Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of aortic stenosis can lead to embolization of debris. Capture of debris by devices that provide cerebral embolic protection (CEP) may reduce the risk of stroke. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with aortic stenosis in a 1:1 ratio to undergo transfemoral TAVR with CEP (CEP group) or without CEP (control group). The primary end point was stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge (whichever came first) in the intention-to-treat population. Disabling stroke, death, transient ischemic attack, delirium, major or minor vascular complications at the CEP access site, and acute kidney injury were also assessed. A neurology professional examined all the patients at baseline and after TAVR. RESULTS: A total of 3000 patients across North America, Europe, and Australia underwent randomization; 1501 were assigned to the CEP group and 1499 to the control group. A CEP device was successfully deployed in 1406 of the 1489 patients (94.4%) in whom an attempt was made. The incidence of stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge did not differ significantly between the CEP group and the control group (2.3% vs. 2.9%; difference, -0.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -1.7 to 0.5; P = 0.30). Disabling stroke occurred in 0.5% of the patients in the CEP group and in 1.3% of those in the control group. There were no substantial differences between the CEP group and the control group in the percentage of patients who died (0.5% vs. 0.3%); had a stroke, a transient ischemic attack, or delirium (3.1% vs. 3.7%); or had acute kidney injury (0.5% vs. 0.5%). One patient (0.1%) had a vascular complication at the CEP access site. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR, the use of CEP did not have a significant effect on the incidence of periprocedural stroke, but on the basis of the 95% confidence interval around this outcome, the results may not rule out a benefit of CEP during TAVR. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PROTECTED TAVR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04149535.).

Long-term risk of reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has surpassed surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the predominant mode of valve replacement for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS). However, the long-term need for valvular reintervention after TAVR remains unknown. METHODS: Using data from the Medicare Fee for Service 100% dataset, all patients receiving TAVR between July 2011 and December 2020 were identified. Patients were categorized as receiving a valve reintervention (either surgical or transcatheter) or not using the appropriate International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Procedure Coding System (ICD-10-PCS). A competing risk regression model was used to estimate the cumulative probability of valve reintervention. RESULTS: Of 230,644 TAVR patients were identified, of whom 1,880 received a reintervention. Patients receiving a reintervention were younger and more likely to be male. At 10 years, the crude rate of reintervention was 0.59% within a surviving cohort of 341 patients. After adjusting for the competing risk of death and other covariates, the adjusted cumulative incidence of reintervention at 10 years after TAVR was 1.63%. When the rate of reinterventions was compared between early (2011-2016) and later (2017-2020) time periods, the risk-adjusted rate of reintervention at 4 years had decreased over time (0.85% vs 0.51%). CONCLUSION: The 10-year risk of valve reintervention after TAVR is low and appears to be decreasing over time. Further research is necessary to determine the driving factors contributing to valve reintervention in the current era.

Influence of left ventricular ejection fraction in patients undergoing contemporary pLVAD-supported high-risk PCI.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular (LV) systolic dysfunction worsens outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The objective of this study, therefore, was to evaluate outcomes of pLVAD-supported high-risk PCI (HRPCI) patients according to LV ejection fraction (LVEF). METHODS: Patients from the PROTECT III study undergoing pLVAD-supported HRPCI were stratified according to baseline LVEF: severe LV dysfunction (LVEF <30%), mild and moderate LV dysfunction (LVEF ≥30% to <50%), or preserved LV function (LVEF ≥50%). Major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE: composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke/transient ischemic attack, and repeat revascularization), and PCI-related complications were assessed at 90 days and mortality was assessed at 1-year. RESULTS: From March 2017 to March 2020, 940 patients had evaluable baseline LVEF recorded in the study database. Patients with preserved LV function were older, more frequently presented with myocardial infarction, and underwent more left main PCI and atherectomy. Immediate PCI-related coronary complications were infrequent (2.7%, overall), similar between groups (P = 0.98), and not associated with LVEF. Unadjusted 90-day MACCE rates were similar among LVEF groups; however, as a continuous variable, LVEF was associated with both 90-day MACCE (adj.HR per 5% 0.89, 95% CI [0.80, 0.98], P = 0.018) and 1-year mortality (adj.HR per 5% 0.84 [0.78, 0.90], P <0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent pLVAD-supported HRPCI exhibited low incidence of PCI-related complications, regardless of baseline LVEF. However, LVEF was associated with 90-day MACCE and 1-year mortality.

Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium Definitions for Tricuspid Regurgitation and Trial Endpoints.

