Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable TAVR in Patients with a Small Aortic Annulus.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus are at risk for impaired valvular hemodynamic performance and associated adverse cardiovascular clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and an aortic-valve annulus area of 430 mm2 or less in a 1:1 ratio to undergo TAVR with either a self-expanding supraannular valve or a balloon-expandable valve. The coprimary end points, each assessed through 12 months, were a composite of death, disabling stroke, or rehospitalization for heart failure (tested for noninferiority) and a composite end point measuring bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction (tested for superiority). RESULTS: A total of 716 patients were treated at 83 sites in 13 countries (mean age, 80 years; 87% women; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 3.3%). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients who died, had a disabling stroke, or were rehospitalized for heart failure through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 10.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -1.2 percentage points; 90% confidence interval [CI], -4.9 to 2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 41.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -32.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -38.7 to -25.6; P<0.001 for superiority). The aortic-valve mean gradient at 12 months was 7.7 mm Hg with the self-expanding valve and 15.7 mm Hg with the balloon-expandable valve, and the corresponding values for additional secondary end points through 12 months were as follows: mean effective orifice area, 1.99 cm2 and 1.50 cm2; percentage of patients with hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, 3.5% and 32.8%; and percentage of women with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction, 10.2% and 43.3% (all P<0.001). Moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch at 30 days was found in 11.2% of the patients in the self-expanding valve group and 35.3% of those in the balloon-expandable valve group (P<0.001). Major safety end points appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus who underwent TAVR, a self-expanding supraannular valve was noninferior to a balloon-expandable valve with respect to clinical outcomes and was superior with respect to bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months. (Funded by Medtronic; SMART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04722250.).

Transcatheter or Surgical Treatment of Aortic-Valve Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Among low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who are eligible for both transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic-valve replacement (SAVR), data are lacking on the appropriate treatment strategy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: In this randomized noninferiority trial conducted at 38 sites in Germany, we assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low or intermediate surgical risk to undergo either TAVI or SAVR. Percutaneous- and surgical-valve prostheses were selected according to operator discretion. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or fatal or nonfatal stroke at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 1414 patients underwent randomization (701 to the TAVI group and 713 to the SAVR group). The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 74±4 years; 57% were men, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.8% (low surgical risk). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary outcome at 1 year was 5.4% in the TAVI group and 10.0% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio for death or stroke, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.79; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The incidence of death from any cause was 2.6% in the TAVI group and 6.2% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.73); the incidence of stroke was 2.9% and 4.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.06). Procedural complications occurred in 1.5% and 1.0% of patients in the TAVI and SAVR groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis at low or intermediate surgical risk, TAVI was noninferior to SAVR with respect to death from any cause or stroke at 1 year. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and the German Heart Foundation; DEDICATE-DZHK6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03112980.).

Preprocedural assessment of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Rationale and design of the EASE-IT CT registry.

BACKGROUND: Invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the standard for pre-procedural assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, it requires hospitalization and can be associated with complications. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) may be a viable alternative to rule out prognostically relevant CAD. METHODS: The EASE-IT CT Registry is an investigator-initiated, prospective, observational, multicentre pilot registry involving patients aged ≥75 years with severe aortic stenosis (AS) intended to implant a transcatheter heart valve (THV) of the SAPIEN family. A total of 150 patients will be recruited from four sites in Germany and Austria. The registry will consist of two prospective cohorts: the investigational CTA-only cohort and the CTA + ICA control cohort. The CTA-only cohort will enrol 100 patients in whom significant (≥50%) left main (LM) and/or proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) stenosis are ruled out on CTA. The CTA + ICA control cohort will enrol 50 patients who have undergone both CTA and ICA before TAVI and in whom ≥50% LM/proximal LAD stenosis has been ruled out by CTA. Three composite endpoints will be assessed at 3 months post-TAVI: CAD-specific endpoints, VARC-3-defined device success and early safety. CONCLUSION: The EASE-IT CT Registry evaluates whether TAVI can be carried out safely without performing ICA if prognostically relevant CAD of the LM/proximal LAD is ruled out with CTA. If so, the omission of ICA would help streamline the pre-procedural workup of TAVI patients.

