Clinical Trial Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: Roadmap of the Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network.

BACKGROUND: There is a recognized lack of diversity among patients enrolled in cardiovascular interventional and surgical trials. Diverse patient representation in clinical trials is necessary to enhance generalizability of findings, which may lead to better outcomes across broader populations. The Cardiothoracic Surgical Trials Network (CTSN) recently developed a plan of action to increase diversity among participating investigators and trial participants and is the focus of this review. METHODS: A review of literature and enrollment data from CTSN trials was conducted. RESULTS: CTSN completed more than a dozen major clinical trials (2008-2022), enrolling >4000 patients, of whom 30% were women, 11% were non-White, and 5.6% were Hispanic. CTSN also completed trials of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019, wherein enrollment was more diverse, with 42% women, and 58% were Asian, Black, Hispanic, or from another underrepresented racial group. The discrepancy in diversity of enrollment between cardiac surgery trials and coronavirus disease trials highlights the need for a more comprehensive understanding of (1) the prevalence of underlying disease requiring cardiac interventions across broad populations, (2) differences in access to care and referral for cardiac surgery, and (3) barriers to enrollment in cardiac surgery trials. CONCLUSIONS: Committed to diversity, CTSN's multifaceted action plan includes developing site-specific enrollment targets, collecting social determinants of health data, understanding reasons for nonparticipation, recruiting sites that serve diverse populations, emphasizing greater diversity among clinical trial teams, and implicit bias training. The CTSN will prospectively assess how these interventions influence enrollment as we work to ensure trial participants are more representative of the communities we serve.

Benchmarking Outcomes of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valves.

BACKGROUND: The relative roles for transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for bicuspid aortic valve (AV) stenosis are debated. This study analyzes the 5-year longitudinal outcomes of isolated SAVR in bicuspid vs tricuspid AV patients, particularly in low-risk patients. METHODS: All patients undergoing isolated index SAVR at 1146 United States hospitals in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac database between July 1, 2011, and December 31, 2018, with linkage to Medicare claims, were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 65,687 patients were analyzed, including of 9131 bicuspid patients (13.9%). Compared with tricuspid patients, bicuspid patients were significantly younger (median 70 vs 74 years, P < .001) with lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality scores (mean 1.6% vs 2.3%, P < .001) and lower risk profile. Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality and major morbidity were similar, but risk-adjusted 5-year mortality was significantly lower in the bicuspid patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.66-0.77), specifically in low-risk patients (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.64-0.76). Additionally, the bicuspid cohort had a lower 5-year readmission risk of heart failure, stroke, bleeding, or other cardiovascular causes (all P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In this nationally representative study, 30-day mortality was similar, but risk-adjusted 5-year mortality was significantly lower in bicuspid patients undergoing isolated SAVR compared with tricuspid patients, specifically low-risk and normal left ventricular ejection fraction patients. This analysis provides a much-needed 5-year longitudinal national-level benchmark to better inform the discussion of transcatheter vs SAVR in bicuspid patients.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Transcatheter Mitral Therapies: Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVTR.

Mitral regurgitation is the most common valvular disease and is estimated to affect over 5 million Americans. Real-world data collection contributes to safety and effectiveness evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, and clinical best practice research. We aimed to establish a minimum core data set in mitral interventions to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection for all of these purposes. Two expert task forces separately evaluated and reconciled a list of candidate elements derived from: 1) 2 ongoing transcatheter mitral trials; and 2) a systemic literature review of high-impact mitral trials and U.S multicenter, multidevice registries. From 703 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 127 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core data set being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (41.2%), duplicative information (25.0%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (19.6%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established and implemented into the national Society of Thoracic Surgery/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry 127 interoperable, reusable core data elements to support more efficient, consistent, and informative transcatheter mitral device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice development, and hospital quality assessments.

