ABSTRACT
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.).
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Aortic Valve , Bioprosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Male , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/complications , Bioprosthesis/adverse effects , Heart Failure , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Prosthesis Design , Prosthesis Failure , Stroke/etiology , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effectsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: An interatrial shunt may provide an autoregulatory mechanism to decrease left atrial pressure and improve heart failure (HF) symptoms and prognosis. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic HF with any left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were randomized 1:1 to transcatheter shunt implantation versus a placebo procedure, stratified by reduced (≤40%) versus preserved (>40%) LVEF. The primary safety outcome was a composite of device-related or procedure-related major adverse cardiovascular or neurological events at 30 days compared with a prespecified performance goal of 11%. The primary effectiveness outcome was the hierarchical composite ranking of all-cause death, cardiac transplantation or left ventricular assist device implantation, HF hospitalization, outpatient worsening HF events, and change in quality of life from baseline measured by the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score through maximum 2-year follow-up, assessed when the last enrolled patient reached 1-year follow-up, expressed as the win ratio. Prespecified hypothesis-generating analyses were performed on patients with reduced and preserved LVEF. RESULTS: Between October 24, 2018, and October 19, 2022, 508 patients were randomized at 94 sites in 11 countries to interatrial shunt treatment (n=250) or a placebo procedure (n=258). Median (25th and 75th percentiles) age was 73.0 years (66.0, 79.0), and 189 patients (37.2%) were women. Median LVEF was reduced (≤40%) in 206 patients (40.6%) and preserved (>40%) in 302 patients (59.4%). No primary safety events occurred after shunt implantation (upper 97.5% confidence limit, 1.5%; P<0.0001). There was no difference in the 2-year primary effectiveness outcome between the shunt and placebo procedure groups (win ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.61-1.22]; P=0.20). However, patients with reduced LVEF had fewer adverse cardiovascular events with shunt treatment versus placebo (annualized rate 49.0% versus 88.6%; relative risk, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.42-0.73]; P<0.0001), whereas patients with preserved LVEF had more cardiovascular events with shunt treatment (annualized rate 60.2% versus 35.9%; relative risk, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.29-2.19]; P=0.0001; Pinteraction<0.0001). There were no between-group differences in change in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score during follow-up in all patients or in those with reduced or preserved LVEF. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter interatrial shunt implantation was safe but did not improve outcomes in patients with HF. However, the results from a prespecified exploratory analysis in stratified randomized groups suggest that shunt implantation is beneficial in patients with reduced LVEF and harmful in patients with preserved LVEF. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03499236.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This trial sought to assess the safety and efficacy of ShortCut, the first dedicated leaflet modification device, prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients at risk for coronary artery obstruction. METHODS: This pivotal prospective study enrolled patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves scheduled to undergo TAVI and were at risk for coronary artery obstruction. The primary safety endpoint was procedure-related mortality or stroke at discharge or 7 days, and the primary efficacy endpoint was per-patient leaflet splitting success. Independent angiographic, echocardiographic, and computed tomography core laboratories assessed all images. Safety events were adjudicated by a clinical events committee and data safety monitoring board. RESULTS: Sixty eligible patients were treated (77.0 ± 9.6 years, 70% female, 96.7% failed surgical bioprosthetic valves, 63.3% single splitting and 36.7% dual splitting) at 22 clinical sites. Successful leaflet splitting was achieved in all [100%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 94%-100.0%, P < .001] patients. Procedure time, including imaging confirmation of leaflet splitting, was 30.6 ± 17.9â min. Freedom from the primary safety endpoint was achieved in 59 [98.3%; 95% CI (91.1%-100%)] patients, with no mortality and one (1.7%) disabling stroke. At 30 days, freedom from coronary obstruction was 95% (95% CI 86.1%-99.0%). Within 90 days, freedom from mortality was 95% [95% CI (86.1%-99.0%)], without any cardiovascular deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Modification of failed bioprosthetic aortic valve leaflets using ShortCut was safe, achieved successful leaflet splitting in all patients, and was associated with favourable clinical outcomes in patients at risk for coronary obstruction undergoing TAVI.