Early and Late Results after Surgical Mitral Valve Repair: A High-Volume Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Surgical mitral valve repair is the gold standard treatment of severe primary mitral regurgitation (MR). In the light of rapidly evolving percutaneous technologies, current surgical outcome data are essential to support heart-team-based decision-making. METHODS: This retrospective, high-volume, single-center study analyzed in 1779 patients with primary MR early morbidity and mortality, postoperative valve function, and long-term survival after mitral valve (MV) repair. Surgeries were performed between 2009 and 2022. Surgical approaches included full sternotomy (FS) and right-sided minithoracotomy (minimally invasive cardiac [MIC] surgery). RESULTS: Of the surgeries (mean age: 59.9 [standard deviation:11.4] years; 71.5% males), 85.6% (n = 1,527) were minithoracotomies. Concomitant procedures were performed in 849 patients (47.7%), including tricuspid valve and/or atrial septal defect repair, cryoablation, and atrial appendage closure. The majority of patients did not need erythrocyte concentrates. Mediastinitis and rethoracotomy for bleeding rates were 0.1 and 4.3%, respectively. Reoperation before discharge for failed repair was necessary in 12 patients (0.7%). Freedom from more than moderate MR was > 99%. Thirty-day mortality was 0.2% and did not differ significantly between groups (p = 0.37). Median follow-up was 48.2 months with a completeness of 95.9%. Long-term survival was similar between groups (p = 0.21). In the FS and MIC groups, 1-, 5-, and 10-year survival rates were 98.8 and 98.8%, 92.9 and 94.4%, and 87.4 and 83.1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: MV surgery, both minimally invasive and via sternotomy, is associated with high repair rates, excellent perioperative outcomes, and long-term survival. Data underscore the effectiveness of surgical repair in managing MR, even in the era of advancing interventional techniques.

Patterns of Aortic Valve Replacement in Europe: Adoption by Age.

INTRODUCTION: The management of patients with severe aortic stenosis may differ according to patients' age. The aim of this analysis was to describe patterns of aortic valve replacement (AVR) use in European countries stratified by age. METHODS: Procedure volume data for AVR, including surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), for the years 2015-2020 were obtained from national databases for twelve European countries (Austria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland). Procedure volumes were reported by patient age (<50 years, 5-year age groups between 50 and 85 years, and ≥85 years). Patients per million (PPM) population undergoing AVR each year were calculated using population estimates from Eurostat. RESULTS: AVR PPM varied widely between countries, from 508 PPM in Germany to 174 PPM in Poland in 2020. TAVI rates ranged from 61% in Switzerland and Finland to 25% in Poland. AVR PPM increased with age to a peak at 80-84 years, after which it decreased again. AVR procedures increased from 2015 to 2019 at an average annual rate of 3.9%. AVR increased more substantially in people aged ≥80 years than in younger age groups; these older age groups accounted for 30% of all AVR procedures in 2015 and 35% in 2019. TAVI accounted for an increasing proportion of all AVR procedures as patient age increased; an overall average of 96% of males and 98% of females aged ≥85 years received TAVI as the treatment modality, although adoption of TAVI differed between countries. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in the rates of AVR use and the adoption of TAVI versus sAVR between European countries. The use of TAVI has increased in recent years, particularly for older patients.

High Efficacy and Low Early Mortality in High-Volume Center Tricuspid Valve Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with early mortality rates of up to 10%. With rapidly emerging interventional catheter-based options, the question arises whether current technical and perioperative protocols in cardiac surgery translate into lower than previously expected mortality rates, especially when looking at data from high-volume centers. METHODS: We performed a retrospective single-center analysis in 369 patients undergoing isolated tricuspid valve repair (n = 256) or replacement (n = 113) between 2009 and 2021. Surgical approaches included full sternotomy, as well as right-sided minithoracotomy. According to a recently introduced clinical risk score, patients were divided into scoring groups, and observed (O) versus expected (E) early mortality were compared. Pre- and postoperative tricuspid valve function was also analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 30-day mortality was 4.1%, ranging from 0% (scoring group 0-1 points) to 8.7% (scoring group ≥ 10 points), which was substantially lower than the expected early mortality (2% in the lowest to 34% in the highest scoring group). Preoperative tricuspid regurgitation was severe in 71.3% (n = 263), moderate to severe in 14.9% (n = 55), and mild or less in 6.5% (n = 24). The corresponding postoperative values were 0% (n = 0), 1.4% (n = 5), and 81.6% (n = 301). CONCLUSION: Our high-volume center data indicate substantially lower than predicted 30-day mortality in different cardiac surgical risk scoring groups. The majority of patients had zero to minimal residual tricuspid valve insufficiency postoperatively. Randomized controlled trials are needed to compare tricuspid valve functional results and long-term outcomes of surgical versus interventional procedures in patients undergoing isolated tricuspid valve procedures.

