Complications of Balloon Pulmonary Angioplasty: A Comprehensive Analysis Based on the Latest ESC Consensus Statement.

Background/Objectives: The literature reports high complication rates in patients with chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) who undergo balloon pulmonary angioplasty (BPA), especially in patients with poor pulmonary hemodynamics. Here, we describe the complications of BPA based on the new definitions. Methods: All patients with CTEPH who completed BPA treatment before 15 September 2023 were selected from the CTEPH database. Peri-procedural complications were collected and classified according to the 2023 consensus paper on BPA treatment. Complications were analyzed in subgroups of patients with pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR), ≤ or >6.6 WU, and mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP), ≤ or >45 mmHg, at first BPA. Results: In this analysis, 87 patients (63% women; mean age 61.1 ± 14.0 years; 62% on dual PH targeted medical therapy) underwent 426 (mean 4.9 ± 1.6 per patient) BPAs. Only non-severe complications occurred in 14% of BPA treatments and in 47% of the patients; 31% patients had a thoracic complication. The thoracic complications were mild (71%) or moderate (29%). Patients with a PVR > 6.6 WU (n = 8) underwent more BPA treatments (6.6 ± 1.5 versus 4.6 ± 1.5, p = 0.002), had more complications (88% versus 41% of patients, p = 0.020), and had more thoracic complications (17% vs. 7% of BPAs, p = 0.013) than patients with PVR ≤ 6.6 WU. Patients with mPAP > 45 mmHg (n = 13) also had more BPA treatments (6.5 ± 1.7 versus 4.6 ± 1.4, p < 0.001), more complications (77% versus 44% of patients, p = 0.027) and more thoracic complications (14% versus 8% of BPAs, p = 0.039) than patients with mPAP ≤ 45 mmHg. Conclusions: Complications occurred in 14% of BPAs and were mostly mild. Patients with severe pulmonary hemodynamics suffered more (thoracic) complications.

Continuation versus Interruption of Oral Anticoagulation during TAVI.

BACKGROUND: One third of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) have an indication for oral anticoagulation owing to concomitant diseases. Interruption of oral anticoagulation during TAVI may decrease the risk of bleeding, whereas continuation may decrease the risk of thromboembolism. METHODS: We conducted an international, open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial involving patients who were receiving oral anticoagulants and were planning to undergo TAVI. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to periprocedural continuation or interruption of oral anticoagulation. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke from any cause, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications, or major bleeding within 30 days after TAVI. RESULTS: A total of 858 patients were included in the modified intention-to-treat population: 431 were assigned to continuation and 427 to interruption of oral anticoagulation. A primary-outcome event occurred in 71 patients (16.5%) in the continuation group and in 63 (14.8%) in the interruption group (risk difference, 1.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -3.1 to 6.6; P = 0.18 for noninferiority). Thromboembolic events occurred in 38 patients (8.8%) in the continuation group and in 35 (8.2%) in the interruption group (risk difference, 0.6 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.1 to 4.4). Bleeding occurred in 134 patients (31.1%) in the continuation group and in 91 (21.3%) in the interruption group (risk difference, 9.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.9 to 15.6). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing TAVI with a concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation, periprocedural continuation was not noninferior to interruption of oral anticoagulation during TAVI with respect to the incidence of a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications, or major bleeding at 30 days. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development and the St. Antonius Research Fund; POPular PAUSE TAVI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04437303.).

Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion in Patients With Anticoagulation Failure vs Anticoagulation Contraindication.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides mechanical cardioembolic protection for atrial fibrillation (AF) patients who cannot use oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). Patients with a thrombotic event despite OAT are at high risk for recurrence and may also benefit from LAAO. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the efficacy of LAAO in AF patients with a thrombotic event on OAT compared to: 1) LAAO in AF patients with a contraindication for OAT; and 2) historical data. METHODS: The international LAAO after stroke despite oral anticoagulation (STR-OAC LAAO) collaboration included patients who underwent LAAO because of thrombotic events on OAT. This cohort underwent propensity score matching and was compared to the EWOLUTION (Evaluating Real-Life Clinical Outcomes in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Receiving the WATCHMAN Left Atrial Appendage Closure Technology) registry, which represents patients who underwent LAAO because of OAT contraindications. The primary outcome was ischemic stroke. Event rates were compared between cohorts and with historical data without OAT, yielding relative risk reductions based on risk scores. RESULTS: Analysis of 438 matched pairs revealed no significant difference in the ischemic stroke rate between the STR-OAC LAAO and EWOLUTION cohorts (2.5% vs 1.9%; HR: 1.37; 95% CI: 0.72-2.61). STR-OAC LAAO patients exhibited a higher thromboembolic risk (HR: 1.71; 95% CI: 1.04-2.83) but lower bleeding risk (HR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.18-0.88) compared to EWOLUTION patients. The mortality rate was slightly higher in EWOLUTION (4.3% vs 6.9%; log-rank P = 0.028). Relative risk reductions for ischemic stroke were 70% and 78% in STR-OAC LAAO and EWOLUTION, respectively, compared to historical data without OAT. CONCLUSIONS: LAAO in patients with a thrombotic event on OAT demonstrated comparable stroke rates to the OAT contraindicated population in EWOLUTION. The thromboembolic event rate was higher and the bleeding rate lower, reflecting the intrinsically different risk profile of both populations. Until randomized trials are available, LAAO may be considered in patients with an ischemic event on OAT.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1·5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS: In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2-4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10·44% and assuming an event rate of 26·10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80·0 years (SD 5·7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80·4 years (5·4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2·6% [IQR 1·7-4·0] vs contemporary 2·6% [1·7-4·0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of -2·3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3·8, pnon-inferiority<0·0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION: In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days. FUNDING: Meril Life Sciences.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1•5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2­4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10•44% and assuming an event rate of 26•10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80•0 years (SD 5•7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80•4 years (5•4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2•6% [IQR 1•7­4•0] vs contemporary 2•6% [1•7­4•0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of ­2•3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3•8, pnon-inferiority<0•0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days.

Safety and feasibility of early discharge after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with ACURATE Neo-the POLESTAR trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) serves a growing range of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). TAVI has evolved to a streamlined procedure minimizing length of hospital stay. AIMS: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of an early discharge (ED) strategy after TAVI. METHODS: We performed an international, multi-center, prospective observational single-arm study in AS patients undergoing TAVI with the ACURATE valve platform. Eligibility for ED was assessed prior to TAVI and based on prespecified selection criteria. Discharge ≤ 48 h was defined as ED. Primary Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3-defined 30-day safety and efficacy composite endpoints were landmarked at 48 h and compared between ED and non-ED groups. RESULTS: A total of 252 patients were included. The median age was 82 [25th-75th percentile, 78-85] years and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) score was 2.2% [25th-75th percentile, 1.6-3.3]. ED and non-ED were achieved in 173 (69%) and 79 (31%) patients respectively. Monitoring for conduction disturbances was the principal reason for non-ED (33%). Overall, at 30 days, all-cause mortality was 1%, new permanent pacemaker rate was 4%, and valve- or procedure-related rehospitalization was 4%. There was no difference in the primary safety and efficacy endpoint between the ED and non-ED cohorts (OR 0.84 [25th-75th percentile, 0.31-2.26], p = 0.73, and OR 0.97 [25th-75th percentile, 0.46-2.06], p = 0.94). The need for rehospitalization was similarly low for ED and non-ED groups. CONCLUSION: Early discharge after TAVI with the ACURATE valve is safe and feasible in selected patients. Rhythm monitoring and extended clinical observation protracted hospital stay.