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Bioprosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Female , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Male , Aged , Prospective Studies , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Prosthesis Failure , Prosthesis Design , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve/diagnostic imaging , Treatment Outcome , Coronary Occlusion/surgery , Postoperative Complications/epidemiologyABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Real-world studies comparing safety and efficacy of combined percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) and catheter ablation (CA) to LAAO alone are limited. METHODS: Patients from a large US hospital system undergoing combined LAAO and left-atrial CA from 8/2020 to 2/2024 were retrospectively analyzed and compared to a control group undergoing LAAO alone. Controls were identified using a 1:2 propensity score match based on LAAO device type (Watchman FLX vs. Amulet), CHA2D2-VASc and Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile international normalized ratio [INR], Elderly, Drugs/alcohol (HAS-BLED) scores and compared for safety, sealing performance and clinical outcomes at 6 months. RESULTS: Patients were younger in the combined (n = 72) than in the control group (n = 144, 70.2 ± 7.3 vs. 76.7 ± 6.9 years, p < 0.001) but otherwise comparable with a mean CHA2D2-VASc score of 4.2 ± 1.1 and 4.4 ± 1.2 (p = 0.26) and HAS-BLED score of 2.2 ± 0.8 and 2.3 ± 0.7 (p = 0.34). Successful LAAO implantation rates were the same (95.8% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.99) with longer procedure times seen in the combined group (156.5 ± 53 vs. 56 ± 26 min, p < 0.001). Both major (1.4% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.72) and minor (27.8% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.17) in-hospital complications were similar between the combined and control group, respectively. At 45 days, presence of peri-device leak (18.3% vs. 30.4%, p = 0.07) and device related thrombosis (4.5% vs. 4.5%, p = 0.96) on transesophageal echocardiogram did not differ. Finally, all-cause mortality (0% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.99), thromboembolic (0% vs. 0%, p = 0.99) and bleeding (6.1% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.73) events during follow-up were comparable. CONCLUSION: This large, real-world analysis indicates comparable safety and efficiency of combined LAAO and CA when compared with LAAO alone.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) volume reshaping reduces myocardial wall stress and may induce reverse remodeling in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. The AccuCinch Transcatheter Left Ventricular Restoration system consists of a series of anchors connected by a cable implanted along the LV base that is cinched to the basal free wall radius. We evaluated the echocardiographic and clinical outcomes following transcatheter left ventricular restoration. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analyzed 51 heart failure patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction between 20% and 40%, with no more than 2+ mitral regurgitation treated with optimal medical therapy, who subsequently underwent transcatheter left ventricular restoration. Serial echocardiograms, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores, and 6-minute walk test distances were measured at baseline through 12 months. Primary analysis end point was change in end-diastolic volume at 12 months compared with baseline. Patients (nâ¯=â¯51) were predominantly male (86%) with a mean age of 56.3 ± 13.1 years. Fluoroscopy showed LV free wall radius decreased by a median of 9.2 mm amounting to a 29.6% decrease in the free wall arc length. At 12 months, the LV end-diastolic volume decreased by 33.6 ± 34.8 mL (P < .01), with comparable decreases in the LV end-systolic volume. These decreases were associated with significant improvements in the overall Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score (16.4 ± 18.7 points; P < .01) and 6-minute hall walk test distance (45.9 ± 83.9 m; P < .01). There were no periprocedural deaths; through the 1-year follow-up, 1 patient died (day 280) and 1 patient received a left ventricular assist device (day 13). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction without significant mitral regurgitation receiving optimal medical therapy, the AccuCinch System resulted in decreases of LV volume, as well as improved quality of life and exercise endurance. A randomized trial is ongoing (NCT04331769).