Economic Outcomes of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis and Low Surgical Risk: Results from the PARTNER 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at low surgical risk, transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve has been shown to reduce the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 2-year follow-up compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Whether TAVR is cost-effective compared with SAVR for low-risk patients remains uncertain. METHODS: Between 2016 and 2017, 1000 low-risk patients with aortic stenosis were randomly assigned to TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve or SAVR in the PARTNER 3 trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves). Of these patients, 929 underwent valve replacement, were enrolled in the United States, and were included in the economic substudy. Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource use. Other costs were determined by linkage with Medicare claims or by regression models when linkage was not feasible. Health utilities were estimated using the EuroQOL 5-item questionnaire. With the use of a Markov model informed by in-trial data, lifetime cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the US health care system was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Although procedural costs were nearly $19 000 higher with TAVR, total index hospitalization costs were only $591 more with TAVR compared with SAVR. Follow-up costs were lower with TAVR such that TAVR led to 2-year cost savings of $2030/patient compared with SAVR (95% CI, -$6222 to $1816) and a gain of 0.05 quality-adjusted life-years (95% CI, -0.003 to 0.102). In our base-case analysis, TAVR was projected to be an economically dominant strategy with a 95% probability that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for TAVR would be <$50 000/quality-adjusted life-year gained (consistent with high economic value from a US health care perspective). These findings were sensitive to differences in long-term survival, however, such that a modest long-term survival advantage with SAVR would render SAVR cost-effective (although not cost saving) compared with TAVR. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk similar to those enrolled in the PARTNER 3 trial, transfemoral TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve is cost saving compared with SAVR at 2 years and is projected to be economically attractive in the long run as long as there are no substantial differences in late death between the 2 strategies. Long-term follow-up will be critical to ultimately determine the preferred treatment strategy for low-risk patients from both a clinical and economic perspective.

Modeling the Association of Volume vs Composite Outcome Thresholds With Outcomes and Access to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the US.

Importance: Professional societies and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services suggest volume thresholds to ensure quality in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Objective: To model the association of volume thresholds vs spoke-and-hub implementation of outcome thresholds with TAVI outcomes and geographic access. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients who enrolled in the US Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy registry. Site volume and outcomes were determined from a baseline cohort of adults undergoing TAVI between July 1, 2017, and June 30, 2020. Exposures: Within each hospital referral region, TAVI sites were categorized by volume (<50 or ≥50 TAVIs per year) and separately by risk-adjusted outcome on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy 30-day TAVI composite during the baseline period (July 2017 to June 2020). Outcomes of patients undergoing TAVIs from July 1, 2020, to March 31, 2022, were then modeled as though the patients had been treated at (1) the nearest higher volume (≥50 TAVIs per year) or (2) the best outcome site within the hospital referral region. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the absolute difference in events between the adjusted observed and modeled 30-day composite of death, stroke, major bleeding, stage III acute kidney injury, and paravalvular leak. Data are presented as the number of events reduced under the above scenarios with 95% bayesian credible intervals (CrIs) and median (IQR) driving distance. Results: The overall cohort included 166 248 patients with a mean (SD) age of 79.5 (8.6) years; 74 699 (47.3%) were female and 6657 (4.2%) were Black; 158 025 (95%) were treated in higher-volume sites (≥50 TAVIs) and 75 088 (45%) were treated in best-outcome sites. Modeling a volume threshold, there was no significant reduction in estimated adverse events (-34; 95% CrI, -75 to 8), while the median (IQR) driving time from the existing site to the alternate site was 22 (15-66) minutes. Transitioning care to the best outcome site in a hospital referral region resulted in an estimated 1261 fewer adverse outcomes (95% CrI, 1013-1500), while the median (IQR) driving time from the original site to the best site was 23 (15-41) minutes. Directionally similar findings were observed for Black individuals, Hispanic individuals, and individuals from rural areas. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, compared with the current system of care, a modeled outcome-based spoke-and-hub paradigm of TAVI care improved national outcomes to a greater extent than a simulated volume threshold, at the cost of increased driving time. To improve quality while maintaining geographic access, efforts should focus on reducing site variation in outcomes.

Impact of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Availability on Volume and Outcomes of Surgical Repair.