Preoperative computed tomography-imaging with patient-specific computer simulation in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Design and rationale of the GUIDE-TAVI trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment option for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, but is still associated with relatively high rates of pacemaker implantation and paravalvular regurgitation. Routine preoperative computed tomography (CT) combined with patient-specific computer modelling can predict the interaction between the TAVI device and the patient's unique anatomy, allowing physicians to assess the risk for paravalvular regurgitation and conduction disorders in advance to the procedure. The aim of this trial is to assess potential improvement in the procedural outcome of TAVI by applying CT-based patient-specific computer simulations in patients with suitable anatomy for TAVI. METHODS: The GUIDE-TAVI trial is an international multicenter randomized controlled trial including patients accepted for TAVI by the Heart Team. Patients enrolled in the study will be randomized into 2 arms of each 227 patients. In patients randomized to the use of FEops HEARTGuide (FHG), patient-specific computer simulation with FHG is performed in addition to routine preoperative CT imaging and results of the FHG are available to the operator(s) prior to the scheduled intervention. In patients randomized to no use of FHG, only routine preoperative CT imaging is performed. The primary objective is to evaluate whether the use of FHG will reduce the incidence of mild to severe PVR, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3. Secondary endpoints include the incidence of new conduction disorders requiring permanent pacemaker implantation, the difference between preoperative and final selected valve size, the difference between target and final implantation depth, change of preoperative decision, failure to implant valve, early safety composite endpoint and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: The GUIDE-TAVI trial is the first multicenter randomized controlled trial to evaluate the value of 3-dimensional computer simulations in addition to standard preprocedural planning in TAVI procedures.

Periprocedural continuation versus interruption of oral anticoagulant drugs during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the POPular PAUSE TAVI trial.

About one-third of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) use oral anticoagulants (OAC), mainly due to atrial fibrillation. General guidelines advise interrupting OAC in patients with a high risk of bleeding undergoing interventions. However, preliminary observational data suggest that the continuation of OAC during TAVI is safe and may reduce the risk of periprocedural thromboembolic events. The Periprocedural Continuation Versus Interruption of Oral Anticoagulant Drugs During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (POPular PAUSE TAVI) is a multicentre, randomised clinical trial with open-label treatment and blinded endpoint assessment. Patients are randomised 1:1 to periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC and are stratified for vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulant use. The primary endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular mortality, all stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications and type 2-4 bleeding within 30 days after TAVI, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. Secondary endpoints include separate individual and composite outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Since continuation of OAC is associated with the ancillary benefit that it simplifies periprocedural management, the primary outcome is first analysed for non-inferiority; if non-inferiority is proven, superiority will be tested. Recruitment started in November 2020, and the trial will continue until a total of 858 patients have been included and followed for 90 days. In summary, POPular PAUSE TAVI is the first randomised clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC in patients undergoing TAVI.

Long-term outcomes of successful left atrial appendage occlusion with focus on stroke prevention: 10-year follow-up of a single-center registry.

Background: Percutaneous left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an alternative to anticoagulation in the prevention of stroke in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, especially in patients with a contraindication for oral anticoagulation therapy (OAT). Objective: The study sought to obtain long-term patient outcomes after successful LAAO in everyday clinical practice. Methods: In this single-center registry spanning over 10 years, data of all consecutive patients that underwent percutaneous LAAO were collected. Observed thromboembolic and major bleeding event rates after successful LAAO during follow-up were compared with expected event rates based on CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes mellitus, prior stroke or transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex category) and HAS-BLED (hypertension, abnormal renal or liver function, stroke, bleeding, labile international normalized ratio, elderly, drugs or alcohol) scores. Furthermore, anticoagulation and antiplatelet use during follow-up was evaluated. Results: Of 230 patients scheduled for LAAO (38% women, 69.5 ± 8.2 years of age, CHA2DS2-VASc score 3.9 ± 1.6, HAS-BLED score 2.9 ± 1.0), 218 patients had a successful implantation (95%) with a follow-up duration of 5.2 ± 3.1 years. The procedure was combined with catheter ablation in 52% of the patients. Fifty thromboembolic complications (24 ischemic stroke, 26 transient ischemic attack) were observed during follow-up in 40 (18%) of 218 patients. Ischemic strokes occurred with a rate of 2.1 per 100 patient-years, accounting for a 66% relative risk reduction compared with the CHA2DS2-VASc predicted event rate. Device-related thrombus was observed in 5 (2%) patients. Sixty-five nonprocedural major bleeding complications occurred in 24 (11%) of 218 patients with a rate of 5.7 per 100-patient years, which is comparable to estimated HAS-BLED-bleeding rates under OAT use. At end of follow-up 71% of all patients were on single antiplatelet or no antiplatelet or anticoagulation treatment, while 29% were on OAT. Conclusion: Thromboembolic event rates during long-term follow-up after successful LAAO remained consistently lower than expected supporting the efficacy of LAAO.