Subject(s)
Cardiomyopathies , Heart Failure , Mitral Valve Insufficiency , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left , Adult , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Heart Failure/diagnosis , Heart Failure/therapy , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/diagnostic imaging , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Quality of Life , Stroke Volume , Treatment Outcome , Ventricular Function, Left , Ventricular RemodelingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at increased risk for death from surgery; less is known about TAVR in low-risk patients. METHODS: We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in which TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients who had severe aortic stenosis and were at low surgical risk. When 850 patients had reached 12-month follow-up, we analyzed data regarding the primary end point, a composite of death or disabling stroke at 24 months, using Bayesian methods. RESULTS: Of the 1468 patients who underwent randomization, an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure was performed in 1403. The patients' mean age was 74 years. The 24-month estimated incidence of the primary end point was 5.3% in the TAVR group and 6.7% in the surgery group (difference, -1.4 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval for difference, -4.9 to 2.1; posterior probability of noninferiority >0.999). At 30 days, patients who had undergone TAVR, as compared with surgery, had a lower incidence of disabling stroke (0.5% vs. 1.7%), bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 7.5%), acute kidney injury (0.9% vs. 2.8%), and atrial fibrillation (7.7% vs. 35.4%) and a higher incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation (3.5% vs. 0.5%) and pacemaker implantation (17.4% vs. 6.1%). At 12 months, patients in the TAVR group had lower aortic-valve gradients than those in the surgery group (8.6 mm Hg vs. 11.2 mm Hg) and larger effective orifice areas (2.3 cm2 vs. 2.0 cm2). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was noninferior to surgery with respect to the composite end point of death or disabling stroke at 24 months. (Funded by Medtronic; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02701283.).
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve/surgery , Bioprosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/methods , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Prosthesis Design , Stroke/etiology , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/instrumentation , Aged , Aortic Valve Insufficiency/etiology , Aortic Valve Stenosis/complications , Aortic Valve Stenosis/mortality , Atrial Fibrillation/etiology , Bayes Theorem , Echocardiography , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Length of Stay , Male , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Risk Factors , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effectsABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve/surgery , Female , Humans , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis Design , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: We assessed the impact of conventional delivery system (DS) insertion technique on "Hat-marker" orientation/commissural alignment in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the Evolut Low Risk Trial CT substudy versus a modified technique. BACKGROUND: Unlike surgical aortic valve replacement, where alignment of the surgical valve commissures with native commissures can be achieved virtually 100% of the time, commissural alignment during TAVR is not achieved consistently. This may subsequently impact the feasibility of both coronary access and reintervention after TAVR. METHODS: "Hat-marker" orientations during deployment were characterized as outer curve (OC), center front (CF), inner curve, and center back. Severe commissure-to-CA overlap was 0-20°. "Hat-marker" orientations and CA overlap were compared to 240 patients from a single center using the modified 3-o'clock flush port DS technique. RESULTS: In the CT substudy in which conventional DS insertion was performed (flush port at 12 o'clock); 154/249 had both analyzable CT and procedural fluoroscopy to validate "Hat-marker" to C-tab/commissural orientation. On post-TAVR CT, Evolut valve commissural orientation and coronary artery (CA) ostia were identified. Compared to conventional DS technique in the CT substudy, the modified technique had higher rates of "Hat-marker" at OC/CF orientation, improved commissural alignment and reduced severe CA overlap; (left main, 14.2 vs. 27.9%; right coronary artery, 11.7 vs. 27.3% both, 5.0 vs. 13.6%; 1 or both CA, 20.8 vs. 41.6%, all p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The modified technique improved initial "Hat-marker" orientation during Evolut deployment and resulted in better commissural alignment and reduced CA overlap.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Humans , Prosthesis Design , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Mitral regurgitation (MR) is one of the most prevalent valvular pathologies in the developed world. There continues to be a growing population of aging patients with MR who may be too high risk for surgical management. The rapid adoption and remarkable success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) generated enthusiasm for transcatheter mitral valve therapies; however, the complex anatomy and pathophysiology of the mitral valve confers several unique challenges for a fully percutaneous approach. Nevertheless, several devices are under development and in various phases of preclinical or clinical testing, both for transcatheter mitral valve replacement and repair. MitraClip (Abbott Vascular), which has received FDA approval, is the most established percutaneous repair strategy and has been performed in over 80,000 patients as of 2019. The following article serves as a review of the available and upcoming devices for the various etiologies of mitral valvular disease, as well as the unique challenges and potential complications of transcatheter mitral valve intervention.