BACKGROUND: The impact of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) on national surgical mitral valve repair (MVr) volume and outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the impact of TEER availability on MVr volumes and outcomes for degenerative mitral regurgitation. METHODS: MVr volume, 30-day and 5-year outcomes, including mortality, heart failure rehospitalization and mitral valve reintervention, were obtained from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database linked with Medicare administrative claims and were compared within TEER centers before and after the first institutional TEER procedure. A difference-in-difference approach comparing parallel trends in coronary artery bypass grafting outcomes was used to account for temporal improvements in perioperative care. RESULTS: From July 2011 through December 2018, 13,959 patients underwent MVr at 278 institutions, which became TEER-capable during the study period. There was no significant change in median annualized institutional MVr volume before (32 [IQR: 17-54]) vs after (29 [IQR: 16-54]) the first TEER (P = 0.06). However, higher-risk (Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality ≥2%) MVr procedures declined over the study period (P < 0.001 for trend). The introduction of TEER was associated with reduced risk-adjusted odds of mortality after MVr at 30 days (adjusted OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.54-0.99) and over 5 years (adjusted HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.66-0.86). These improvements in 30-day and 5-year mortality were significantly greater than equivalent trends in coronary artery bypass grafting. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of TEER has not significantly changed overall MVr case volumes for degenerative mitral regurgitation but is associated with a decrease in higher-risk surgical operations and improved 30-day and 5-year outcomes within institutions adopting the technology.

Long-term outcomes of aortic root operations in the United States among Medicare beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: The best method of aortic root repair in older patients remains unknown given a lack of comparative effectiveness of long-term outcomes data. The objective of this study was to compare long-term outcomes of different surgical approaches for aortic root repair in Medicare patients using The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database-Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-linked data. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed by querying the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database for patients aged 65 years or more who underwent elective aortic root repair with or without aortic valve replacement. Primary long-term end points were mortality, any stroke, and aortic valve reintervention. Short-term outcomes and long-term survival were compared among each root repair strategy. Additional risk factors for mortality after aortic root repair were assessed with a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: A total of 4173 patients aged 65 years or more underwent elective aortic root repair. Patients were stratified by operative strategy: mechanical Bentall, stented bioprosthetic Bentall, stentless bioprosthetic Bentall, or valve-sparing root replacement. Mean follow-up was 5.0 (±4.6) years. Relative to mechanical Bentall, stented bioprosthetic Bentall (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.80; confidence interval, 0.66-0.97) and stentless bioprosthetic Bentall (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70; confidence interval, 0.59-0.84) were associated with better long-term survival. In addition, stentless bioprosthetic Bentall (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.64; confidence interval, 0.47-0.80) and valve-sparing root replacement (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.51; confidence interval, 0.29-0.90) were associated with lower long-term risk of stroke. Aortic valve reintervention risk was 2-fold higher after valve-sparing root replacement compared with other operative strategies. CONCLUSIONS: In the Medicare population, there was poorer late survival and greater late stroke risk for patients undergoing mechanical Bentall and a higher rate of reintervention for valve-sparing root replacement. Bioprosthetic Bentall may be the procedure of choice in older patients undergoing aortic root repair, particularly in the era of transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

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.

Association Between Peripheral Versus Central Access for Alternative Access Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Mortality and Stroke: A Report From the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry.

BACKGROUND: In some patients, the alternative access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is utilized because the conventional transfemoral approach is not felt to be either feasible or optimal. However, accurate prognostication of patient risks is not well established. This study examines the associations between peripheral (transsubclavian/transaxillary, and transcarotid) versus central access (transapical and transaortic) in alternative access TAVR and 30-day and 1-year end points of mortality and stroke for all valve platforms. METHODS: Using data from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry with linkage to Medicare claims, patients who underwent alternative access TAVR from June 1, 2015 to June 30, 2018 were identified. Adjusted and unadjusted Cox proportional hazards modeling were performed to determine the association between alternate access TAVR site and 30-day and 1-year end points of mortality and stroke. RESULTS: Of 7187 alternative access TAVR patients, 3725 (52%) had peripheral access and 3462 (48%) had central access. All-cause mortality was significantly lower in peripheral access versus central access group at in-hospital and 1 year (2.9% versus 6.3% and 20.3% versus 26.6%, respectively), but stroke rates were higher (5.0% versus 2.8% and 7.3% versus 5.5%, respectively; all P<0.001). These results persisted after 1-year adjustment (death adjusted hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.62-0.85] and stroke adjusted hazard ratio, 2.92 [95% CI, 2.21-3.85]). When broken down by individual subtypes, compared with transaxillary/subclavian access patients, transapical, and transaortic access patients had higher all-cause mortality but less stroke (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world, contemporary, nationally representative benchmarking study of alternate access TAVR sites, peripheral access was associated with favorable mortality and morbidity outcomes compared with central access, at the expense of higher stroke. These findings may allow for accurate prognostication of risk for patient counseling and decision-making for the heart team with regard to alternative access TAVR.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.

