Long-term health outcomes of young patients with low complexity coronary disease: A weighted analysis according to revascularization strategy.

OBJECTIVES: Age is an important factor weighing on revascularization outcomes decisions. We analysed long-term health outcomes of young patients with low complexity coronary anatomy suitable for both CABG and PCI, according to revascularization strategy. METHODS: Patients 60 year-old or less, undergoing invasive coronary angiography between Jan/2007 and Dec/2015, presenting with proximal LAD involvement, left main or multivessel disease and a SYNTAX Score (SS) ≤22 were retrospectively selected. An inverse probability of treatment weight methodology generated a pseudopopulation with well-balanced characteristics, which was used to estimate the average treatment effect between PCI (n = 374) and CABG (n = 173). RESULTS: Mean age was 53 ± 7 yo, 27% had DM and 48% presented with an ACS. Mean SYNTAX Score was 13.6 ± 4.9 and 68% underwent PCI as index revascularization strategy. In the weighed population, the adjusted hazard of the primary end-point of all-cause death at total follow-up (median 9.3 years [IQR: 6.9; 11.7]) was 0.40 (95% CI 0.19-0.7) for CABG vs PCI (incidence-rate 5.8 vs 14.0 deaths/1000-person-years). Accounting for death as competing-risk, the cumulative hazard of new revascularization (sub-distribution HR 0.72; 95% CI 0.32-1.25) and any cause hospital readmission (sub-distribution HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.41-1.07) were lower in CABG patients, as opposed to death/stroke rates at 30-days which were higher with CABG (0.3% vs 1.7%; risk ratio = 5.84). CONCLUSIONS: In this quasi-experimental analysis of young patients with CAD and an equivalent indication for both PCI or CABG, improved long-term health outcomes were favourably associated with CABG, as compared to PCI. These observations support the need for dedicated randomized trials with longer follow-up in order to better inform lifetime treatment options.

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.

TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multivessel or advanced coronary disease: The transcatheter valve and vessels trial (TCW trial): Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently present with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). In those, current guidelines recommend combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the preferred treatment option, although this surgical approach is associated with a high rate of clinical events. Combined transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with or without FFR have evolved as a valid alternative for cardiac surgery in patients with AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. To date, no dedicated trial has prospectively evaluated the outcomes of a percutaneous versus surgical treatment for patients with both severe AS and CAD. AIMS: To investigate whether fractional-flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI and TAVI is noninferior to combined CABG and SAVR for the treatment of severe AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. METHODS: The Transcatheter Valve and Vessels (TCW) trial (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03424941) is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, international trial. Patients ≥ 70 years with severe AS and multivessel (≥ 2 vessels) or advanced CAD, deemed feasible by the heart team for both; a full percutaneous or surgical treatment, will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either FFR-guided PCI followed by TAVI (intervention arm) vs. CABG and SAVR (control arm). The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, unscheduled clinically-driven target vessel revascularization, valve reintervention, and life threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year. The TCW trial is powered for noninferiority, and if met, superiority will be tested. Assuming a primary endpoint rate of 30% in the CABG-SAVR arm, with a significance level α of 5%, a noninferiority limit delta of 15% and a loss to follow-up of 2%, a total of 328 patients are needed to obtain a power of 90%. The primary endpoint analysis is performed on an intention-to-treat basis. SUMMARY: The TCW Trial is the first prospective randomized trial that will study if a less invasive percutaneous treatment for severe AS and concomitant advanced CAD (i.e., FFR-guided PCI-TAVI) is noninferior to the guidelines recommended approach (CABG-SAVR).

Transcatheter interventions for left-sided valvular heart disease complicated by cardiogenic shock: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) and the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery.

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is one of the most frequent causes of heart failure (HF) and is associated with poor prognosis, particularly among patients with conservative management. The development and improvement of catheter-based VHD interventions have broadened the indications for transcatheter valve interventions from inoperable/high-risk patients to younger/lower-risk patients. Cardiogenic shock (CS) associated with severe VHD is a clinical condition with a very high risk of mortality for which surgical treatment is often deemed a prohibitive risk. Transcatheter valve interventions might be a promising alternative in this setting given that they are less invasive. However, supportive scientific evidence is scarce and often limited to small case series. Current guidelines on VHD do not contain specific recommendations on how to manage patients with both VHD and CS. The purpose of this clinical consensus statement, developed by a group of international experts invited by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Scientific Documents and Initiatives Committee, is to perform a review of the available scientific evidence on the management of CS associated with left-sided VHD and to provide a rationale and practical approach for the application of transcatheter valve interventions in this specific clinical setting.