Rationale and design of the SMall Annuli Randomized To Evolut or SAPIEN Trial (SMART Trial).

BACKGROUND: The SMall Annuli Randomized To Evolut or SAPIEN (SMART) Trial was designed to compare the performance of the two most widely available commercial transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in patients with symptomatic severe native aortic stenosis with a small aortic valve annulus undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Patients with small aortic valve annuli are typically female and are often underrepresented in clinical trials. METHODS: The SMART Trial is an international, prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled, post-market trial. The trial will be conducted in approximately 700 subjects at approximately 90 sites globally. Inclusion criteria include severe aortic stenosis, aortic valve annulus area of ≤430 mm2 based on multi-detector computed tomography, and appropriate anatomy for both the Medtronic Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding and Edwards SAPIEN 3/3 Ultra balloon-expandable devices. The primary clinical outcome composite endpoint is defined as mortality, disabling stroke or heart failure rehospitalization at 12 months. The co-primary valve function composite endpoint is defined as bioprosthetic valve dysfunction at 12 months which includes hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, defined as a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg, non-structural valve dysfunction, defined as severe prothesis-patient mismatch or ≥moderate aortic regurgitation, thrombosis, endocarditis, and aortic valve re-intervention. Powered secondary endpoints will be assessed hierarchically. CONCLUSIONS: The SMART trial will be the largest head-to-head comparative trial of transfemoral TAVR using the two most widely available contemporary TAVR devices in the setting of small aortic annuli and the largest trial to enroll primarily women. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT04722250.

Stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A severe complication with low predictability.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to describe stroke and transient ischemic attacks (TIAs) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and to identify associated risk factors. BACKGROUND: Stroke/TIA after TAVR is a major complication. METHODS: A total of 1919 concomitant patients underwent TAVR in a single center from 2007 to 2017. Pre-, intra-, and postprocedural data were collected prospectively in a database and analyzed retrospectively. Stroke and TIA were documented according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-II criteria. Logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for stroke after TAVR. RESULTS: Mean age was 79.5 ± 6.8 years, mean logistic EuroScore was 17.6% ± 12.8%, and 51.8% (n = 994) of the patients were female. Stroke/TIA occurred in 76 patients (3.9%), 1.9% were disabling, and 1.6% nondisabling. The predominant type of stroke were territorial ischemic lesions (82.4%), with primary bleeding in 4.4% and border zone infarctions in 4.4%. Left-sided lesions were more common (45.6% left sided vs. 25% right sided) and 13.2% of the lesions were bilateral (4.4% no finding and 11.8% missing data). In multivariate logistic regression, prior stroke (odds ratio [OR] = 1.83, p = 0.046) and initial experience (first 300 TAVR implanted at our center) were identified as independent risk factors for stroke/TIA during the first 30 days (OR = 1.95, p = 0.045). Overall, the occurrence of stroke had a highly significant impact on a 30-day mortality (13.2% vs. 4.9% in patients without stroke (p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Stroke within the first 30 days after TAVR severely impairs 30-day survival. We identified prior stroke and initial experience as significant independent risk factors for the occurrence of stroke after TAVR.

Final 3-year clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a supra-annular self-expanding repositionable valve in a real-world setting: Results from the multicenter FORWARD study.

