Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients at Five Years.

BACKGROUND: A previous analysis in this trial showed that among patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite end point of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) than with surgical aortic-valve replacement. Longer-term outcomes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR or surgery. The first primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization related to the valve, the procedure, or heart failure. The second primary end point was a hierarchical composite that included death, disabling stroke, nondisabling stroke, and the number of rehospitalization days, analyzed with the use of a win ratio analysis. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were assessed through 5 years. RESULTS: A total of 1000 patients underwent randomization: 503 patients were assigned to undergo TAVR, and 497 to undergo surgery. A component of the first primary end point occurred in 111 of 496 patients in the TAVR group and in 117 of 454 patients in the surgery group (Kaplan-Meier estimates, 22.8% in the TAVR group and 27.2% in the surgery group; difference, -4.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.9 to 1.3; P = 0.07). The win ratio for the second primary end point was 1.17 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.51; P = 0.25). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for the components of the first primary end point were as follows: death, 10.0% in the TAVR group and 8.2% in the surgery group; stroke, 5.8% and 6.4%, respectively; and rehospitalization, 13.7% and 17.4%. The hemodynamic performance of the valve, assessed according to the mean (±SD) valve gradient, was 12.8±6.5 mm Hg in the TAVR group and 11.7±5.6 mm Hg in the surgery group. Bioprosthetic-valve failure occurred in 3.3% of the patients in the TAVR group and in 3.8% of those in the surgery group. CONCLUSIONS: Among low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR or surgery, there was no significant between-group difference in the two primary composite outcomes. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675114.).

Outcomes After Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement According to Regurgitation Etiology.

BACKGROUND: Whether transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) devices perform similarly with respect to the underlying mitral regurgitation (MR) etiology remains unknown. The aim of the present analysis was to assess outcomes of TMVR according to the MR underlying etiology among the CHoice of OptImal transCatheter trEatment for Mitral Insufficiency (CHOICE-MI) registry. METHODS: Of 746 patients, 229 patients (30.7%) underwent TMVR. The study population was subdivided according to primary, secondary, or mixed MR. Patients with mitral annular calcification were excluded. The primary study endpoint was a composite endpoint of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year. Secondary study endpoints were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality at 1 year, New York Heart Association functional class, and residual MR, both at discharge and 1 year. RESULTS: The predominant MR etiology was secondary MR (58.4%), followed by primary MR (28.7%) and mixed MR (12.9%). Technical success and procedural mortality were similar according to MR etiology. Discharge echocardiography revealed residual MR 2+ in 11.3%, 3.7%, and 5.3% of patients with primary, secondary, and mixed MR, respectively (P = .1). MR elimination was similar in all groups up to the 1-year follow-up. There was no difference in terms of primary combined outcome occurrence according to MR etiology. One-year all-cause mortality was reported in 28.8%, 24.2%, and 32.1% of patients with primary, secondary, and mixed MR, respectively (P = .07). CONCLUSIONS: In our study we did not find differences in short-term and 1-year outcomes after TMVR according to MR etiology.

Update on Transcatheter Treatment of Mitral and Tricuspid Valve Regurgitation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Mitral and tricuspid regurgitation represents a clinical challenge. They are associated with a poor prognosis, and many patients are not eligible for conventional surgery. Transcatheter therapies have been the focus of numerous studies and devices over the past decade. Here, we provide a summary of current options for transcatheter treatment of these 2 entities. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have demonstrated the benefits of edge-to-edge repair for increasing numbers of patients. Encouraging early results with transcatheter valve replacement are also becoming available. To date, transcatheter edge-to-edge repair is currently the first-line transcatheter treatment for both mitral and tricuspid regurgitation for many patients who are not candidates for surgery. A number of transcatheter replacement devices are under development and clinical investigation but, for the most part, their current use is limited to compassionate cases or clinical trials.

Economics of Minimalist Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the 3M-TAVR Economic Study.