Interest in the pathophysiology, etiology, management, and outcomes of patients with tricuspid regurgitation (TR) has grown in the wake of multiple natural history studies showing progressively worse outcomes associated with increasing TR severity, even after adjusting for multiple comorbidities. Historically, isolated tricuspid valve surgery has been associated with high in-hospital mortality rates, leading to the development of transcatheter treatment options. The aim of this first Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document is to standardize definitions of disease etiology and severity, as well as endpoints for trials that aim to address the gaps in our knowledge related to identification and management of patients with TR. Standardizing endpoints for trials should provide consistency and enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. A second Tricuspid Valve Academic Research Consortium document will focus on further defining trial endpoints and will discuss trial design options.

Days at home after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Days at home (DAH) quantifies time spent at home after a medical event but has not been fully evaluated for TAVR. We sought to compare 1- and 5-year DAH (DAH365, DAH1825) among high-risk patients participating in a randomized trial of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding bioprosthesis versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). METHODS: We linked data from the U.S. CoreValve High Risk Trial to Medicare Fee-for-Service claims in 456 patients with 450 (234 TAVR/216 SAVR) and 427 (222 TAVR/205 SAVR) analyzed at 1 and 5 years. DAH was calculated as the number of days alive and spent outside of a hospital, skilled nursing facility, rehabilitation, long-term acute care hospital, emergency department, or observation stay. RESULTS: Mean DAH365 was higher in patients who underwent TAVR compared with SAVR (295.1 ± 106.9 vs 267.8 ± 122.3, difference in days 27.2 [95% CI 6.0, 48.5], P = .01). Compared with SAVR, TAVR patients had a shorter index length of stay (LOS) (7.4 ± 4.5 vs 12.5 ± 9.0, difference in days -5.1 [-6.5, -3.8], P < .001). The largest contributions to decreased DAH365 were mortality days and total facility days after discharge from the index hospitalization (mortality days-TAVR: 34.7 ± 93.1 vs SAVR: 48.0 ± 108.8, difference in days -13.3 [95% CI -32.1, 5.5], P = .17; total facility days-TAVR: 27.9 ± 47.4 vs SAVR: 36.7 ± 48.9, difference in days -8.8 [95% CI -17.8, 0.1], P = .05). Mean DAH1825 was numerically but not statistically significantly higher in TAVR (TAVR: 1154.2 ± 659.0 vs SAVR: 1067.6 ± 697.3, difference in days 86.6 [95% CI -42.3, 215.6], P = .19). Landmark analysis showed no difference in DAH from years 1 to 5 (TAVR: 1040.4 ± 477.5 vs SAVR: 1022.9 ± 489.3, P = .74). CONCLUSIONS: In the U.S. CoreValve High Risk Trial linked to Medicare, high-risk patients undergoing TAVR spend an average of 27 additional DAH compared with SAVR in the first year after the procedure due to a shorter index LOS and the additive effect of fewer but nonsignificantly different mortality and total facility days after discharge from the index hospitalization compared with SAVR. After the first year, both groups spend a similar number of DAH. These results describe the postprocedural course of high-risk patients from a patient-centered perspective, which may guide expectations regarding longitudinal health care needs and inform shared decision-making.

Prosthetic valve endocarditis: Literally a growing concern following transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low surgical risk patients is uncommon, occurring in 11 of 396 patients (2.8%) in the study by Medranda et al., but associated with high morbidity (6 of 11 with embolic strokes [55%]) and mortality (2 of 11 [18%]). As TAVR volumes increase, especially in low surgical risk patients, whose long-term outcomes are generally excellent, PVE will become an increasingly important concern. Future research is needed to identify optimal strategies for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of PVE associated with TAVR.