Subject(s)
Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Mitral Valve Insufficiency , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Cardiac Catheterization , Humans , Mitral Valve/diagnostic imaging , Mitral Valve/surgery , Mitral Valve Insufficiency/surgery , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Prior studies have demonstrated that outcomes of invasive cardiac interventions may vary by hospital teaching status and volume. As transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) rapidly expands from teaching to nonteaching hospitals across the country, the clinical impact of hospital teaching status has not been clearly established. This study aimed to compare TAVR outcomes between nonteaching and teaching hospitals. METHODS: An observational study was conducted using the Nationwide Readmission Database (NRD). Patients undergoing TAVR from 2011 to 2018 were included. Data was analyzed using multivariable logistic regression to determine outcomes of 30-day mortality and readmission between nonteaching and teaching hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 235,321 patients underwent TAVR during the study period. Patients undergoing TAVR at teaching hospitals presented with a higher frequency of baseline comorbidities compared to nonteaching hospitals. Postprocedure complications such as myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, sepsis, stroke, and hemorrhage occurred more often at teaching centers (p < 0.001); translating to a higher rate of in-hospital mortality (2.27% vs. 1.99%, p = 0.006) and hospital cost ($48,300 vs. $44,900, p < 0.001) in teaching versus nonteaching hospitals. After adjusting for baseline characteristics and postoperative morbidity, in-hospital mortality (p = 0.095) and readmission rate (p = 0.420) on multivariable analysis were not statistically different between centers. CONCLUSION: With the evolution and expansion of TAVR to nonteaching centers, mortality, and readmission rates are not significantly different between nonteaching and teaching hospitals. Higher unadjusted in-hospital mortality at teaching centers suggest these centers more often treat high risk patients with associated increased complications.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve/surgery , Hospital Mortality , Hospitals , Hospitals, Teaching , Humans , Postoperative Complications/surgery , Risk Factors , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively compared 257 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with self-expandable valves using either CON (n = 101) or COVL (n = 156) in four intermediate/low volume centers. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. The 30-day incidence of new-onset LBBB (12.9% vs. 5.8%; p=0.05) and PPMI rate (17.8% vs. 6.4%; p=0.004) was significantly lower when using the COVL implantation view. There was no difference between the CON and COVL groups in 30-day incidence of death (4.9% vs. 2.6%), any stroke (0% vs. 0.6%), and the need for surgical aortic valve replacement (0% for both groups). CONCLUSION: Using the COVL view for implantation, we achieved a significant reduction of the LBBB and PPMI rate after TAVR in comparison with the traditional CON view, without compromising the TAVR outcomes when using self-expandable prostheses.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Aortic Valve , Bundle-Branch Block , Pacemaker, Artificial/statistics & numerical data , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aortic Valve/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Bundle-Branch Block/etiology , Bundle-Branch Block/therapy , Cardiac Catheterization/instrumentation , Cardiac Catheterization/methods , Equipment Design , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Humans , Male , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care , Surgery, Computer-Assisted/instrumentation , Surgery, Computer-Assisted/methods , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/instrumentation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methodsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) is an important therapeutic intervention for patients with aortic valve stenosis. As TAVR has become available to a broader population, there has been an increase in the number of less common, yet potentially catastrophic, complications. TAVR related infective endocarditis (TAVR-IE) is a rare, but potentially fatal, complication. CASE SERIES: We present here two patients that we encountered for TAVR associated infective endocarditis. Our first patient