Current Penetration, Completeness, and Representativeness of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database.

BACKGROUND: The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (ACSD) is the largest cardiac surgical database in the world. Linked data from STS ACSD and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) database were used to determine contemporary completeness, penetration, and representativeness of STS ACSD. METHODS: Variables common to both STS and CMS databases were used to link STS procedures to CMS data for all CMS coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG) discharges between 2000 and 2018, inclusive. For each CMS CABG hospitalization, it was determined whether a matching STS record existed. RESULTS: Center-level penetration (number of CMS sites with at least 1 matched STS participant divided by total number of CMS CABG sites) increased from 45% in 2000 to 95% in 2018. In 2018, 949 of 1004 CMS CABG sites (95%) were linked to an STS site. Patient-level penetration (number of CMS CABG hospitalizations at STS sites divided by total number of CMS CABG hospitalizations) increased from 51% in 2000 to 97% in 2018. In 2018, 68,584 of 70,818 CMS CABG hospitalizations (97%) occurred at an STS site. Completeness of case inclusion at STS sites (number of CMS CABG cases at STS sites linked to STS records divided by total number of CMS CABG cases at STS sites) increased from 88% in 2000 to 98% in 2018. In 2018, 66,673 of 68,108 CMS CABG hospitalizations at STS sites (98%) were linked to an STS record. CONCLUSIONS: Linkage of the STS and CMS databases demonstrates high and increasing penetration and completeness of STS ACSD. STS ACSD now includes 97% of CABG in the United States.

Temporal Changes in Mortality After Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: Retrospective Analysis of US Medicare Patients (2012-2019).

Background The treatment of aortic stenosis is evolving rapidly. Pace of change in the care of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) differs. We sought to determine differences in temporal changes in 30-day mortality, 30-day readmission, and length of stay after TAVR and SAVR. Methods and Results We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients treated in the United States between 2012 and 2019 using data from the Medicare Data Set Analytic File 100% Fee for Service database. We included consecutive patients enrolled in Medicare Parts A and B and aged ≥65 years who had SAVR or transfemoral TAVR. We defined 3 study cohorts, including all SAVR, isolated SAVR (without concomitant procedures), and elective isolated SAVR and TAVR. The primary end point was 30-day mortality; secondary end points were 30-day readmission and length of stay. Statistical models controlled for patient demographics, frailty measured by the Hospital Frailty Risk Score, and comorbidities measured by the Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (ECI). Cox proportional hazard models were developed with TAVR versus SAVR as the main covariates with a 2-way interaction term with index year. We repeated these analyses restricted to full aortic valve replacement hospitals offering both SAVR and TAVR. The main study cohort included 245 269 patients with SAVR and 188 580 patients with TAVR, with mean±SD ages 74.3±6.0 years and 80.7±6.9 years, respectively, and 36.5% and 46.2% female patients, respectively. Patients with TAVR had higher ECI scores (6.4±3.6 versus 4.4±3) and were more frail (55.4% versus 33.5%). Total aortic valve replacement volumes increased 61% during the 7-year span; TAVR volumes surpassed SAVR in 2017. The magnitude of mortality benefit associated with TAVR increased until 2016 in the main cohort (2012: hazard ratio [HR], 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67-0.86]; 2016: HR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.36-0.43]); although TAVR continued to have lower mortality rates from 2017 to 2019, the magnitude of benefit over SAVR was attenuated. A similar pattern was seen with readmission, with a lower risk of readmission from 2012 to 2016 for patients with TAVR (2012: HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.63-0.73]; 2016: HR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.41-0.45]) followed by a lesser difference from 2017 to 2019. Year over year, TAVR was associated with increasingly shorter lengths of stay compared with SAVR (2012: HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.84-1.98]; 2019: HR, 5.34 [95% CI, 5.22-5.45]). These results were consistent in full aortic valve replacement hospitals. Conclusions The rate of improvement in TAVR outpaced SAVR until 2016, with the recent presence of U-shaped phenomena suggesting a narrowing gap between outcomes. Future longitudinal research is needed to determine the long-term implications of lowering risk profiles across treatment options to guide case selection and clinical care.