Diagnostic Performance of CCTA and CT-FFR for the Detection of CAD in TAVR Work-Up.

BACKGROUND: The work-up for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) currently uses computed tomography to evaluate the annulus diameter and peripheral vascular access plus invasive coronary angiography (ICA) to assess significant coronary artery disease (CAD). ICA might partially be redundant with the use of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). Prior studies found an improvement of the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA with the use of computed tomography-derived fractional flow reserve (CT-FFR). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the diagnostic performance of CT-FFR for the diagnosis of CAD in the work-up for TAVR. METHODS: Consecutive patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR work-up between 2015 and 2019 were included in this retrospective cross-sectional study. All patients underwent CCTA and ICA within 3 months, and the diagnostic performance of both CCTA and CT-FFR was assessed using ICA as the reference. RESULTS: Seventy-six of the 338 patients included in the analysis had ≥1 significant coronary stenosis on ICA. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and diagnostic accuracy per patient were 76.9%, 64.5%, 34.0%, 92.1%, and 66.9% for CCTA and 84.6%, 88.3%, 63.2%, 96.0%, and 87.6% for CT-FFR. The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve was significantly different between CCTA and CT-FFR (0.84 vs 0.90, P = 0.02). A CT-FFR-guided approach could avoid ICA in 57.1% versus 43.6% of patients using CCTA. CONCLUSIONS: CT-FFR significantly improves the diagnostic accuracy of CCTA without additional testing and increases the proportion of patients in whom ICA could have been safely avoided. It has the potential to be integrated in the current clinical work-up for TAVR for diagnosing stable CAD requiring treatment.

Rationale and Design of the Project to Look for Early Discharge in Patients Undergoing TAVR With ACURATE (POLESTAR Trial).

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is now an established treatment strategy for elderly patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) across the entire operative risk spectrum. Streamlined TAVR protocols along with reduced procedure time and expedited ambulation promote early hospital discharge. Selection of patients suitable for safe early discharge after TAVR might improve healthcare efficiency. STUDY DESIGN: The POLESTAR trial is an international, multi-center, prospective, observational study which aims to evaluate the safety of early discharge in selected patients who undergo TAVR with the supra-annular functioning self-expanding ACURATE Neo transcatheter heart valve (THV). A total of 250 patients will be included based on a set of baseline criteria indicating potential early discharge (within 48 h post-TAVR). Primary study endpoints include Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3 defined safety at 30 days and VARC-3 defined efficacy at 30 days and 1 year. Endpoints will be compared between early discharge and non-early discharge cohorts with a distinct landmark analysis at 48 h post-TAVR. Secondary endpoints include quality of life assessed using EQ5D-5L and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) questionnaires and resource costs compared between discharge groups. SUMMARY: The POLESTAR trial prospectively evaluates safety and feasibility of an early discharge protocol for TAVR using the ACURATE Neo THV.

Diagnostic performance and clinical implications for enhancing a hybrid quantitative flow ratio-FFR revascularization decision-making strategy.

Invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) adoption remains low mainly due to procedural and operator related factors as well as costs. Alternatively, quantitative flow ratio (QFR) achieves a high accuracy mainly outside the intermediate zone without the need for hyperaemia and wire-use. We aimed to determine the diagnostic performance of QFR and to evaluate a QFR-FFR hybrid strategy in which FFR is measured only in the intermediate zone. This retrospective study included 289 consecutive patients who underwent invasive coronary angiography and FFR. QFR was calculated for all vessels in which FFR was measured. The QFR-FFR hybrid approach was modelled using the intermediate zone of 0.77-0.87 in which FFR-measurements are recommended. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy on a per vessel-based analysis were 84.6%, 86.3% and 85.6% for QFR and 88.0%, 92.9% and 90.3% for the QFR-FFR hybrid approach. The diagnostic accuracy of QFR-FFR hybrid strategy with invasive FFR measurement was 93.4% and resulted in a 56.7% reduction in the need for FFR. QFR has a good correlation and agreement with invasive FFR. A hybrid QFR-FFR approach could extend the use of QFR and reduces the proportion of invasive FFR-measurements needed while improving accuracy.