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).

Predicting obstructive coronary artery disease in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: A practical clinical score.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the most common etiology of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). However, there is controversy whether invasive coronary angiography (ICA) should be used initially to exclude CAD in patients presenting with new-onset HFrEF of unknown etiology. Our study aimed to develop a clinical score to quantify the risk of obstructive CAD in these patients. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional observational study of 452 consecutive patients presenting with new-onset HFrEF of unknown etiology undergoing elective ICA in one academic center, between January 2005 and December 2019. Independent predictors for obstructive CAD were identified. A risk score was developed using multivariate logistic regression of designated variables. The accuracy and discriminative power of the predictive model were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients (24.1%) presented obstructive CAD. Six independent predictors were identified and included in the score: male gender (2 points), diabetes (1 point), dyslipidemia (1 point), smoking (1 point), peripheral arterial disease (1 point), and regional wall motion abnormalities (3 points). Patients with a score ≤3 had less than 15% predicted probability of obstructive CAD. Our score showed good discriminative power (C-statistic 0.872; 95% CI 0.834-0.909: p<0.001) and calibration (p=0.333 from the goodness-of-fit test). CONCLUSIONS: A simple clinical score showed the ability to predict the risk of obstructive CAD in patients presenting with new-onset HFrEF of unknown etiology and may guide the clinician in selecting the most appropriate diagnostic modality for the assessment of obstructive CAD.

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.

Ultrassonografia intravascular para guiar a intervenção coronária percutânea: resultados do registro nacional português / Intravascular ultrasound in percutaneous coronary intervention guidance: results from Portuguese registry

Introdução: As diretrizes atuais recomendam o uso da ultrassonografia intravascular de coronárias como ferramenta adjuvante em situações difíceis. Objetivo: Caracterizar a utilização da ultrassonografia intravascular em Portugal e comparar os desfechos após intervenção coronária percutânea no tronco da coronária esquerda, guiada ou não por ultrassonografia intravascular. Métodos: Estudo observacional retrospectivo multicêntrico, que analisou pacientes submetidos à intervenção coronária percutânea entre janeiro de 2012 e dezembro de 2018, incluídos no Portuguese Registry on Interventional Cardiology da Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia. Valor de p bicaudal <0,05 foi considerado estatisticamente significativo. Resultados: Este estudo demonstrou variação significativa na utilização da ultrassonografia intravascular em Portugal (valor de p qui-quadrado para tendência <0,001). O ano com maior utilização foi 2016 (2,4%). Houve aumento progressivo, nos últimos 7 anos, na utilização da ultrassonografia intravascular na intervenção coronária percutânea do tronco da coronária esquerda (valor de p qui-quadrado para tendência <0,001), com importantes diferenças regionais. A população submetida à intervenção coronária percutânea do tronco da coronária esquerda guiada por ultrassonografia intravascular era mais jovem, mas tinha maior prevalência de fatores de risco cardiovascular, disfunção sistólica ventricular e lesões coronárias complexas. Além disso, esse grupo de pacientes teve menor prevalência do desfecho primário intra-hospitalar (1,4% versus 3,9%; p=0,024). Porém, após análise multivariada ajustada para fatores de confusão, este estudo não demonstrou impacto significativo da utilização da ultrassonografia intravascular no desfecho intra-hospitalar. Conclusão: A utilização da ultrassonografia intravascular na intervenção coronária percutânea do tronco da coronária esquerda vem aumentando lentamente nos últimos 7 anos em Portugal. Neste estudo, a utilização desse método não teve impacto estatístico nos desfechos intra-hospitalares.

