Moderate Aortic Valve Stenosis Is Associated With Increased Mortality Rate and Lifetime Loss: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data of 409 680 Patients.

BACKGROUND: The mortality risk attributable to moderate aortic stenosis (AS) remains incompletely characterized and has historically been underestimated. We aim to evaluate the association between moderate AS and all-cause death, comparing it with no/mild AS (in a general referral population and in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction). METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review and pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived reconstructed time-to-event data of studies published by June 2023 was conducted to evaluate survival outcomes among patients with moderate AS in comparison with individuals with no/mild AS. Ten studies were included, encompassing a total of 409 680 patients (11 527 with moderate AS and 398 153 with no/mild AS). In the overall population, the 15-year overall survival rate was 23.3% (95% CI, 19.1%-28.3%) in patients with moderate AS and 58.9% (95% CI, 58.1%-59.7%) in patients with no/mild aortic stenosis (hazard ratio [HR], 2.55 [95% CI, 2.46-2.64]; P<0.001). In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction, the 10-year overall survival rate was 15.5% (95% CI, 10.0%-24.0%) in patients with moderate AS and 37.3% (95% CI, 36.2%-38.5%) in patients with no/mild AS (HR, 1.83 [95% CI, 1.69-2.0]; P<0.001). In both populations (overall and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction), these differences correspond to significant lifetime loss associated with moderate AS during follow-up (4.4 years, P<0.001; and 1.9 years, P<0.001, respectively). A consistent pattern of elevated mortality rate associated with moderate AS in sensitivity analyses of matched studies was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate AS was associated with higher risk of death and lifetime loss compared with patients with no/mild AS.

Impact of Tricuspid Regurgitation on Outcomes After Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement.

Development of functional tricuspid regurgitation (TR) because of chronic mitral disease and subsequent heart failure is common. However, the effect of TR on clinical outcomes after transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) remains unclear. We aimed to evaluate the impact of baseline TR on outcomes after TMVR. This was a single-center, retrospective analysis of patients who received valve-in-valve or valve-in-ring TMVR between 2012 and 2022. Patients were categorized into none/mild TR and moderate/severe TR based on baseline echocardiography. The primary outcome was 3 years all-cause death and the secondary outcomes were in-hospital events. Of the 135 patients who underwent TMVR, 64 (47%) exhibited none/mild TR at baseline, whereas 71 (53%) demonstrated moderate/severe TR. There were no significant differences in in-hospital events between the groups. At 3 years, the moderate/severe TR group exhibited a significantly increased risk of all-cause death (adjusted hazard ratio 3.37, 95% confidence interval 1.35 to 8.41, p = 0.009). When patients with baseline moderate/severe TR were stratified by echocardiography at 30 days into improved (36%) and nonimproved (64%) TR groups, although limited by small sample size, there was no significant difference in 3-year all-cause mortality (p = 0.48). In conclusion, this study investigating the impact of baseline TR on clinical outcomes revealed that moderate/severe TR is prevalent in those who underwent TMVR and is an independent predictor of 3-year all-cause mortality. Earlier mitral valve intervention before the development of significant TR may play a pivotal role in improving outcomes after TMVR.

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

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

Reinterventions After CoreValve/Evolut Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Data on valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are limited. OBJECTIVES: The authors compared the 5-year incidence of valve reintervention after self-expanding CoreValve/Evolut TAVR vs SAVR. METHODS: Pooled data from CoreValve and Evolut R/PRO (Medtronic) randomized trials and single-arm studies encompassed 5,925 TAVR (4,478 CoreValve and 1,447 Evolut R/PRO) and 1,832 SAVR patients. Reinterventions were categorized by indication, timing, and treatment. The cumulative incidence of reintervention was compared between TAVR vs SAVR, Evolut vs CoreValve, and Evolut vs SAVR. RESULTS: There were 99 reinterventions (80 TAVR and 19 SAVR). The cumulative incidence of reintervention through 5 years was higher with TAVR vs SAVR (2.2% vs 1.5%; P = 0.017), with differences observed early (≤1 year; adjusted subdistribution HR: 3.50; 95% CI: 1.53-8.02) but not from >1 to 5 years (adjusted subdistribution HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.48-2.28). The most common reason for reintervention was paravalvular regurgitation after TAVR and endocarditis after SAVR. Evolut had a significantly lower incidence of reintervention than CoreValve (0.9% vs 1.6%; P = 0.006) at 5 years with differences observed early (adjusted subdistribution HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.12-0.73) but not from >1 to 5 years (adjusted subdistribution HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.21-1.74). The 5-year incidence of reintervention was similar for Evolut vs SAVR (0.9% vs 1.5%; P = 0.41). CONCLUSIONS: A low incidence of reintervention was observed for CoreValve/Evolut R/PRO and SAVR through 5 years. Reintervention occurred most often at ≤1 year for TAVR and >1 year for SAVR. Most early reinterventions were with the first-generation CoreValve and managed percutaneously. Reinterventions were more common following CoreValve TAVR compared with Evolut TAVR or SAVR.