BACKGROUND: The 3M-TAVR trial (3M-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement) demonstrated the feasibility and safety of next-day hospital discharge after transfemoral TAVR with implementation of a minimalist pathway. However, the economic impact of this approach is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated costs for patients undergoing minimalist TAVR compared with conventional TAVR. METHODS: We used propensity matching to compare resource utilization and costs (from a US health care system perspective) for patients in the 3M-TAVR trial with those for transfemoral TAVR patients enrolled in the contemporaneous S3i trial (PARTNER SAPIEN-3 Intermediate Risk). Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization for both groups. For the S3i group, all other costs through 30-day follow-up were assessed by linkage with Medicare claims; for 3M, these costs were assessed using regression models derived from S3i cost and resource utilization data. RESULTS: After 1:1 propensity matching, 351 pairs were included in our study (mean age 82, mean Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score 5.3%). There were no differences in death, stroke, or rehospitalization between the 3M-TAVR and S3i groups through 30-day follow-up. Index hospitalization costs were $10 843/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort, driven by reductions in procedure duration, anesthesia costs, and length of stay. Between discharge and 30 days, costs were similar for the 2 groups such that cumulative 30-day costs were $11 305/patient lower in the 3M-TAVR cohort compared with the S3i cohort ($49 425 versus $60 729, 95% CI for difference $9378 to $13 138; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with conventional transfemoral TAVR, use of a minimalist pathway in intermediate-risk patients was associated with similar clinical outcomes and substantial in-hospital cost savings, which were sustained through 30 days. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02287662.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients screened for transcatheter mitral valve implantation: 1-year results from the CHOICE-MI registry.

AIMS: Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) represents a novel treatment option for patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) unsuitable for established therapies. The CHOICE-MI registry aimed to investigate outcomes of patients undergoing screening for TMVI. METHODS AND RESULTS: From May 2014 to March 2021, patients with MR considered suboptimal candidates for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) and at high risk for mitral valve surgery underwent TMVI screening at 26 centres. Characteristics and outcomes were investigated for patients undergoing TMVI and for TMVI-ineligible patients referred to bailout-TEER, high-risk surgery or medical therapy (MT). The primary composite endpoint was all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization after 1 year. Among 746 patients included (78.5 years, interquartile range [IQR] 72.0-83.0, EuroSCORE II 4.7% [IQR 2.7-9.7]), 229 patients (30.7%) underwent TMVI with 10 different dedicated devices. At 1 year, residual MR ≤1+ was present in 95.2% and the primary endpoint occurred in 39.2% of patients treated with TMVI. In TMVI-ineligible patients (n = 517, 69.3%), rates of residual MR ≤1+ were 37.2%, 100.0% and 2.4% after bailout-TEER, high-risk surgery and MT, respectively. The primary endpoint at 1 year occurred in 28.8% of patients referred to bailout-TEER, in 42.9% of patients undergoing high-risk surgery and in 47.9% of patients remaining on MT. CONCLUSION: This registry included the largest number of patients treated with TMVI to date. TMVI with 10 dedicated devices resulted in predictable MR elimination and sustained functional improvement at 1 year. In TMVI-ineligible patients, bailout-TEER and high-risk surgery represented reasonable alternatives, while MT was associated with poor clinical and functional outcomes.