Current Devices in Mitral Valve Replacement and Their Potential Complications.

Mitral regurgitation is one of the most prevalent valvulopathies worldwide, and its surgical treatment is not feasible in all cases. The elderly and frail with several comorbidities and left ventricular dysfunction are often managed conservatively. Percutaneous treatment (repair or replacement) of the mitral valve has emerged as a potential option for those patients who are at a high risk for surgery. Mitral valve repair with the Mitraclip device proved both increased safety and mortality reduction in patients with severe mitral regurgitation. On the other hand, in the last decade, percutaneous mitral replacement opened new frontiers in the field of cardiac structural interventions. There are few mitral devices; some are in the early phase of development and some are waiting for CE mark of approval. The evolution of these devices was more complicated compared to the aortic technology due to the native mitral valve's complexity and access. This review aims to provide an overview of the current devices, their specific features, and their potential complications.

Effect of Adding Ticagrelor to Standard Aspirin on Saphenous Vein Graft Patency in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (POPular CABG): A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 15% of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) occlude during the first year after coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) despite aspirin use. The POPular CABG trial (The Effect of Ticagrelor on Saphenous Vein Graft Patency in Patients Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Surgery) investigated whether ticagrelor added to standard aspirin improves SVG patency at 1 year after CABG. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, patients with ≥1 SVGs were randomly assigned (1:1) after CABG to ticagrelor or placebo added to standard aspirin (80 mg or 100 mg). The primary outcome was SVG occlusion at 1 year, assessed with coronary computed tomography angiography, in all patients that had primary outcome imaging available. A generalized estimating equation model was used to perform the primary analysis per SVG. The secondary outcome was 1-year SVG failure, which was a composite of SVG occlusion, SVG revascularization, myocardial infarction in myocardial territory supplied by a SVG, or sudden death. RESULTS: Among 499 randomly assigned patients, the mean age was 67.9±8.3 years, 87.1% were male, the indication for CABG was acute coronary syndrome in 31.3%, and 95.2% of procedures used cardiopulmonary bypass. Primary outcome imaging was available in 220 patients in the ticagrelor group and 223 patients in the placebo group. The SVG occlusion rate in the ticagrelor group was 10.5% (51 of 484 SVGs) versus 9.1% in the placebo group (43 of 470 SVGs), odds ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.73-2.30]; P=0.38. SVG failure occurred in 35 (14.2%) patients in the ticagrelor group versus 29 (11.6%) patients in the placebo group (odds ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.72-2.05]). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial, the addition of ticagrelor to standard aspirin did not reduce SVG occlusion at 1 year after CABG. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02352402.