Sex-related differences in the trends and outcomes of trans-septal transcatheter mitral valve replacement: Insights from the National Readmissions Database.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data regarding the sex-related differences in the trends and outcomes of trans-septal transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TS-TMVR). METHODS: The Nationwide Readmissions Database (2015-2018) was queried for admissions for TS-TMVR. Propensity matched analysis was conducted to compare outcomes with hospitalizations for TS-TMVR among women versus men. The main study outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Our final analysis included 2063 hospitalizations for TS-TMVR; of whom, 58.1% were women. The proportion of women among those undergoing TS-TMVR increased from 50% in 2015 to 60.2% in 2018 (Ptrend = 0.04). Compared with men, women undergoing TS-TMVR were slightly younger, and had a distinct profile of comorbidities. After matching, there was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality among women versus men undergoing TS-TMVR (7.8% vs. 6.1%, OR = 1.30; 95% CI: 0.79-2.13). Subgroup analyzes showed an interaction toward higher mortality with women versus men among patients with CKD (Pinteraction = 0.07). There were no significant differences between women and men in in-hospital complications or length of stay after TS-TMVR. Compared with men, women undergoing TS-TMVR were more likely to be discharged to a nursing facility (17.7% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.01) and had higher rates of 30-day readmissions (22.4% vs. 13.6%, p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: This nationwide analysis showed an increase in the proportion of women among patients undergoing TS-TMVR during the study years. There were no differences in in-hospital mortality, in-hospital complications, or length of stay between both sexes following TS-TMVR. Women were more likely to be discharged to nursing facilities and had higher rates of readmission at 30 days even after propensity matching.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: How Would You Manage This Patient With Severe Aortic Stenosis? : Grand Rounds Discussion From Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Aortic stenosis (AS) is common, especially among the elderly. Left untreated, severe symptomatic AS is typically fatal. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was the standard of care until transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was shown to have lower mortality rates in patients at the highest surgical risk and was recommended for this group in the 2014 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) guidelines. In the 2017 AHA/ACC focused update, evidence of benefit and noninferiority extended the use of TAVR to intermediate-risk patients. More recent studies suggest potential benefit to low-risk patients, although no published guidelines yet recommend the use of TAVR for this population. An advantage of SAVR is a 30-year experience with valve durability, but SAVR may have higher rates of perioperative death and a slower return of quality of life. Although TAVR has less than 10-year experience with valve durability, it has lower or noninferior primary end points, such as mortality and stroke, and fewer periprocedural complications among anatomically permissive patients. Here, a cardiologist and a cardiothoracic surgeon debate the risks and benefits of TAVR versus SAVR for a patient with severe symptomatic AS who is at low risk for surgical death.

Cost-Effectiveness of Tafamidis Therapy for Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: In patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy, tafamidis reduces all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospitalizations and slows decline in quality of life compared with placebo. In May 2019, tafamidis received expedited approval from the US Food and Drug Administration as a breakthrough drug for a rare disease. However, at $225 000 per year, it is the most expensive cardiovascular drug ever launched in the United States, and its long-term cost-effectiveness and budget impact are uncertain. We therefore aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of tafamidis and its potential effect on US health care spending. METHODS: We developed a Markov model of patients with wild-type or variant transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy and heart failure (mean age, 74.5 years) using inputs from the ATTR-ACT trial (Transthyretin Amyloidosis Cardiomyopathy Clinical Trial), published literature, US Food and Drug Administration review documents, healthcare claims, and national survey data. We compared no disease-specific treatment ("usual care") with tafamidis therapy. The model reproduced 30-month survival, quality of life, and cardiovascular hospitalization rates observed in ATTR-ACT; future projections used a parametric survival model in the control arm, with constant hazards reduction in the tafamidis arm. We discounted future costs and quality-adjusted life-years by 3% annually and examined key parameter uncertainty using deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. The main outcomes were lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and annual budget impact, assessed from the US healthcare sector perspective. This study was independent of the ATTR-ACT trial sponsor. RESULTS: Compared with usual care, tafamidis was projected to add 1.29 (95% uncertainty interval, 0.47-1.75) quality-adjusted life-years at an incremental cost of $1 135 000 (872 000-1 377 000), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $880 000 (697 000-1 564 000) per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Assuming a threshold of $100 000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained and current drug price, tafamidis was cost-effective in 0% of 10 000 probabilistic simulations. A 92.6% price reduction from $225 000 to $16 563 would be necessary to make tafamidis cost-effective at $100 000/quality-adjusted life-year. Results were sensitive to assumptions related to long-term effectiveness of tafamidis. Treating all eligible patients with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy in the United States with tafamidis (n=120 000) was estimated to increase annual healthcare spending by $32.3 billion. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with tafamidis is projected to produce substantial clinical benefit but would greatly exceed conventional cost-effectiveness thresholds at the current US list price. On the basis of recent US experience with high-cost cardiovascular medications, access to and uptake of this effective therapy may be limited unless there is a large reduction in drug costs.

The use of MitraClip to prevent posttranscatheter aortic valve replacement left ventricular "suicide".