Minimally Invasive Versus Full Sternotomy for Isolated Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND: Surgical aortic valve replacement can be performed through a minimally invasive (MI) or full sternotomy (FS) approach. The present study compared outcomes of MI vs FS for isolated surgery among patients enrolled in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) 3 low-risk trial. METHODS: Patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at low surgical risk with anatomy suitable for transfemoral access were eligible for PARTNER 3 enrollment. The primary outcome was the composite end point of death, stroke, or rehospitalization (valve-, procedure-, or heart failure-related) at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary end point as well as patient-reported health status at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: In the PARTNER 3 study, 358 patients underwent isolated valve replacement at 68 centers through an MI (n = 107) or FS (n = 251) approach (8 patients were converted from MI to FS). Mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score were similar between groups. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary outcome was similar in the MI vs FS groups (16.9% vs 14.9%; hazard ratio, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.66-2.03; P = .618). There were no significant differences in the 1-year rates of all-cause death (2.8% vs 2.8%), all stroke (1.9% vs 3.6%), or rehospitalization (13.3% vs 10.6%, P > .05 for all). Quality of life, as assessed by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score at 30 days or 1 year, was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: For patients at low risk for isolated surgery, MI and FS approaches were associated with similar in-hospital and 1-year outcomes.

Bioprosthetic valve fracture: a practical guide.

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV TAVR) is currently indicated for the treatment of failed surgical tissue valves in patients determined to be at high surgical risk for re-operative surgical valve replacement. VIV TAVR, however, often results in suboptimal expansion of the transcatheter heart valve (THV) and can result in patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM), particularly in small surgical valves. Bioprosthetic valve fracture (BVF) and bioprosthetic valve remodeling (BVR) can facilitate VIV TAVR by optimally expanding the THV and reducing the residual transvalvular gradient by utilizing a high-pressure inflation with a non-compliant balloon to either fracture or stretch the surgical valve ring, respectively. This article, along with the supplemental video, will provide patient selection, procedural planning and technical insights for performing BVF and BVR.

5-Year Outcomes Comparing Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare 5-year cardiovascular, renal, and bioprosthetic valve durability outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). BACKGROUND: Patients with severe AS and CKD undergoing TAVR or SAVR are a challenging, understudied clinical subset. METHODS: Intermediate-risk patients with moderate to severe CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/m2) from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) 2A trial (patients randomly assigned to SAPIEN XT TAVR or SAVR) and SAPIEN 3 Intermediate Risk Registry were pooled. The composite primary outcome of death, stroke, rehospitalization, and new hemodialysis was evaluated using Cox regression analysis. Patients with and without perioperative acute kidney injury (AKI) were followed through 5 years. A core laboratory-adjudicated analysis of structural valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure was also performed. RESULTS: The study population included 1,045 TAVR patients (512 SAPIEN XT, 533 SAPIEN 3) and 479 SAVR patients. At 5 years, SAVR was better than SAPIEN XT TAVR (52.8% vs 68.0%; P = 0.04) but similar to SAPIEN 3 TAVR (52.8% vs 58.7%; P = 0.89). Perioperative AKI was more common after SAVR than TAVR (26.3% vs 10.3%; P < 0.001) and was independently associated with long-term outcomes. Compared with SAVR, bioprosthetic valve failure and stage 2 or 3 structural valve deterioration were significantly greater for SAPIEN XT TAVR (P < 0.05) but not for SAPIEN 3 TAVR. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk patients with AS and CKD, SAPIEN 3 TAVR and SAVR were associated with a similar risk for the primary endpoint at 5 years. AKI was more common after SAVR than TAVR, and SAPIEN 3 valve durability was comparable with that of surgical bioprostheses.

2-Year Outcomes for Transcatheter Repair in Patients With Mitral Regurgitation From the CLASP Study.