Nationally Representative Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes: Report From the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine real-world experience with repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in a population-based national database. BACKGROUND: Repeat TAVR is a growing option in patients requiring reintervention for TAVR. However, large-scale studies with longitudinal follow-up are limited. METHODS: All Medicare beneficiaries who underwent TAVR from 2012 to 2017 were included. Outcomes included 30-day and longitudinal mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, stroke, pacemaker insertion, major bleeding, acute kidney injury, or cardiac arrest. Outcomes of repeat TAVR were compared with surgical explantation after TAVR (TAVR explantation) in a matched analysis. RESULTS: Of 133,250 patients who underwent TAVR, 617 (0.46%) underwent subsequent repeat TAVR at a median interval of 154 days (interquartile range: 58-537 days). Mortality at 30 days and 1 year was 6.0% and 22.0%, respectively. Rates of 30-day stroke and pacemaker insertion were 1.8% and 4.2%. Mortality at 30 days was lower in those who underwent their first TAVR during the later era (2015-2017) compared with earlier years (2012-2014) (4.6% vs 8.7%; P = 0.049). Repeat TAVR was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared with a matched group undergoing TAVR explantation (6.2% vs 12.3%; P = 0.05), although 1-year mortality was similar (21.0% vs 20.8%; P = 1.000). The incidence of 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events was higher with TAVR explantation compared with repeat TAVR (risk ratio: 2.92; 95% CI: 1.88-4.99; P ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat TAVR was performed with acceptable 30-day mortality in this high-risk population. Short-term outcomes were superior to surgical explantation, but 1-year outcomes were similar. Repeat TAVR will likely be an important option for aortic valve reintervention after TAVR.

Utilization, Costs, and Outcomes of Conscious Sedation Versus General Anesthesia for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

[Figure: see text].

Variation in Antithrombotic Therapy and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Preexisting Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry.

BACKGROUND: Optimal antithrombotic management of patients with preexisting atrial fibrillation undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement is challenging given the need to balance the risk of bleeding and thromboembolism. We aimed to examine variation in care and association of antithrombotic therapies with 1-year outcomes of stroke, bleeding, and mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement with concomitant atrial fibrillation in the United States. METHODS: Patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with preexisting atrial fibrillation from November 2011 through September 2015 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy registry linked to the Medicare database were examined according to receipt of oral anticoagulants (OACs) or antiplatelet therapies (APTs) or a combination of these (OAC+APT) at discharge. To assess the associations of antithrombotic therapies with 1-year outcomes of stroke, bleeding, and mortality, we utilized inverse probability weighting for antithrombotic therapies and multivariable regression modeling to adjust for patient- and hospital-level variables. RESULTS: In the 11 382 patients included in our study, 5833 (51.2%) were discharged on OAC+APT, 4786 (42.0%) on APT alone, and 763 (6.7%) on OAC alone. There was significant variability in discharge medication patterns, including 42% of patients discharged without OAC therapy. In adjusted analyses, the risk for all-cause mortality and stroke was not significantly different when comparing the 3 different antithrombotic strategies. Risk of bleeding was higher with OAC+APT compared with APT alone (hazard ratio, 1.16 [95% CI, 1.05­1.27]) and similar compared with OAC alone (hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 0.93­1.47]). CONCLUSIONS: There was significant variability in discharge medication patterns across US sites in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, including significant underuse of OAC in this high-risk cohort. The use of OAC+APT (versus OAC alone or APT alone) was not associated with a lower risk of stroke or mortality but was associated with increased risk of bleeding complications at 1 year compared with APT alone.

Predicting the EQ-5D utilities from the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire in patients with heart failure.

INTRODUCTION: Evaluation of health status benefits, cost-effectiveness, and value of new heart failure therapies is critical for supporting their use. The Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) measures patients' heart failure-specific health status but does not provide utilities needed for cost-effectiveness analyses. We mapped the KCCQ scores to EQ-5D scores so that estimates of societal-based utilities can be generated to support economic analyses. METHODS: Using data from two US cohort studies, we developed models for predicting EQ-5D utilities (3L and 5L versions) from the KCCQ (23- and 12-item versions). In addition to predicting scores directly, we considered predicting the five EQ-5D health state items and deriving utilities from the predicted responses, allowing different countries' health state valuations to be used. Model validation was performed internally via bootstrap and externally using data from two clinical trials. Model performance was assessed using R2, mean prediction error, mean absolute prediction error, and calibration of observed vs. predicted values. RESULTS: The EQ-5D-3L models were developed from 1000 health status assessments in 547 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF), while the EQ-5D-5L model was developed from 3925 patients with HFrEF. For both versions, models predicting individual EQ-5D items performed as well as those predicting utilities directly. The selected models for the 3L had internally validated R2 of 48.4-50.5% and 33.7-45.6% on external validation. The 5L version had validated R2 of 57.7%. CONCLUSION: Mappings from the KCCQ to the EQ-5D can yield the estimates of societal-based utilities to support cost-effectiveness analyses when EQ-5D data are not available.