Background: Current guidelines recommend the use of coronary intravascular ultrasound as an adjunctive tool in challenging situations. Objective: To characterize the use of intravascular ultrasound in Portugal and compare outcomes after left main percutaneous coronary intervention, with or without intravascular ultrasound. Methods: A retrospective multicentric observational study analyzed patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2012 and December 2018 and were included in the Portuguese Registry on Interventional Cardiology of the Sociedade Portuguesa de Cardiologia. A two-sided p-value<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: This study revealed significant variation of intravascular ultrasound usage in Portugal over time (p-value Chi-squared for trend <0.001). The year with maximum use was 2016 (2.4%). Regarding left main percutaneous coronary intervention, there was a progressive increase in use of intravascular ultrasound (p-value Chi-squared for trend<0.001) in the last 7 years, with important regional differences. The population submitted to left main percutaneous coronary intervention with intravascular ultrasound was younger, but had a higher prevalence of some cardiovascular risk factors, ventricular systolic dysfunction, and complex coronary lesions. Moreover, this group of patients had lower prevalence of intrahospital primary endpoint (1.4% versus 3.9%; p=0.024). However, after multivariate analysis adjusted to confounding factors, this study did not demonstrate a significant impact of intravascular ultrasound on intrahospital endpoint. Conclusion: The overall use of intravascular ultrasound in left main percutaneous coronary intervention has been slowly increasing in the last seven years, in Portugal. In this study, the use of this method had no statistical impact in intrahospital endpoints.

Surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients: A long-term propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in lower risk populations, but real-world data are scarce. METHODS: Single-center retrospective study of patients undergoing SAVR (between June 2009 and July 2016, n = 682 patients) or TAVI (between June 2009 and July 2017, n = 400 patients). Low surgical risk was defined as EuroSCORE II (ES II) < 4% for single noncoronary artery bypass graft procedure. TAVI patients were propensity score-matched in a 1:1 ratio with SAVR patients, paired by age, New York Heart Association class, diabetes mellitus, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, atrial fibrillation, creatinine clearance, and left ventricular ejection fraction < 50%. RESULTS: A total of 158 patients (79 SAVR and 79 TAVI) were matched (mean age 79 ± 6 years, 79 men). TAVI patients had a higher incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation (0% vs. 19%, p < 0.001) and more than mild paravalvular leak (4% vs. 18%, p = 0.009), but comparable rates of stroke, major or life-threatening bleeding, emergent cardiac surgery, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and need for renal replacement therapy. Hospital length-of-stay and 30-day mortality were similar. At a median follow-up of 4.5 years (IQR 3.0-6.9), treatment strategy did not influence all-cause mortality (HR 1.19, 95% CI 0.77-1.83, log rank p = 0.43) nor rehospitalization (crude subdistribution HR 1.56, 95% CI 0.71-3.41, p = 0.26). ES II remained the only independent predictor of long-term all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.04-1.90, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: In this low surgical risk severe aortic stenosis population, we observed similar rates of 30-day and long-term all-cause mortality, despite higher rates of permanent pacemaker implantation and more than mild paravalvular leak in TAVI patients. The results of this small study suggest that both procedures are safe and effective in the short-term, while the Heart Team remains essential to assess both options on the long-term.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement After Surgical Repair or Replacement: Comprehensive Midterm Evaluation of Valve-in-Valve and Valve-in-Ring Implantation From the VIVID Registry.

BACKGROUND: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR. METHODS: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate. RESULTS: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76-996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510-1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR (P<0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients (P=0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; P<0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; P=0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; P=0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74-12.56; P=0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88-21.53; P<0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.

Diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography angiography for the exclusion of coronary artery disease in candidates for transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Coronary CT angiography (CTA) is currently considered a reliable method to exclude obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) before valvular heart surgery in patients with low pretest probability. However, its role in excluding obstructive CAD before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is less well established. Single-center retrospective study where patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent both CTA and invasive coronary angiography (ICA) as part of TAVI planning. CTA exams were conducted on a 64-slice dual source scanner, with a median interval of 45 days to ICA (IQR 25-75 [13-82]). In both tests, obstructive CAD was defined as a ≥50% stenosis in an epicardial vessel ≥2 mm diameter. Per-patient, per-vessel and per-proximal segment analyses were conducted, excluding and including non-evaluable segments. The study included 200 patients (120 women, mean age 83 ± 6 years). The prevalence of obstructive CAD on ICA was 35.5% (n = 71). On a per-patient analysis (assuming non-evaluable segments as stenotic), CTA showed sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 95-100%), specificity of 42% (95% CI, 33-51%), and positive and negative predictive values of 48% (95% CI, 44-51%) and 100% (95% CI, 92-100%), respectively. CTA was able to exclude obstructive CAD in 54 patients (27%), in whom ICA could have been safely withheld. Despite the high rate of inconclusive tests, pre-procedural CTA is able to safely exclude obstructive CAD in a significant proportion of patients undergoing TAVI, possibly avoiding the need for ICA in roughly one quarter of the cases.

Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation on Kidney Function / Impacto do Implante Percutâneo de Válvula Aórtica na Função Renal

Abstract Background: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is frequently present in patients with aortic valve disease. Decreased kidney perfusion as a consequence of reduced cardiac output may contribute to renal dysfunction in this setting. Objective: Given the potential reversibility of kidney hypoperfusion after valve repair, this study aimed to analyze the impact of percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on kidney function. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 233 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI in a single center between November 2008 and May 2016. We assessed three groups according to their baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (mL/min/1.73 m2): Group 1 with eGFR ≥ 60; Group 2 with 30 ≤ eGFR < 60; and Group 3 with eGFR < 30. We analyzed the eGFR one month and one year after TAVI in these three groups, using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) formula to calculate it. Results: Patients from Group 1 had a progressive decline in eGFR one year after the TAVI procedure (p < 0.001 vs. pre-TAVI). In Group 2 patients, the mean eGFR increased one month after TAVI and continued to grow after one year (p = 0.001 vs. pre-TAVI). The same occurred in Group 3, with the mean eGFR increasing from 24.4 ± 5.1 mL/min/1.73 m2 before TAVI to 38.4 ± 18.8 mL/min/1.73 m2 one year after TAVI (p = 0.012). Conclusions: For patients with moderate-to-severe CKD, kidney function improved one year after the TAVI procedure. This outcome is probably due to better kidney perfusion post-procedure. We believe that when evaluating patients that might need TAVI, this 'reversibility of CKD effect' should be considered.

Resumo Fundamento: Pacientes com doença valvar aórtica frequentemente apresentam doença renal crônica (DRC). Diminuição da perfusão renal como consequência da redução do débito cardíaco pode contribuir para a disfunção renal neste cenário. Objetivo: Dado o potencial de reversibilidade da hipoperfusão renal após o reparo valvar, este estudo teve o objetivo de analisar o impacto do implante percutâneo de válvula aórtica (TAVI - transcatheter aortic valve implantation) na função renal. Métodos: Foi realizada uma análise retrospectiva de 233 pacientes consecutivos submetidos ao TAVI em um único centro, entre novembro de 2008 e maio de 2016. Três grupos foram avaliados de acordo com a taxa de filtração glomerular estimada (TFGe) basal (mL/min/1,73 m2): Grupo 1 com TFGe ≥ 60; Grupo 2 com 30 ≤ TFGe < 60; e Grupo 3 com TFGe < 30. O TFGe foi analisado nestes três grupos um mês e um ano após o TAVI e calculado usando a fórmula do Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI). Resultados: Os pacientes do Grupo 1 tiveram um declínio progressivo da TFGe um ano após o procedimento TAVI (p < 0,001 vs. pré-TAVI). Nos pacientes do Grupo 2, a média da TFGe aumentou um mês depois do TAVI e continuou crescendo depois de um ano (p = 0,001 vs. pré-TAVI). O mesmo ocorreu no Grupo 3, com a média da TFGe subindo de 24,4 ± 5,1 mL/min/1,73 m2 antes do TAVI para 38,4 ± 18,8 mL/min/1,73 m2 um ano após o TAVI (p = 0,012). Conclusões: Em pacientes com DRC moderada a grave, a função renal melhorou um ano após o procedimento TAVI. Este resultado é provavelmente devido à melhora da perfusão renal pós-procedimento. Acredita-se que, ao avaliar pacientes que possam precisar de TAVI, este 'efeito de reversibilidade da DRC' deva ser considerado.