presented 5 weeks after his TAVR. His initial presentation was consistent with signs of sepsis. The patient then developed Mobitz type I block during hospital course. His TEE was negative for features of infective endocarditis. Due to high suspicion, patient was taken for surgical exploration and was found to have multiple foci of vegetation adhered to the stent frame. Our second patient presented with new onset pulmonary edema, worsening heart failure and systemic inflammatory response. A TEE was done for persistent MSSA bacteremia which showed stable prosthetic valve function with no signs of infective endocarditis. Patient was discharged with a prolonged course of intravenous antibiotics. Patient was re-admitted for worsening sepsis and blood cultures were positive for MSSA. Patient was taken for surgical exploration of his prosthetic aortic valve which showed purulent aortic root abscess. CONCLUSION: Through these cases, we aim to raise awareness on TAVR-IE. Due to the atypical clinical presentation, the modified Duke criteria may not be sufficient to diagnose TAVR-IE. Transesophageal echocardiogram in TAVR-IE may be negative or indeterminate. Prosthetic valve shadow may obscure smaller vegetations and/or smaller abscesses. A negative transesophageal echocardiogram should not rule out TAVR-IE and further diagnostic imaging modalities should be considered. PET/CT after administration of 18F-FDG (fluorodeoxyglucose) is a useful diagnostic tool in the diagnosis of infective endocarditis where TEE has been negative or inconclusive. Multi-modal imaging, in addition to the modified Duke criteria, can facilitate early diagnosis and improved mortality outcomes.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve/surgery , Echocardiography, Doppler, Color , Echocardiography, Transesophageal , Endocarditis, Bacterial/diagnostic imaging , Heart Valve Prosthesis/adverse effects , Prosthesis-Related Infections/diagnostic imaging , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effects , Aged , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Aortic Valve/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Valve Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Device Removal , Electrocardiography , Endocarditis, Bacterial/microbiology , Endocarditis, Bacterial/therapy , Humans , Male , Multimodal Imaging , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Predictive Value of Tests , Prosthesis-Related Infections/microbiology , Prosthesis-Related Infections/therapy , Reoperation , Reproducibility of Results , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/instrumentation , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Although transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk, less is known about comparative outcomes among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate surgical risk. METHODS: We evaluated the clinical outcomes in intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis in a randomized trial comparing TAVR (performed with the use of a self-expanding prosthesis) with surgical aortic-valve replacement. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or disabling stroke at 24 months in patients undergoing attempted aortic-valve replacement. We used Bayesian analytical methods (with a margin of 0.07) to evaluate the noninferiority of TAVR as compared with surgical valve replacement. RESULTS: A total of 1746 patients underwent randomization at 87 centers. Of these patients, 1660 underwent an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 79.8±6.2 years, and all were at intermediate risk for surgery (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 4.5±1.6%). At 24 months, the estimated incidence of the primary end point was 12.6% in the TAVR group and 14.0% in the surgery group (95% credible interval [Bayesian analysis] for difference, -5.2 to 2.3%; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). Surgery was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and transfusion requirements, whereas TAVR had higher rates of residual aortic regurgitation and need for pacemaker implantation. TAVR resulted in lower mean gradients and larger aortic-valve areas than surgery. Structural valve deterioration at 24 months did not occur in either group. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR was a noninferior alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, with a different pattern of adverse events associated with each procedure. (Funded by Medtronic; SURTAVI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01586910 .).