OBJECTIVES: The Evolut R FORWARD study confirmed safety and effectivenesss of the Evolut R THV in routine clinical practice out to 1 year. Herein, we report the final 3-year clinical follow up of the FORWARD study. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a proven alternative to surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Long-term clinical outcome data with the Evolut R platform are scarce. METHODS: FORWARD is a prospective multicenter observational study that evaluated the Evolut R system in routine clinical practice at 53 centres. Eligible patients had symptomatic native aortic valve stenosis or failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis and elevated operative risk per Heart-Team assessment. TAVR was attempted in 1039 patients. RESULTS: Mean age was 81.8 ± 6.2 years, 64.9% were women, STS score was 5.5 ± 4.5% and 34.2% were frail. Rates of all-cause mortality and disabling stroke were 24.8% and 4.8% at 3 years. Early need for a new pacemaker implantation after TAVR (all-cause mortality: with new PPI; 21.0% vs. without; 22.8%, p = 0.55) and the presence of > trace paravalvular regurgitation (all-cause mortality: no or trace; 22.0% vs. ≥ mild; 25.5%, p = 0.29) did not affect survival. Between 1 and 3 years incidence rates of valve related intervention, endocarditis and clinically relevant valve thrombosis were low. CONCLUSIONS: The Evolut R valve maintained a favorable safety profile through 3 years in routine clinical practice. Rates of transcatheter heart valve-related adverse events were low.

Papillary Muscle Heads Focalization for Functional Mitral Regurgitation with Severe Tethering.

We performed "Papillary muscle heads focalization" for three patients with severe functional mitral regurgitation with severe leaflet tethering (coaptation distance ≥1 cm and/or posterior leaflet angle ≥45 degrees). All separated papillary muscle heads were sutured together and both the anterolateral and posteromedial papillary muscles were reconstructed as single head papillary muscles. The stitches are positioned to adjust the levels of mitral leaflet tips, concerning the length of the marginal chordae connected to each head. A downsized annuloplasty is performed concomitantly. At discharge, no patient showed moderate/severe mitral regurgitation. Their coaptation lengths were 7.1, 8.5, and 8.3 mm.

Prognosis and Clinical Results after Coronary Artery Bypass Operation in Young Patients Aged <45 Years: Chances and Limitations of a New Therapy Option.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the recommended type of revascularization procedure in patients with left main or three-vessel disease and is considered an alternative when percutaneous coronary intervention is not feasible. We evaluated registry data to obtain long-term outcome data.All patients ≤45 years in whom CABG was performed between 2009 and 2019 were selected from the Heart and Diabetes Center NRW, Germany. Cox regression analysis was applied to estimate the incidence risk of events after surgery.A total of 209 patients (81.8% male) were included. Mean (standard deviation) follow-up duration was 5.8 (3.1) years. The combined outcome of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, or repeated revascularization occurred in 31 patients (14.8%). Estimated mean time to event was 8.5 (standard error: 0.22) years. By the end of the follow-up period, 8 patients (3.8%) had died, among whom 2 (1.0%) died within 1 month after surgery, 1 (0.5%) within 1 year, 1 (0.5%) within 2 years, and 4 (1.9%) after 2 years.Risk factors independently associated with postsurgery events were angina pectoris CCS (Canadian Cardiovascular Society) class IV (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 4.954; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.322-18.563; p = 0.018) and STS (Society of Thoracic Surgeons) score (adjusted HR: 1.152 per scoring point; 95% CI: 1.040-1.276; p = 0.007).After performing CABG in patients ≤45 years, event-free long-term outcomes were observed in the majority of patients. Presence of angina pectoris CCS class IV and higher STS scores were independently associated with adverse postsurgery events.

Long-Term Clinical Outcome in Elderly Patients Undergoing Mitral Valve Repair.