Transcatheter mitral valve interventions for mitral regurgitation, with special focus on MitraClip: The position of Spanish, Portuguese and Italian interventional societies.

Mitral regurgitation is a common valvular heart disease and its prevalence is expected to increase with population ageing. In the recent years we have witnessed the evolution of several transcatheter devices to correct mitral regurgitation in patients at high-risk for surgery. Most of the evidence of the safety and efficacy of this new therapy comes from MitraClip studies. However, new alternatives have emerged with promising results. The aim of this position paper is to review the current evidence regarding patient selection, expected results and timing for transcatheter mitral valve interventions from the perspective of three European interventional societies.

Sequential transcatheter aortic valve implantation due to valve dislodgement - a Portico valve implanted over a CoreValve bioprosthesis.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an important treatment in high surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS), whose complications need to be managed promptly. The authors report the case of an 86-year-old woman presenting with severe symptomatic AS, rejected for surgery due to advanced age and comorbidities. The patient underwent a first TAVI, with implantation of a Medtronic CoreValve®, which became dislodged and migrated to the ascending aorta. Due to the previous balloon valvuloplasty, the patient's AS became moderate, and her symptoms improved. After several months, she required another intervention, performed with a St. Jude Portico® repositionable self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve. There was a good clinical response that was maintained at one-year follow-up. The use of a self-expanding transcatheter bioprosthesis with repositioning features is a solution in cases of valve dislocation to avoid suboptimal positioning of a second implant, especially when the two valves have to be positioned overlapping or partially overlapping each other.

Transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve replacement: one-year results : Alternative to surgery in high-risk patients.

Although rheumatic heart disease is becoming uncommon in industrialized countries, its global burden is still significant. We report the case of a 70-year-old male with rheumatic heart disease, who underwent 4 previous heart valve replacement surgeries, and presented to our hospital with refractory heart failure (NYHA functional class IV) due to severe stenosis of a previously implanted tricuspid bioprosthesis. The Heart Team deemed the patient as inoperable/high-risk for surgery. As an alternative, a transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve replacement was decided upon and later executed through the right femoral vein, with the insertion of an Edwards SAPIEN XT 29 no. (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) through the inferior vena cava, towards the RV, followed by direct implantation in the tricuspid bioprosthesis (valve-in-valve), under rapid pacing, without complications. A substantial clinical and echocardiographic improvement was noted after the procedure and the patient was subsequently discharged in NYHA functional class II. These favourable outcomes persisted through the 1-year follow-up period. This case report adds to the current body of evidence that tricuspid valve implantation stands as a viable and reliable alternative in the treatment of degenerated bioprosthesis in high-surgical-risk patients.

In vitro evaluation of implantation depth in valve-in-valve using different transcatheter heart valves.

AIMS: Transcatheter heart valve (THV) implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) offers an alternative therapy for high-risk patients. Elevated post-procedural gradients are a significant limitation of aortic ViV. Our objective was to assess the relationship between depth of implantation and haemodynamics. METHODS AND RESULTS: Commercially available THVs used for ViV were included in the analysis (CoreValve Evolut, SAPIEN XT and the Portico valve). THVs were implanted in small surgical valves (label size 19 mm) to simulate boundary conditions. Custom-mounted pulse duplicators registered relevant haemodynamic parameters. Twenty-eight experiments were performed (13 CVE, 5 SXT and 10 Portico). Ranges of depth of implantation were: CVE: -1.2 mm to 15.7 mm; SXT: -2.2 mm to 7.5 mm; Portico: 1.4 mm to 12.1 mm. Polynomial regression established a relationship between depth of implantation and valvular mean gradients (CVE: p<0.001; SXT: p=0.01; Portico: p=0.002), as well as with EOA (CVE: p<0.001; SXT: p=0.02; Portico valve: p=0.003). In addition, leaflet coaptation was better in the high implantation experiments for all valves. CONCLUSIONS: The current comprehensive bench testing assessment demonstrates the importance of high device position for the attainment of optimal haemodynamics during aortic ViV procedures.