Aspirin with or without Clopidogrel after Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The effect of single as compared with dual antiplatelet treatment on bleeding and thromboembolic events after transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) in patients who do not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation has not been well studied. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial, we assigned a subgroup of patients who were undergoing TAVI and did not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive aspirin alone or aspirin plus clopidogrel for 3 months. The two primary outcomes were all bleeding (including minor, major, and life-threatening or disabling bleeding) and non-procedure-related bleeding over a period of 12 months. Most bleeding at the TAVI puncture site was counted as non-procedure-related. The two secondary outcomes were a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-procedure-related bleeding, stroke, or myocardial infarction (secondary composite 1) and a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, ischemic stroke, or myocardial infarction (secondary composite 2) at 1 year, with both outcomes tested sequentially for noninferiority (noninferiority margin, 7.5 percentage points) and superiority. RESULTS: A total of 331 patients were assigned to receive aspirin alone and 334 were assigned to receive aspirin plus clopidogrel. A bleeding event occurred in 50 patients (15.1%) receiving aspirin alone and in 89 (26.6%) receiving aspirin plus clopidogrel (risk ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.77; P = 0.001). Non-procedure-related bleeding occurred in 50 patients (15.1%) and 83 patients (24.9%), respectively (risk ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.83; P = 0.005). A secondary composite 1 event occurred in 76 patients (23.0%) receiving aspirin alone and in 104 (31.1%) receiving aspirin plus clopidogrel (difference, -8.2 percentage points; 95% CI for noninferiority, -14.9 to -1.5; P<0.001; risk ratio, 0.74; 95% CI for superiority, 0.57 to 0.95; P = 0.04). A secondary composite 2 event occurred in 32 patients (9.7%) and 33 patients (9.9%), respectively (difference, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI for noninferiority, -4.7 to 4.3; P = 0.004; risk ratio, 0.98; 95% CI for superiority, 0.62 to 1.55; P = 0.93). A total of 44 patients (13.3%) and 32 (9.6%), respectively, received oral anticoagulation during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing TAVI who did not have an indication for oral anticoagulation, the incidence of bleeding and the composite of bleeding or thromboembolic events at 1 year were significantly less frequent with aspirin than with aspirin plus clopidogrel administered for 3 months. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development; POPular TAVI EU Clinical Trials Register number, 2013-003125-28; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02247128.).

Can TAVR Be Effectively and Safely Performed Without Intraprocedural TEE?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The TAVR procedure is a well-established therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate/high risk for surgery and a potential treatment for low-risk patients. It is much less invasive with short hospital stays and presents similar results compared with SAVR. Different "minimalist approach strategies" were proposed in order to obtain this performance. In these settings, transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) became less relevant for the TAVR procedure. The present review provides an update regarding the safety of TAVR without intraprocedural TEE. RECENT FINDINGS: Transthoracic echocardiography and fluoroscopy are the primary imaging tools during TAVR. Several studies proved that TAVR under local anesthesia without TEE is as safe as that performed under TEE guidance. However, not all patients have a proper window for TTE, and particular cases with complex anatomy can benefit from TEE support during the intervention. Intraprocedural TEE no longer plays a crucial role in the TAVR procedure, but in some instances, it remains of great help to detect and avoid complications.

Comparative Assessment of Predictive Performance of PRECISE-DAPT, CRUSADE, and ACUITY Scores in Risk Stratifying 30-Day Bleeding Events.

BACKGROUND: The utility of the PRECISE-DAPT score in predicting short-term major bleeding, either alone, or in comparison with the CRUSADE and ACUITY scores, has not been investigated. This analysis compared the predictive performances of the three bleeding scores in stratifying the risk of 30-day major bleeding postpercutaneous coronary intervention in patients with dual-antiplatelet therapy. METHODS: In this post hoc subanalysis of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, the primary safety objective (bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] criteria [type 3 or 5]) was assessed at 30 days according to the three scores in the overall population, and in patients with acute (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS). RESULTS: In a total of 15,968 patients, we calculated all three scores in 14,709 (92.1%). Irrespective of clinical presentation, the PRECISE-DAPT (c-statistics: 0.648, 0.653, and 0.641, respectively), CRUSADE (c-statistics: 0.641, 0.639, and 0.644, respectively), and ACUITY (c-statistics: 0.633, 0.638, and 0.623, respectively) scores were no significant between-score differences in discriminatory performance for BARC 3 or 5 bleeding up to 30 days, and similarly the PRECISE-DAPT score had a comparable discriminative capacity according to the integrated discrimination improvement when compared with the other scores. In ACS, the CRUSADE score had a poor calibration ability (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit [GOF] chi-square = 15.561, p = 0.049), whereas in CCS, the PRECISE-DAPT score had poor calibration (GOF chi-square = 15.758, p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: The PRECISE-DAPT score might be clinically useful in the overall population and ACS patients for the prediction of short-term major bleeding considering its discriminative and calibration abilities.