BACKGROUND: Long-term data on patients over 75 years undergoing mitral valve (MV) repair are scarce. At our high-volume institution, we, therefore, aimed to evaluate mortality, stroke risk, and reoperation rates in these patients. METHODS: We investigated clinical outcomes in 372 patients undergoing MV repair with (n = 115) or without (n = 257) tricuspid valve repair. The primary endpoint was the probability of survival up to a maximum follow-up of 9 years. Secondary clinical endpoints were stroke and reoperation of the MV during follow-up. Univariate and multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to assess independent predictors of mortality. Mortality was also compared with the age- and sex-adjusted general population. RESULTS: During a median follow-up period of 37 months (range: 0.1-108 months), 90 patients died. The following parameters were independently associated with mortality: double valve repair (hazard ratio, confidence interval [HR, 95% CI]: 2.15, 1.37-3.36), advanced age (HR: 1.07, CI: 1.01-1.14 per year), diabetes (HR: 1.97, CI: 1.13-3.43), preoperative New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class (HR: 1.41, CI: 1.01-1.97 per class), and operative creatininemax levels (HR: 1.32, CI: 1.13-1.55 per mg/dL). The risk of stroke in the isolated MV and double valve repair groups at postoperative year 5 was 5.0 and 4.1%, respectively (p = 0.65). The corresponding values for the risk of reoperation were 4.0 and 7.0%, respectively (p = 0.36). Nine-year survival was comparable with the general population (53.2 vs. 53.1%). CONCLUSION: Various independent risk factors for mortality in elderly MV repair patients could be identified, but overall survival rates were similar to those of the general population. Consequently, our data indicates that repairing the MV in elderly patients represents a suitable and safe surgical approach.

Comparison of Self-Expanding Bioprostheses for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis: SCOPE 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Few randomized trials have compared bioprostheses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, and no trials have compared bioprostheses with supra-annular design. The SCOPE 2 trial (Safety and Efficacy Comparison of Two TAVI Systems in a Prospective Randomized Evaluation 2) was designed to compare the clinical outcomes of the ACURATE neo and CoreValve Evolut bioprostheses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. METHODS: SCOPE 2 was a randomized trial performed at 23 centers in 6 countries between April 2017 and April 2019. Patients ≥75 years old with an indication for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement as agreed by the heart team were randomly assigned to receive treatment with either the ACURATE neo (n=398) or the CoreValve Evolut bioprostheses (n=398). The primary end point, powered for noninferiority of the ACURATE neo bioprosthesis, was all-cause death or stroke at 1 year. The key secondary end point, powered for superiority of the ACURATE neo bioprosthesis, was new permanent pacemaker implantation at 30 days. RESULTS: Among 796 randomized patients (mean age, 83.2±4.3 years; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, 4.6±2.9%), clinical follow-up information was available for 778 (98%) patients. Within 1 year, the primary end point occurred in 15.8% of patients in the ACURATE neo group and in 13.9% of patients in the CoreValve Evolut group (absolute risk difference, 1.8%, upper 1-sided 95% confidence limit, 6.1%; P=0.0549 for noninferiority). The 30-day rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation were 10.5% in the ACURATE neo group and 18.0% in the CoreValve Evolut group (absolute risk difference, -7.5% [95% CI, -12.4 to -2.60]; P=0.0027). No significant differences were observed in the components of the primary end point. Cardiac death at 30 days (2.8% versus 0.8%; P=0.03) and 1 year (8.4% versus 3.9%; P=0.01), and moderate or severe aortic regurgitation at 30 days (10% versus 3%; P=0.002) were significantly increased in the ACURATE neo group. CONCLUSIONS: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE neo did not meet noninferiority compared with the self-expanding CoreValve Evolut in terms of all-cause death or stroke at 1 year, and it was associated with a lower incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation. In secondary analyses, the ACURATE neo was associated with more moderate or severe aortic regurgitation at 30 days and cardiac death at 30 days and 1 year. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03192813.

Four-year mortality in women and men after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN 3.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate 4-year, post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) survival and predictors of survival by sex, in a real-world cohort that underwent transfemoral TAVI with SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve. BACKGROUND: Previous TAVI investigations of first-generation devices demonstrated an early- to mid-term survival advantage in women compared with men. METHODS: SOURCE 3 (SAPIEN 3 Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome) is a post-approval, multicentre, observational registry. Patients (N = 1,694, 49.2% women, age 81.7 ± 6.7 years) with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk (logistic EuroSCORE 17.8%) underwent TAVI between 2014 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier event estimates were used to determine mortality by sex. Predictors of overall mortality were identified using a cox multivariate proportional hazard model. RESULTS: At 4 years, women had lower all-cause mortality than men (36.0 vs 39.7%; p = .0911; HR: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.75-1.02]). No difference was observed for cardiac mortality between women 24.2% and men 24.7% (p = .76; HR: 0.97 [95% CI: 0.79-1.19]). When adjusted for baseline characteristics (age, height, weight, NYHA functional class, renal insufficiency, EuroScore, and tricuspid regurgitation), sex had no impact on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, real-world cohort, all-cause mortality trended lower in women than men at 4 years post TAVI; however, several baseline factors, but not sex, were predictors of mortality. No difference between sexes was observed for cardiovascular mortality.