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Valve Stenosis/mortality , Bayes Theorem , Female , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Humans , Male , Postoperative Complications , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Stroke/epidemiology , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/adverse effectsABSTRACT
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the current data on TAVR in low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis, highlights the results of the recently published Medtronic Low Risk Randomized Study and PARTNER 3 trials, and describes specific clinical, anatomic, and procedural considerations regarding the optimal treatment choice in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: In low-risk patients, the Medtronic Low Risk Randomized Study demonstrated TAVR to be non-inferior to surgery with respect to the composite endpoint of death or disabling stroke while PARTNER 3 trial proved TAVR to be superior to surgery with regard to the composite endpoint of death, stroke, or rehospitalization. Recent trials demonstrate the safety and efficacy of TAVR in low-risk patients and have led to an FDA indication for the use of TAVR in these patients. However, the lack of long-term data on the rate of transcatheter valve deterioration in the younger population, higher incidence of paravalvular leak and pacemaker implantation following TAVR, along with certain intrinsic anatomic factors remain potential challenges to generalize TAVR in all low surgical risk patients. We describe specific clinical, anatomic, and procedural considerations regarding the optimal treatment choice for low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic AS.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Aortic Valve , Humans , Incidence , Risk Factors , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Great strides have been made in improving outcomes for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), predominately through initiatives focusing upon improving clinical processes "upstream" of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The actual step-by-step mechanics of diagnostic angiography during STEMI and other aspects of the PCI procedure itself have received relatively little attention. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We hypothesized that there would be significant variation in how primary PCI for STEMI is performed in the United States. In order to better understand current US practice, an electronic survey consisting of seven focused questions was forwarded to 2,910 US interventional cardiologists who were members of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI). RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-two responses were received (12.4%). Among respondents, the femoral artery was the preferred access site in 83% (vs. 17% radial). The use of a diagnostic catheter to visualize the non-culprit artery prior to using a guiding catheter for the culprit artery was the preferred approach for 58% of respondents, and an additional 23% preferred complete angiography with diagnostic catheters prior to guide insertion. However, a significant minority (19%) preferred starting directly with a guide catheter for the culprit artery and performing PCI prior to contralateral non-culprit artery visualization. Only 9% reported performing routine left ventriculography prior to PCI, with the majority (66%) choosing to perform ventriculography during/after PCI, and 25% reporting rare or no use of left ventriculography. Fewer than half of respondents (49%) reported routine aspiration thrombectomy use, despite a Class IIa ACC/AHA guidelines recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant variability in the self-reported mechanics of primary PCI by US interventional cardiologists. Some of this variability (e.g., sequence of catheters, and performance of left ventriculography prior to reperfusion) is not addressed by current guidelines/consensus documents, and may have clinical implications, reflecting the balance between the desire for timely reperfusion versus a more complete assessment of patient risk.
Subject(s)
Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Outcome and Process Assessment, Health Care/trends , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/trends , Practice Patterns, Physicians'/trends , Radiography, Interventional/trends , Cardiac Catheters/trends , Consensus , Coronary Angiography/trends , Femoral Artery/diagnostic imaging , Guideline Adherence/trends , Health Care Surveys , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/diagnostic imaging , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/instrumentation , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Radial Artery/diagnostic imaging , Radiography, Interventional/instrumentation , Societies, Medical , Surveys and Questionnaires , Thrombectomy/trends , Treatment Outcome , United StatesABSTRACT