Patients with concomitant severe aortic stenosis (AS) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are at risk for hemodynamic collapse due to a sudden decrease in afterload causing worsening LVOT obstruction. We present a case of an 88-year-old female with symptomatic, severe AS, and LVOT obstruction with systolic anterior motion (SAM) of the mitral leaflet in whom alcohol septal ablation was contraindicated secondary to a chronic total occlusion of the right coronary artery that filled retrograde via septal collaterals. MitraClip at the time of TAVR was successfully performed to treat SAM with subsequent stabilization of LVOT gradients despite treatment of the patient's AS. This novel approach may represent a feasible option to prevent hemodynamic complications after TAVR in patients with significant LVOT obstruction secondary to SAM and AS.

Hot topics in interventional cardiology: Proceedings from the society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) 2021 think tank.

The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) Think Tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community annually for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2021 Think Tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease. Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's Emerging Leader Mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialog from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI, the industry community and external stakeholders in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.

Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Versus Medical Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure and Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Results From the COAPT Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation) demonstrated that edge-to-edge transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with the MitraClip resulted in reduced mortality and heart failure hospitalizations and improved quality of life compared with maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation. Whether TMVr is cost-effective compared with GDMT in this population is unknown. METHODS: We used data from the COAPT trial to perform a formal patient-level economic analysis of TMVr+GDMT versus GDMT alone for patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation from the perspective of the US healthcare system. Costs for the index TMVr hospitalization were assessed using a combination of resource-based accounting and hospital billing data (when available). Follow-up medical care costs were estimated on the basis of medical resource use collected during the COAPT trial. Health utilities were estimated for all patients at baseline and 1, 6, 12, and 24 months with the Short Form Six-Dimension Health Survey. RESULTS: Initial costs for the TMVr procedure and index hospitalization were $35 755 and $48 198, respectively. Although follow-up costs were significantly lower with TMVr compared with GDMT ($26 654 versus $38 345; P=0.018), cumulative 2-year costs remained higher with TMVr because of the upfront cost of the index procedure ($73 416 versus $38 345; P<0.001). When in-trial survival, health utilities, and costs were modeled over a lifetime horizon, TMVr was projected to increase life expectancy by 1.13 years and quality-adjusted life-years by 0.82 years at a cost of $45 648, yielding a lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $40 361 per life-year gained and $55 600 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: For symptomatic patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation, TMVr increases life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy compared with GDMT at an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained that represents acceptable economic value according to current US thresholds. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01626079.

Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Risk.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at intermediate surgical risk, treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) results in similar rates of death or stroke at 2 years. Whether TAVR is cost-effective compared with SAVR for intermediate-risk patients remains uncertain. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2014, 3110 intermediate-risk AS patients were treated with TAVR or SAVR in the PARTNER 2 trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 2). A total of 2032 patients were randomized to receive TAVR using the SAPIEN XT valve (XT-TAVR) or SAVR in the PARTNER 2A trial, whereas the PARTNER S3i registry included an additional 1078 patients treated with TAVR using the SAPIEN 3 valve (S3-TAVR), which offers a lower delivery profile and sealing skirt designed to reduce paravalvular regurgitation compared with XT-TAVR. Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization. Other in-trial costs were assessed by linkage of trial data with Medicare claims (n=2333) or by linear regression models for unlinked patients (n=682). Health utilities were estimated using the EQ-5D at baseline and 1, 12, and 24 months. Using a Markov model informed by in-trial costs, utilities, and survival data, lifetime cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the US healthcare system was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Although procedural costs were ≈$20 000 higher with TAVR than SAVR, total cost differences for the index hospitalization were only $2888 higher with XT-TAVR ( P=0.014) and were $4155 lower with S3-TAVR ( P<0.001) owing to reductions in length of stay with TAVR. Follow-up costs were significantly lower with XT-TAVR (Δ=-$9304; P<0.001) and S3-TAVR (Δ=-$11 377; P<0.001) than with SAVR. Over a lifetime horizon, TAVR was projected to lower total costs by $8000 to $10 000 and to increase quality-adjusted survival by 0.15 to 0.27 years. XT-TAVR and S3-TAVR were found to be economically dominant compared with SAVR in 84% and 97% of bootstrap replicates, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among intermediate-risk AS patients, TAVR is projected to be economically dominant from the perspective of the US healthcare system by providing both greater quality-adjusted life expectancy and lower long-term costs than SAVR. If long-term data demonstrate comparable late mortality with TAVR and SAVR, these findings suggest that TAVR might be the preferred treatment strategy for intermediate-risk AS patients based on both clinical and economic considerations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01314313.