Effects of a dual-filter-based cerebral embolic protection device in transcatheter aortic valve replacement on cerebral oxygen saturation: A prospective pilot study.

PURPOSE: The Sentinel Cerebral Protection System (Sentinel-CPS) is increasingly used in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, the impact of inserting the Sentinel-CPS inside the brain-supplying arteries on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation is unknown. METHODS: Twenty patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with (n = 10) and without (n = 10) cerebral embolic protection using the Sentinel-CPS were prospectively observed. All patients received conscious sedation and cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2 ) was continuously measured with near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS). The cumulative perioperative cerebral desaturation was calculated for each patient by multiplying rSO2 below an individualized desaturation threshold by time. In addition, rSO2 values at the time of Sentinel-CPS insertion, filter positioning, and device retraction were analyzed. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in cumulative cerebral desaturation in patients with Sentinel-CPS (median [IQR]) (0 [0/81] s%) and without (median [IQR]) (0 [0/23] s%), p = .762. A total of 6 patients (33.3%) experienced a perioperative decrease in rSO2 below the individualized desaturation threshold (n = 3 with Sentinel-CPS, n = 3 without Sentinel-CPS; p = 1.000). Cerebral desaturation was detected during valve deployment (n = 5) and after postdilatation (n = 1). No desaturation events occurred during Sentinel-CPS insertion, filter positioning, or retraction. CONCLUSION: Our pilot study revealed no difference in cumulative perioperative cerebral desaturation between TAVR with and without Sentinel-CPS. Catheter- and filter-based manipulations in the brain-supplying arteries for Sentinel-CPS application were not associated with a decrease of cerebral perfusion and oxygenation.

Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves.

AIMS: Due to bioprosthetic valve degeneration, aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures are increasingly performed. There are no data on long-term outcomes after aortic ViV. Our aim was to perform a large-scale assessment of long-term survival and reintervention after aortic ViV. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1006 aortic ViV procedures performed more than 5 years ago [mean age 77.7 ± 9.7 years; 58.8% male; median STS-PROM score 7.3% (4.2-12.0)] were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with Medtronic self-expandable valves (CoreValve/Evolut, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) (n = 523, 52.0%), Edwards balloon-expandable valves (EBEV, SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) (n = 435, 43.2%), and other devices (n = 48, 4.8%). Survival was lower at 8 years in patients with small-failed bioprostheses [internal diameter (ID) ≤ 20 mm] compared with those with large-failed bioprostheses (ID > 20 mm) (33.2% vs. 40.5%, P = 0.01). Independent correlates for mortality included smaller-failed bioprosthetic valves [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13)], age [HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01-1.45)], and non-transfemoral access [HR 1.43 (95% CI 1.11-1.84)]. There were 40 reinterventions after ViV. Independent correlates for all-cause reintervention included pre-existing severe prosthesis-patient mismatch [subhazard ratio (SHR) 4.34 (95% CI 1.31-14.39)], device malposition [SHR 3.75 (95% CI 1.36-10.35)], EBEV [SHR 3.34 (95% CI 1.26-8.85)], and age [SHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.44-0.78)]. CONCLUSIONS: The size of the original failed valve may influence long-term mortality, and the type of the transcatheter valve may influence the need for reintervention after aortic ViV.

Insights on Embolic Protection, Repositioning, and Stroke: A Subanalysis of the RESPOND Study.