Patients with moderate aortic stenosis (AS) have a greater risk of adverse clinical outcomes than that of the general population. How this risk compares with those with severe AS, along with factors associated with outcomes and disease progression, is less clear. We analyzed serial echoes (from 2017 to 2019) from a single healthcare system using Tempus Next (Chicago, Illinois) software. AS severity was defined according to American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines. Outcomes of interest included death or heart failure hospitalization. We used Cox proportional hazards models and logistic regression to identify predictors of clinical outcome and disease progression, respectively. From 82,805 echoes for 61,546 patients, 1,770; 914; 565; and 1,463 patients had no, mild, moderate, or severe AS, respectively. Both patients with moderate and those with severe AS experienced a similar prevalence of adverse clinical outcomes (p = 0.45) that was significantly greater than that of patients without AS (p <0.01). In patients with moderate AS, atrial fibrillation (hazard ratio 3.29, 95% confidence interval 1.79 to 6.02, p <0.001) and end-stage renal disease (hazard ratio 3.34, 95% confidence interval 1.87 to 5.95, p <0.001) were associated with adverse clinical outcomes. One-third of patients with moderate AS with a subsequent echo (139/434) progressed to severe AS within 1 year. In conclusion, patients with moderate AS can progress rapidly to severe AS and experience a similar risk of adverse clinical outcomes; predictors include atrial fibrillation and low left ventricular ejection fraction. Machine learning algorithms may help identify these patients. Whether these patients may warrant earlier intervention merits further study.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Artificial Intelligence , Disease Progression , Echocardiography , Severity of Illness Index , Humans , Male , Female , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aged , Software , Aged, 80 and over , Heart Failure , Retrospective Studies , Prognosis , Atrial Fibrillation , Proportional Hazards ModelsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Food and Drug Administration approved the Amulet occluder (Abbott) after demonstrating safety and effectiveness in the Amulet IDE (AMPLATZER Amulet LAA Occluder) trial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the EMERGE Left Atrial Appendage study is to evaluate early postapproval outcomes of the Amulet occluder in the United States using data from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry. METHODS: Patients with a commercial Amulet occluder implant attempt between Food and Drug Administration approval (August 14, 2021) and December 31, 2022, were included. The safety composite endpoint included all-cause death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device/procedure-related events requiring open cardiac surgery or endovascular intervention between device implantation and 7 days or hospital discharge (whichever is later). Major adverse events through 45 days were also reported and stratified by operator experience (early [<10 cases], moderate [10-29 cases], and high [30+ cases]). RESULTS: A total of 5,499 patients underwent attempted Amulet occluder implantation. Implant success was 95.8%, and complete closure was 97.2% post-left atrial appendage occlusion and 87.1% at 45 days. A safety composite endpoint event occurred in 0.76% patients. Any major adverse event occurred in 2.9% and 5.7% of patients in-hospital and through 45 days, respectively, driven by major bleeding and pericardial effusion (PE) requiring intervention. PE requiring surgery or percutaneous intervention decreased significantly with increasing experience both in-hospital (early vs high operator experience 1.8% vs 1.1%; P = 0.006) and at 45 days (2.3% vs 1.5%; P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: The EMERGE Left Atrial Appendage study demonstrates favorable safety and effectiveness of the Amulet occluder in the real-world setting. More experienced operators had improved implant success and fewer PEs, suggesting a learning curve effect implanting this dual occlusive mechanism device.
ABSTRACT
Patients with small aortic annuli (SAA) pose a challenge in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement because of the potential for prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). This study aimed to compare the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of self-expandable valve (SEV) versus balloon-expandable valve (BEV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA. All patients who underwent TAVI for severe native aortic stenosis with a SAA between January 2018 and December 2022 were retrospectively included in the study from a single center. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the baseline characteristics. Bioprosthesis valve dysfunction was based on modified Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria. A total of 1,170 TAVI procedures were performed between 2018 and 2022. After applying the exclusion criteria, 332 patients reported a SAA at computed tomography scan, and the matching created 109 balanced pairs. Echocardiographic data at discharge showed higher mean transvalvular gradients (p <0.001), higher grades of mitral regurgitation (p = 0.029), and lower ejection fraction (p <0.043) in BEVs than SEVs. At follow-up, significant differences favoring the SEV group regarding bioprosthesis valve dysfunction were observed (p = 0.002), especially in terms of severe PPM (p = 0.046) and at least moderate structural valve deterioration (p = 0.040). In conclusion, TAVI in patients with SAA using a BEV was associated with lower valve areas, higher mean pressure gradients, and PPM (including severe) than a SEV. Short- and midterm all-cause and cardiac-related mortality did not differ between the 2 groups. Future randomized studies with extended follow-ups are warranted to validate these outcomes.