Outcomes of COVID-19 in Patients With a History of Cancer and Comorbid Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and cardiovascular disease (CVD) are independently associated with adverse outcomes in patients with COVID-19. However, outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with both cancer and comorbid CVD are unknown. METHODS: This retrospective study included 2,476 patients who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 at 4 Massachusetts hospitals between March 11 and May 21, 2020. Patients were stratified by a history of either cancer (n=195) or CVD (n=414) and subsequently by the presence of both cancer and CVD (n=82). We compared outcomes between patients with and without cancer and patients with both cancer and CVD compared with patients with either condition alone. The primary endpoint was COVID-19-associated severe disease, defined as a composite of the need for mechanical ventilation, shock, or death. Secondary endpoints included death, shock, need for mechanical ventilation, need for supplemental oxygen, arrhythmia, venous thromboembolism, encephalopathy, abnormal troponin level, and length of stay. RESULTS: Multivariable analysis identified cancer as an independent predictor of COVID-19-associated severe disease among all infected patients. Patients with cancer were more likely to develop COVID-19-associated severe disease than were those without cancer (hazard ratio [HR], 2.02; 95% CI, 1.53-2.68; P<.001). Furthermore, patients with both cancer and CVD had a higher likelihood of COVID-19-associated severe disease compared with those with either cancer (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.11-3.10; P=.02) or CVD (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.21-2.66; P=.004) alone. Patients died more frequently if they had both cancer and CVD compared with either cancer (35% vs 17%; P=.004) or CVD (35% vs 21%; P=.009) alone. Arrhythmias and encephalopathy were also more frequent in patients with both cancer and CVD compared with those with cancer alone. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a history of both cancer and CVD are at significantly higher risk of experiencing COVID-19-associated adverse outcomes. Aggressive public health measures are needed to mitigate the risks of COVID-19 infection in this vulnerable patient population.

Durability of quality of life benefits of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Long-term results from the CoreValve US extreme risk trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at extreme surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) leads to improved survival and health status when compared with medical therapy. Whether the early health status benefits of TAVR in these patients are sustained beyond 1 year of follow-up is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Six hundred thirty-nine patients with severe AS at extreme surgical risk underwent TAVR in the CoreValve US Extreme Risk Pivotal trial. Health status was evaluated at baseline and at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), the Short-Form-12, and the EuroQoL-5D. Analyses were performed using pattern mixture models to account for both death and missing data and were stratified by iliofemoral (IF) and non-iliofemoral (non-IF) access. After TAVR, there was substantial health status improvement in disease-specific and generic scales by 6 to 12 months. Although there were small declines in health status after 12 months, the initial benefits of TAVR were largely sustained through 3 years for both IF and non-IF cohorts (change from baseline in KCCQ Overall Summary score 19.0 points in IF patients and 14.9 points in non-IF patients; P<.01 for both comparisons). Among surviving patients, clinically meaningful (≥10 point) improvements in the KCCQ Overall Summary Score at 3 years were observed in 85.0% and 83.4% of IF and non-IF patients respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among extreme risk patients with severe AS, TAVR resulted in large initial health status benefits that were sustained through 3-year follow-up. Although late mortality was high in this population, these findings demonstrate that TAVR offers substantial and durable health status improvements for surviving patients.

Aortic valve replacement today: Outcomes, costs, and opportunities for improvement.

The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) just two decades ago has transformed the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. TAVR has not only extended the option of aortic valve replacement to patients deemed ineligible for surgery, it has also demonstrated similar or better short- and intermediate-term clinical outcomes compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at all levels of surgical risk. These benefits have been achieved with similar or lower costs compared with SAVR, at least in the first 1-2 years for intermediate- and low-risk patients. Longer-term data will further inform clinical and shared decision-making. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENTS: In just over two decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as a frontline approach for appropriately selected patients with severe aortic stenosis. A growing body of evidence documents similar or better clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness for transcatheter compared with surgical aortic valve replacement. Whether the mode is transcatheter or surgical, aortic valve replacement remains underutilized in patients with clear indications for intervention.

Trends in Percutaneous Device Use for the Treatment of Venous Thromboembolism Over Time in the PINC AI Healthcare Database and the National Inpatient Sample.