RESPOND is a prospective, single-arm study enrolling 1014 transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients. The objective of this analysis is to assess the impact of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices and prosthetic valve repositioning on the risk of neurologic complications in patients treated with the fully repositionable Lotus Valve in the RESPOND postmarket study. Valve repositioning and CEP use were at the operators' discretion. Stroke events were adjudicated by an independent medical reviewer. This analysis assessed the baseline differences among patients according to CEP use and valve repositioning and evaluated the neurological complications at 72 hours after TAVR, hospital discharge, and 30-day follow-up. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the potential predictors of stroke. Of the 996 patients implanted with the Lotus Valve (mean age: 80.8 years, 50.8% female, STS score 6.0 ± 6.9), 92 cases (9.2%) used CEP. The overall rate of acute stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) was 3.0% at 72 hours after TAVR. The 72-hour stroke/TIA rate was 1.1% in patients who had CEP and 3.2% in those who did not. Use of CEP was associated with a 2.1% absolute reduction in the risk of acute neurological events (relative risk reduction: 65.6%), although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.51). Repositioning of the Lotus Valve occurred in 313/996 procedures (31.4%). The 72-hour rate of stroke/TIA was similar in patients who had valve repositioning (2.9%) compared with those who did not (3.1%; p=0.86). The selective use of a CEP device in the RESPOND study was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk for stroke within 72 hours. The use of the repositioning feature of the Lotus Valve did not increase the stroke risk.

Impact of a Two-Filter Cerebral Embolic Protection Device on the Complexity and Risk of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing use of cerebral protection devices in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We aimed to analyze if the use of these devices itself has an impact on the complexity and the risk of TAVR. METHODS: Between February 2016 and July 2017, 391 patients underwent transfemoral TAVR with Medtronic CoreValve Evolut R (n = 196) or Edwards Sapien 3 (n = 195). In 39 patients, the Claret Sentinel™ embolic protection device (CS-EPD) was used. Prospectively collected data were retrospectively analyzed, comparing fluoroscopy/operation time, amount of contrast used, vascular events, and postprocedural renal function in TAVR patients with (n = 39) and without (n = 352) CS-EPD. RESULTS: The CS-EPD was placed through the right radial (n = 35) or brachial (n = 4) artery. Procedural success rate defined as correct deployment and retraction of both filters was 94.9%. No device-related vascular complications occurred. TAVR patients with CS-EPD showed a significantly higher total operation time, total fluoroscopy time, and amount of used contrast (85.4 ± 39.3 vs. 64 ± 29.8 minutes, p = 0.002; 20.7 ± 9.3 vs. 13.7 ± 7 minutes, p ≤ 0.001; 133.7 ± 42.6 vs. 109.7 ± 44.5 mL, p = 0.001). Comparing the initial third of patients receiving a CS-EPD with the last third of CS-EPD cases, procedural time had decreased significantly (102.5 ± 34.9 vs. 67 ± 11.9; p = 0.002). There were no differences in postprocedural renal failure (p = 0.80). CONCLUSION: Our data add evidence that the application of the CS-EPD is not associated with an additional risk for the patient. Although procedural time and amount of contrast are still higher when using the CS-EPD, there were no device-related complications or increased incidence of renal failure.

Patients at low surgical risk as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score undergoing isolated interventional or surgical aortic valve implantation: in-hospital data and 1-year results from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY).

AIMS: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard treatment for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at high surgical risk and may be considered for patients with intermediate risk. During the last few years, an increasing number of patients with low surgical risk have been treated with TAVI. In this study, low-risk patients undergoing isolated TAVI or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) were analysed using data from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY). METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients with a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score of <4% undergoing TAVI or SAVR in 2014 and 2015 were evaluated. A total of 20 549 low surgical risk patients remained for further analysis, comprising 14 487 surgical patients and 6062 TAVI patients. Since TAVI patients were significantly older and had significantly more co-morbidities, a weighted propensity score model was used to compare SAVR and TAVI patients for in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation patients showed a significantly higher in-hospital and 30-day survival than SAVR patients (in hospital survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 98.5% vs. 97.3%; P = 0.003; 30-day survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 98.1% vs. 97.1%; P = 0.014). At 1 year, survival rates did not differ significantly (survival TAVI vs. SAVR: 90.0% vs. 91.2%; P = 0.158). CONCLUSION: In this first GARY analysis of low-risk patients, weighted comparison showed similar 1-year survival for TAVI and SAVR and higher in-hospital survival for TAVI patients.