Priorities in coronary artery bypass grafting: Is midterm survival more dependent on completeness of revascularization or multiple arterial grafts?

OBJECTIVE: Both completeness of revascularization and multiple arterial grafts (multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting) have been associated with increased midterm survival after coronary artery bypass grafting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relative impact of completeness of revascularization and multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting on midterm survival after coronary artery bypass grafting. METHODS: A retrospective review of 17,411 isolated, primary coronary artery bypass grafting operations from January 2002 to June 2016 at a US academic institution was performed. Patients were divided into groups based on complete or incomplete revascularization and number of arterial grafts. Inverse probability of treatment weighting based on the generalized propensity score was performed to minimize imbalance in preoperative characteristics. Between-group differences in outcomes were assessed using multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses, incorporating the propensity score weights. RESULTS: Patients undergoing multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting in this study were younger, had fewer comorbid conditions, and had lower incidence of left main stenosis compared with patients undergoing single-arterial coronary artery bypass grafting. Short-term perioperative outcomes were similar between groups once propensity score weighting was used to minimize between-group differences in preoperative variables. Median follow-up in the entire population was 630 days, but was 1366 days in the cohort with data available from the Social Security Death Index. Multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting was protective for midterm survival compared with single arterial coronary artery bypass grafting, regardless of complete or incomplete revascularization or strategy (multiple arterial complete revascularization vs single-arterial complete revascularization: hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.97; P = .02; multiple arterial incomplete revascularization vs single-arterial incomplete revascularization: hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.90; P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: After controlling for preoperative comorbidities, multiple arterial coronary artery bypass grafting provides a modest midterm survival benefit over single-arterial coronary artery bypass grafting irrespective of completeness of revascularization, suggesting that when forced to choose, surgeons may elect to pursue multiple arterial conduits.

Incidence, Characteristics, Predictors, and Outcomes of Surgical Explantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is a paucity of information on surgical explantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the incidence, patient characteristics, predictors, and outcomes of surgical explantation after TAVR using a population-based, nationally representative database. METHODS: We analyzed the Medicare Provider profile to include all U.S. patients undergoing TAVR from 2012 to 2017. Time to surgical explant was calculated from the index TAVR discharge to surgical explantation. Post-operative survival was assessed using time-dependent Cox proportional hazard regression analysis and landmark analysis. RESULTS: The incidence of surgical explantation was 0.2% (227 of 132,633 patients), and was 0.28% and 0.14% in the early and newer TAVR era, respectively. The median time to surgical explant was 212 days, whereas 8.8% and 70.9% underwent surgical explantation within 30 days and 1 year, respectively. The primary indication for reintervention was bioprosthetic failure (79.3%). Compared with the no-explant cohort, the explant cohort was significantly younger (mean age 73.7 years vs. 81.7 years), with a lower prevalence of heart failure (55.9% vs. 65.8%) but more likely a lower-risk profile cohort (15% vs. 2.4%; all p < 0.05). The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 13.2% and 22.9%, respectively, and did not vary by either time to surgical explant or TAVR era, or between patients with versus without endocarditis (all p > 0.05). The time-dependent Cox regression analysis demonstrated a higher mortality in those with surgical explantation (hazard ratio: 4.03 vs. no-explant group; 95% confidence interval: 1.81 to 8.98). Indication, time-to-surgical-explant, and year of surgical explantation were not associated with worse post-explantation survival (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides updated evidence on the incidence, timing, and outcomes of surgical explantation of a TAVR prosthesis. Although the overall incidence was low, short-term mortality was high. These findings stress the importance of future mechanistic studies on TAVR explantation and may have implications on lifetime management of aortic stenosis, particularly in younger patients.