mitral Regurgitation (COAPT) trial was designed to determine whether transcatheter mitral valve (MV) repair with the MitraClip device is safe and effective in patients with symptomatic HF and clinically significant SMR. STUDY DESIGN: The COAPT trial is a prospective, randomized, parallel-controlled, open-label multicenter study of the MitraClip device for the treatment of moderate-to-severe (3+) or severe (4+) SMR (as verified by an independent echocardiographic core laboratory) in patients with New York Heart Association class II-IVa HF despite treatment with maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) who have been determined by the site's local heart team as not appropriate for MV surgery. A total of 614 eligible subjects were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to MV repair with the MitraClip plus GDMT versus GDMT alone. The primary effectiveness end point is recurrent HF hospitalizations through 24 months, analyzed when the last subject completes 12-month follow-up, powered to demonstrate superiority of MitraClip therapy. The primary safety end point is a composite of device-related complications at 12 months compared to a performance goal. Follow-up is ongoing, and the principal results are expected in late 2018. CONCLUSIONS: HF patients with clinically significant SMR who continue to be symptomatic despite optimal GDMT have limited treatment options and a poor prognosis. The randomized COAPT trial was designed to determine the safety and effectiveness of transcatheter MV repair with the MitraClip in symptomatic HF patients with moderate-to-severe or severe SMR.

The COMMENCE trial: 2-year outcomes with an aortic bioprosthesis with RESILIA tissue.

OBJECTIVES: The COMMENCE trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of a novel bioprosthetic tissue for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). METHODS: Patients underwent clinically indicated surgical AVR with the Carpentier-Edwards PERIMOUNT™ Magna Ease™ aortic valve with RESILIA™ tissue (Model 11000A) in a prospective, multinational, multicentre (n = 27), single-arm, FDA Investigational Device Exemption trial. Events were adjudicated by an independent Clinical Events Committee; echocardiograms were analysed by an independent Core Laboratory. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and February 2016, 689 patients received the study valve. Mean age was 67.0 ± 11.6 years; 71.8% were male; 26.3% were New York Heart Association Class III/IV. Mean STS PROM was 2.0 ± 1.8 (0.3-17.5). Isolated AVR was performed in 59.1% of patients; others had additional concomitant procedures, usually CABG. Thirty-day outcomes for all patients included all-cause mortality 1.2%, thromboembolism 2.2%, bleeding 0.9%, major paravalvular leak 0.1% and permanent pacemaker implantation 4.7%. Median intensive care unit and hospital length of stay were 2 (range: 0.2-66) and 7 days (3.0-121.0), respectively. At 2 years, New York Heart Association class improved in 65.7%, effective orifice area was 1.6 ± 0.5 cm2; mean gradient was 10.1 ± 4.3 mmHg; and paravalvular leak was none/trivial in 94.5%, mild in 4.9%, moderate in 0.5% and severe in 0.0%. One-year actuarial freedom from all-cause mortality for isolated AVR and for all patients was 98.2% and 97.6%, respectively. Two-year actuarial freedom from mortality in these groups was 95.3% and 94.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: These data demonstrate excellent early safety and effectiveness of aortic valve replacement with a novel bioprosthetic tissue (RESILIA™). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01757665.

The ABLATE Trial: Safety and Efficacy of Cox Maze-IV Using a Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation System.

BACKGROUND: The Cox Maze-IV procedure (CMP-IV) has replaced the Cox Maze-III procedure as the most common approach for the surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF). The Food and Drug Administration-regulated AtriCure Bipolar Radiofrequency Ablation of Permanent Atrial Fibrillation (ABLATE) trial sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the CMP-IV performed with the Synergy ablation system (AtriCure, Inc, Cincinnati, OH). METHODS: Fifty-five patients (aged 70.5 ± 9.3 years), 92.7% of whom had nonparoxysmal AF, underwent CMP-IV to terminate AF during a concomitant cardiac surgical procedure. Lesions were created using the AtriCure Synergy bipolar radiofrequency ablation system. All patients were seen for follow-up visits after 30 days, 3 months, and 6 months, with 24-hour Holter monitoring at 6 months. Late evaluation was performed by 48-hour Holter monitoring at an average of 21 months. RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint, absence of AF (30 seconds or less) at 6-month follow-up off antiarrhythmic medications (Heart Rhythm Society definition), indicated 76% (38 of 50) were AF free (95% confidence interval: 62.6% to 85.7%). The primary safety endpoint, the rate of major adverse events within 30 days, was 9.1% (5 of 55; 95% confidence interval: 3.9% to 19.6%), with 3.6% mortality (2 of 55). Secondary efficacy endpoints included being AF free with antiarrhythmic drugs (6 months, 84%; 21 months, 75%), successful pulmonary vein isolation (100%), and AF burden at 6 and 21 months. The results, together with those for the secondary safety endpoint (6-month major adverse events), demonstrated that the Synergy system performs comparably to the cut-and-sew Cox Maze-III procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The CMP-IV using the AtriCure Synergy system was safe and effective for cardiac surgical patients who had persistent and longstanding persistent AF.

Influence of endoscopic versus traditional saphenectomy on event-free survival: five-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic harvesting of the greater saphenous vein is increasingly used during cardiac surgery to improve patient satisfaction and reduce the wound complications associated with traditional open techniques. Although histologic studies suggest no significant difference in vein quality between these two techniques, long-term follow-up is lacking to address whether graft patency and event-free survival are influenced by the harvest method. METHODS: A total of 112 isolated coronary artery bypass patients were prospectively randomized to have veins harvested using either an endoscopic (n = 54) or traditional (n = 58) technique. Groups were demographically similar with regard to preoperative risk stratification and coronary procedures performed. Event-free survival (freedom from death, myocardial infarction, or recurrent angina) and use of outpatient resources for resolution of wound complications were determined. Follow-up was 100% at 5 years. RESULTS: Five-year actual event-free survival was similar in patients with endoscopic versus traditionally harvested v e ins (75% versus 74%, P =.85). The number of outpatient office visits required to manage each wound complication to complete resolution was significantly less following endoscopic versus traditional vein harvest (1.5 versus 6 visits, P =.001). CONCLUSIONS: Wound complication management following endoscopic versus traditional vein harvest requires less resource utilization. Five-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial demonstrates that use of endosco pic versus traditionally harvested saphenous veins does not influence event-free survival.