Subject(s)
Aortic Valve Stenosis , Aortic Valve , Bioprosthesis , Heart Valve Prosthesis , Hemodynamics , Propensity Score , Prosthesis Design , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , Humans , Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement/methods , Male , Female , Aortic Valve Stenosis/surgery , Aortic Valve Stenosis/physiopathology , Hemodynamics/physiology , Retrospective Studies , Aged, 80 and over , Aortic Valve/surgery , Aged , EchocardiographyABSTRACT
Background: Lack of standardization in posttranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) conduction disturbance (CD) identification and treatment may affect permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates and clinical outcomes. The safety and efficacy of a standardized TAVR CD algorithm has not been analyzed. This study analyzes the Optimize PRO post-TAVR CD management algorithm with Evolut PRO/PRO+ valves. Methods: Optimize PRO is a prospective, postmarket study implementing 2 strategies to reduce pacemaker rates: TAVR with cusp overlap technique and a post-TAVR CD algorithm. The 2-hour postprocedural electrocardiogram (ECG) stratified patients to early discharge in the absence of new ECG changes or to CD algorithms for (1) ECG changes with preexisting right or left bundle branch block (LBBB), interventricular conduction delay or first-degree atrioventricular block, (2) new LBBB, or (3) high-degree atrioventricular block (HAVB). Results: The interim analysis of the CD cohort consisted of 125/400 TAVR recipients. In the CD cohort, the 30-day new PPI rate was higher (28.1% vs 1.5%; P <.001), and 60 (48%) patients were discharged with a 30-day continuous ECG monitor. At 30 days, 90% of patients discharged with a monitor did not require PPI. Clinical outcomes, including mortality, stroke, bleeding, and reintervention, were similar in patients with and without CDs. No patient experienced sudden cardiac death. Conclusions: Effective management of CDs using a standard algorithm following Evolut TAVR provides similar 30-day safety outcomes to patients without CDs who undergo routine next day discharge. The CD algorithm may provide an effective strategy to recognize arrhythmias early, improve PPI utilization, and facilitate safe monitoring of patients after discharge.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remain a concern. We assessed the PPI rates over time in patients implanted with an Evolut supra-annular, self-expanding transcatheter valve from the US STS/ACC TVT Registry. METHODS: Patients who underwent TAVR with an Evolut R, Evolut PRO or Evolut PRO+ valve between July 2018 (Q3) and June 2021 (Q2) were included. PPI rates were reported by calendar quarter. In-hospital PPI rates were reported as proportions and 30-day rates as Kaplan-Meier estimates. A Cox regression model was used to determine potential predictors of a new PPI within 30 days of the TAVR procedure. RESULTS: From July 2018 to June 2021, 54,014 TAVR procedures were performed using Evolut valves. Mean age was 79.3 ± 8.8 years and 49.2 % were male. The 30-day PPI rate was 16.6 % in 2018 (Q3) and 10.8 % in 2021 (Q2, 34.9 % decrease, p < 0.001 for trend across all quarters). The in-hospital PPI rate decreased by 40.1 %; from 14.7 % in 2018 (Q3) to 8.8 % in 2021 (Q2) (p < 0.001 for trend across all quarters). Significant predictors of a new PPI within 30 days included a baseline conduction defect, history of atrial fibrillation, home oxygen, and diabetes mellitus. CONCLUSION: From 2018 to 2021, TAVR with an Evolut transcatheter heart valve in over 50,000 patients showed a significant decreasing trend in the rates of in-hospital and 30-day PPI, representing the lowest rate of PPI in any large real-world registry of Evolut. During the same evaluated period, high device success and shorter length of stay was also observed.