OBJECTIVES: This study reports 2-year outcomes from the multicenter, prospective, single-arm CLASP study with functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) and degenerative MR (DMR) analysis. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter repair is a favorable option to treat MR. Long-term prognostic impact of the PASCAL transcatheter valve repair system in patients with clinically significant MR remains to be established. METHODS: Patients had clinically significant MR ≥3+ as evaluated by the echocardiographic core laboratory and were deemed candidates for transcatheter repair by the heart team. Assessments were performed by clinical events committee to 1 year (site-reported thereafter) and core laboratory to 2 years. RESULTS: A total of 124 patients (69% FMR, 31% DMR) were enrolled with a mean age of 75 years, 56% were male, 60% were New York Heart Association functional class III to IVa, and 100% had MR ≥3+. At 2 years, Kaplan-Meier estimates showed 80% survival (72% FMR, 94% DMR) and 84% freedom from heart failure (HF) hospitalization (78% FMR, 97% DMR), with 85% reduction in annualized HF hospitalization rate (81% FMR, 98% DMR). MR ≤1+ was achieved in 78% of patients (84% FMR, 71% DMR) and MR ≤2+ was achieved in 97% (95% FMR, 100% DMR) (all p < 0.001). Left ventricular end-diastolic volume decreased by 33 ml (p < 0.001); 93% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I to II (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The PASCAL repair system demonstrated sustained favorable outcomes at 2 years in FMR and DMR patients. Results showed high survival and freedom from HF rehospitalization rates with a significantly reduced annualized HF hospitalization rate. Durable MR reduction was achieved with evidence of left ventricular reverse remodeling and significant improvement in functional status. The CLASP IID/IIF randomized pivotal trial is ongoing.

Outcomes 2 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients at Low Surgical Risk.

BACKGROUND: In low surgical risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, the PARTNER 3 (Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in Low Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis) trial demonstrated superiority of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus surgery for the primary endpoint of death, stroke, or re-hospitalization at 1 year. OBJECTIVES: This study determined both clinical and echocardiographic outcomes between 1 and 2 years in the PARTNER 3 trial. METHODS: This study randomly assigned 1,000 patients (1:1) to transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve versus surgery (mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score: 1.9%; mean age: 73 years) with clinical and echocardiography follow-up at 30 days and at 1 and 2 years. This study assessed 2-year rates of the primary endpoint and several secondary endpoints (clinical, echocardiography, and quality-of-life measures) in this as-treated analysis. RESULTS: Primary endpoint follow-up at 2 years was available in 96.5% of patients. The 2-year primary endpoint was significantly reduced after TAVR versus surgery (11.5% vs. 17.4%; hazard ratio: 0.63; 95% confidence interval: 0.45 to 0.88; p = 0.007). Differences in death and stroke favoring TAVR at 1 year were not statistically significant at 2 years (death: TAVR 2.4% vs. surgery 3.2%; p = 0.47; stroke: TAVR 2.4% vs. surgery 3.6%; p = 0.28). Valve thrombosis at 2 years was increased after TAVR (2.6%; 13 events) compared with surgery (0.7%; 3 events; p = 0.02). Disease-specific health status continued to be better after TAVR versus surgery through 2 years. Echocardiographic findings, including hemodynamic valve deterioration and bioprosthetic valve failure, were similar for TAVR and surgery at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: At 2 years, the primary endpoint remained significantly lower with TAVR versus surgery, but initial differences in death and stroke favoring TAVR were diminished and patients who underwent TAVR had increased valve thrombosis. (Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in Low Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis [PARTNER 3]; NCT02675114).

Transfemoral Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Replacement With the EVOQUE System: A Multicenter, Observational, First-in-Human Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this observational first-in-human experience was to investigate the feasibility and safety of the EVOQUE tricuspid valve replacement system and its impact on short-term clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter tricuspid intervention is a promising option for selected patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR). Although transcatheter leaflet repair is an option for some, transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) may be applicable to a broader population. METHODS: Twenty-five patients with severe TR underwent EVOQUE TTVR in a compassionate-use experience. The primary outcome was technical success, with NYHA (NYHA) functional class, TR grade, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events assessed at 30-day follow-up. RESULTS: All patients (mean age 76 ± 3 years, 88% women) were at high surgical risk (mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score 9.1 ± 2.3%), with 96% in NYHA functional class III or IV. TR etiology was predominantly functional, with mean tricuspid annular diameter of 44.8 ± 7.8 mm and mean tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion of 16 ± 2 mm. Technical success was 92%, with no intraprocedural mortality or conversion to surgery. At 30-day follow-up, mortality was 0%, 76% of patients were in NYHA functional class I or II, and TR grade was ≤2+ in 96%. Major bleeding occurred in 3 patients (12%), 2 patients (8%) required pacemaker implantation, and 1 patient (4%) required dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-human experience evaluating EVOQUE TTVR demonstrated high technical success, acceptable safety, and significant clinical improvement. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm durability and safety and the impact on long-term clinical outcomes.

Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Intervention in Patients With Previous Left Valve Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Scarce data exist on patients with previous left valve surgery (PLVS) undergoing transcatheter tricuspid valve intervention (TTVI). This study sought to investigate the procedural and early outcomes in patients with PLVS undergoing TTVI. METHODS: This was a subanalysis of the multicenter TriValve registry including 462 patients, 82 (18%) with PLVS. Data were analyzed according to the presence of PLVS in the overall cohort and in a propensity score-matched population including 51 and 115 patients with and without PLVS, respectively. RESULTS: Patients with PLVS were younger (72 ± 10 vs 78 ± 9 years; p < 0.01) and more frequently female (67.1% vs 53.2%; P = 0.02). Similar rates of procedural success (PLVS 80.5%; no-PLVS 82.1%; P = 0.73), and 30-day mortality (PLVS 2.4%, no-PLVS 3.4%; P = 0.99) were observed. After matching, there were no significant differences in both all-cause rehospitalisation (PLVS 21.1%, no-PLVS 26.5%; P = 0.60) and all-cause mortality (PLVS 9.8%, no-PLVS 6.7%; P = 0.58). At last follow-up (median 6 [interquartile range 1-12] months after the procedure), most patients (81.8%) in the PLVS group were in NYHA functional class I-II (P = 0.12 vs no-PLVS group), and TR grade was ≤ 2 in 82.6% of patients (P = 0.096 vs no-PVLS group). A poorer right ventricular function and previous heart failure hospitalization determined increased risks of procedural failure and poorer outcomes at follow-up, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with PLVS, TTVI was associated with high rates of procedural success and low early mortality. However, about one-third of patients required rehospitalisation or died at midterm follow-up. These results would support TTVI as a reasonable alternative to redo surgery in patients with PLVS and suggest the importance of earlier treatment to improve clinical outcomes.

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.

Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Durability on Life Expectancy in Low-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Recent clinical trial results showed that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is noninferior and may be superior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for mortality, stroke, and rehospitalization. However, the impact of transcatheter valve durability remains uncertain. METHODS: Discrete event simulation was used to model hypothetical scenarios of TAVR versus SAVR durability in which TAVR failure times were varied to determine the impact of TAVR valve durability on life expectancy in a cohort of low-risk patients similar to those in recent trials. Discrete event simulation modeling was used to estimate the tradeoff between a less invasive procedure with unknown valve durability (TAVR) and that of a more invasive procedure with known durability (SAVR). Standardized differences were calculated, and a difference >0.10 was considered clinically significant. In the base-case analysis, patients with structural valve deterioration requiring reoperation were assumed to undergo a valve-in-valve TAVR procedure. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to determine the impact of TAVR valve durability on life expectancy in younger age groups (40, 50, and 60 years). RESULTS: Our cohort consisted of patients with aortic stenosis at low surgical risk with a mean age of 73.4±5.9 years. In the base-case scenario, the standardized difference in life expectancy was <0.10 between TAVR and SAVR until transcatheter valve prosthesis failure time was 70% shorter than that of surgical prostheses. At a transcatheter valve failure time <30% compared with surgical valves, SAVR was the preferred option. In younger patients, life expectancy was reduced when TAVR durability was 30%, 40%, and 50% shorter than that of surgical valves in 40-, 50-, and 60-year-old patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: According to our simulation models, the durability of TAVR valves must be 70% shorter than that of surgical valves to result in reduced life expectancy in patients with demographics similar to those of recent trials. However, in younger patients, this threshold for TAVR valve durability was substantially higher. These findings suggest that durability concerns should not influence the initial treatment decision concerning TAVR versus SAVR in older low-risk patients on the basis of current evidence supporting TAVR valve durability. However, in younger low-risk patients, valve durability must be weighed against other patient factors such as life expectancy.

Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Transcatheter Prosthesis Dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) use is increasing in patients with longer life expectancy, yet robust data on the durability of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) are limited. Redo-TAVR may play a key strategy in treating patients in whom THVs fail. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to examine outcomes following redo-TAVR. METHODS: The Redo-TAVR registry collected data on consecutive patients who underwent redo-TAVR at 37 centers. Patients were classified as probable TAVR failure or probable THV failure if they presented within or beyond 1 year of their index TAVR, respectively. RESULTS: Among 63,876 TAVR procedures, 212 consecutive redo-TAVR procedures were identified (0.33%): 74 within and 138 beyond 1 year of the initial procedure. For these 2 groups, TAVR-to-redo-TAVR time was 68 (38 to 154) days and 5 (3 to 6) years. The indication for redo-TAVR was THV stenosis in 12 (16.2%) and 51 (37.0%) (p = 0.002) and regurgitation or combined stenosis-regurgitation in 62 (83.8%) and 86 (62.3%) (p = 0.028), respectively. Device success using VARC-2 criteria was achieved in 180 patients (85.1%); most failures were attributable to high residual gradients (14.1%) or regurgitation (8.9%). At 30-day and 1-year follow-up, residual gradients were 12.6 ± 7.5 mm Hg and 12.9 ± 9.0 mm Hg; valve area 1.63 ± 0.61 cm2 and 1.51 ± 0.57 cm2; and regurgitation ≤mild in 91% and 91%, respectively. Peri-procedural complication rates were low (3 stroke [1.4%], 7 valve malposition [3.3%], 2 coronary obstruction [0.9%], 20 new permanent pacemaker [9.6%], no mortality), and symptomatic improvement was substantial. Survival at 30 days was 94.6% and 98.5% (p = 0.101) and 83.6% and 88.3% (p = 0.335) at 1 year for patients presenting with early and late valve dysfunction, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Redo-TAVR is a relatively safe and effective option for selected patients with valve dysfunction after TAVR. These results are important for applicability of TAVR in patients with long life expectancy in whom THV durability may be a concern.

Single-center prospective study examining use of the Wattson temporary pacing guidewire for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety and efficacy of the Wattson temporary pacing guidewire. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) requires a guidewire for device delivery and generally requires temporary pacing wire for burst and back-up pacing. The Wattson wire provides concomitant support and bipolar pacing without the need to place a temporary venous pacemaker (TVP). METHODS: This was a single-center nonrandomized prospective clinical trial enrolling 20 patients. The primary endpoint was defined as successful rapid pacing and transcatheter heart valve (THV) delivery with no loss of capture. Safety, qualitative and quantitative secondary outcomes were also analyzed. RESULTS: Mean age was 77.4 ± 9.0 years. Mean Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score was 3.0 ± 1.5%. All patients received a balloon-expandable valve via a transfemoral approach. All patients met the primary end-point. One patient (5%) had balloon predilatation and six patients (30%) had postdilatation, all using the wire. Mean pacing threshold was 2.2 ± 1.2 mA that was evaluated prior to placing an insulating catheter over the wire. One patient required TVP placement and subsequent permanent pacemaker implantation due to complete heart block post THV deployment. There were no incidences of cardiac perforation or tamponade. One patient required valve reintervention, which was not related to the device. CONCLUSIONS: The Wattson wire offered predictable guidewire support with concomitant reliable bipolar pacing at low thresholds to allow safe THV delivery in this patient cohort. It has the potential to make TAVR a safer and more efficient procedure.