The number of different methods of reperfusion therapy to treat venous thromboembolism (VTE) has increased substantially. Nevertheless, investigation of data representativeness and device-level use in administrative databases has been limited. Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) and the PINC AI Healthcare Database (PHD), all hospital encounters with a diagnosis code of VTE were identified between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. Patient demographics and trends in treatment modalities were evaluated over time. An algorithm was developed to identify specific devices used for VTE treatment in the PHD cohort. A total of 145,870 patients with VTE treated with reperfusion therapy were identified in the NIS (pulmonary embolism [PE] 88,725, isolated deep vein thrombosis [iDVT] 57,145) and 39,311 in the PHD (PE 25,383, iDVT 13,928). Patient demographics were qualitatively similar in the NIS and PHD. Over time, there was a significant increase in the use of mechanical thrombectomy in the PE and iDVT populations (p <0.05 in both databases), with catheter-directed thrombolysis use plateauing in PE (p = 0.83 and p = 0.14 in NIS and PHD, respectively) and significantly decreasing for the iDVT population (p <0.05 in both databases). In the PHD cohort, specific reperfusion devices were identified in 14,105 patients (PE 9,098, iDVT 5,007). In conclusion, the use of mechanical thrombectomy for the treatment of VTE has increased over time, whereas the rates of catheter-directed thrombolysis therapy have remained stagnant or decreased. Further research is needed to understand the uptake of these treatment modalities and the unique abilities of the PHD to study specific device therapy in the VTE population.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in aortic stenosis patients at low- and intermediate-surgical risk in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low- and intermediate-risk patients from a Japanese public healthcare payer perspective. METHODS: A Markov model cost-effectiveness analysis was developed. Clinical and utility data were extracted from a systematic literature review. Cost inputs were obtained from analysis of the Medical Data Vision claims database and supplemented with a targeted literature search. The robustness of the results was assessed using sensitivity analyses. Scenario analyses were performed to determine the impact of lower mean age (77.5 years) and the effect of two different long-term mortality hazard ratios (TAVI versus SAVR: 0.9-1.09) on both risk-level populations. This analysis was conducted according to the guidelines for cost-effectiveness evaluation in Japan from Core 2 Health. RESULTS: In intermediate-risk patients, TAVI was a dominant procedure (TAVI had lower cost and higher effectiveness). In low-risk patients, the incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for TAVI was ¥750,417/quality-adjusted-life-years (QALY), which was below the cost-effectiveness threshold of ¥5 million/QALY. The ICER for TAVI was robust to all tested sensitivity and scenario analyses. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI was dominant and cost-effective compared to SAVR in intermediate- and low-risk patients, respectively. These results suggest that TAVI can provide meaningful value to Japanese patients relative to SAVR, at a reasonable incremental cost for patients at low surgical risk and potentially resulting in cost-savings in patients at intermediate surgical risk.

Aortic Stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease in Japan, and, if left untreated, severe symptomatic AS (sSAS) is associated with a dramatic increase in mortality and morbidity. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) is a minimally invasive treatment option for replacing the aortic valve in patients with sSAS and has been associated with similar or better outcomes compared to Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR), which involves open-heart surgical replacement of the aortic valve. The objective of this study was to compare the costs and health outcomes associated with TAVI compared to SAVR in Japanese patients deemed low- or intermediate-risk for surgery. Despite the expanding use of TAVI in Japan, a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) does not exist that evaluates the economics of TAVI with the current generation SAPIEN 3 implant in patients with low- and intermediate-risk from a public perspective. Our study suggests that TAVI represents strong value for money among low- and intermediate-risk patients in Japan: compared to SAVR, TAVI is associated with better clinical outcomes and quality of life for patients, at a reasonable additional cost for low-risk patients and at a lower cost for intermediate-risk patients.

Chronological vs Biological Age in Interventional Cardiology: A Comprehensive Approach to Care for Older Adults: JACC Family Series.

Aging is the gradual decline in physical and physiological functioning leading to increased susceptibility to stressors and chronic illnesses, including cardiovascular disease. With an aging global population, in which 1 in 6 individuals will be older than 60 years by 2030, interventional cardiologists are increasingly involved in providing complex care for older individuals. Although procedural aspects remain their main clinical focus, interventionalists frequently encounter age-associated risks that influence eligibility for invasive care, decision making during the intervention, procedural adverse events, and long-term management decisions. The unprecedented growth in transcatheter interventions, especially for structural heart diseases at extremes of age, have pushed age-related risks and implications for cardiovascular care to the forefront. In this JACC state-of-the-art review, the authors provide a comprehensive overview of the aging process as it relates to cardiovascular interventions, with special emphasis on the difference between chronological and biological aging. The authors also address key considerations to improve health outcomes for older patients during and after their invasive cardiovascular care. The role of "gerotherapeutics" in interventional cardiology, technological innovation in measuring biological aging, and the integration of patient-centered outcomes in the older adult population are also discussed.