Temporal Trends, Outcomes, and Predictors of Next-Day Discharge and Readmission Following Uncomplicated Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Next-day discharge (NDD) outcomes following uncomplicated self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement have not been studied. Here, we compare readmission rates and clinical outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD transcatheter aortic valve replacement with Evolut. METHODS AND RESULTS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry patients (n=29 597) undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding supra-annular valves (Evolut R, PRO, and PRO+) from July 2019 to June 2021 were stratified by postprocedure length of stay: ≤1 day (NDD) versus >1 day (non-NDD). Propensity score matching was used to compare risk adjusted 30-day readmission rates and 1-year outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD, and multivariable regression to determine predictors of NDD and readmission. Between the first and last calendar quarter, the rate of NDD increased from 45.4% to 62.1% and median length of stay decreased from 2 days to 1. Propensity score matching produced relatively well-matched NDD and non-NDD cohorts (n=10 549 each). After matching, NDD was associated with lower 30-day readmission rates (6.3% versus 8.4%; P<0.001) and 1-year adverse outcomes (death, 7.0% versus 9.3%; life threatening/major bleeding, 1.6% versus 3.4%; new permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 3.6 versus 11.0%; [all P<0.001]). Predictors of NDD included non-Hispanic ethnicity, preexisting permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and previous surgical aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing uncomplicated self-expanding Evolut transcatheter aortic valve replacement are discharged the next day. This study found that NDD can be predicted from baseline patient characteristics and was associated with favorable 30-day and 1-year outcomes, including low rates of permanent pacemaker implantation and readmission.

Transcatheter Myotomy to Reduce Left Ventricular Outflow Obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction is a source of morbidity in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) and a life-threatening complication of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Available surgical and transcatheter approaches are limited by high surgical risk, unsuitable septal perforators, and heart block requiring permanent pacemakers. OBJECTIVES: The authors report the initial experience of a novel transcatheter electrosurgical procedure developed to mimic surgical myotomy. METHODS: We used septal scoring along midline endocardium (SESAME) to treat patients, on a compassionate basis, with symptomatic LVOT obstruction or to create space to facilitate TMVR or TAVR. RESULTS: In this single-center retrospective study between 2021 and 2023, 76 patients underwent SESAME. In total, 11 (14%) had classic HCM, and the remainder underwent SESAME to facilitate TMVR or TAVR. All had technically successful SESAME myocardial laceration. Measures to predict post-TMVR LVOT significantly improved (neo-LVOT 42 mm2 [Q1-Q3: 7-117 mm2] to 170 mm2 [Q1-Q3: 95-265 mm2]; P < 0.001; skirt-neo-LVOT 169 mm2 [Q1-Q3: 153-193 mm2] to 214 mm2 [Q1-Q3: 180-262 mm2]; P < 0.001). Among patients with HCM, SESAME significantly decreased invasive LVOT gradients (resting: 54 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 40-70 mm Hg] to 29 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 12-36 mm Hg]; P = 0.023; provoked 146 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 100-180 mm Hg] to 85 mm Hg [Q1-Q3: 40-120 mm Hg]; P = 0.076). A total of 74 (97.4%) survived the procedure. Five experienced 3 of 76 (3.9%) iatrogenic ventricular septal defects that did not require repair and 3 of 76 (3.9%) ventricular free wall perforations. Neither occurred in patients treated for HCM. Permanent pacemakers were required in 4 of 76 (5.3%), including 2 after concomitant TAVR. Lacerations were stable and did not propagate after SESAME (remaining septum: 5.9 ± 3.3 mm to 6.1 ± 3.2 mm; P = 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: With further experience, SESAME may benefit patients requiring septal reduction therapy for obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy as well as those with LVOT obstruction after heart valve replacement, and/or can help facilitate transcatheter valve implantation.

Impact of transcatheter heart valve type on outcomes of surgical explantation after failed transcatheter aortic valve replacement: the EXPLANT-TAVR international registry.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the impact of transcatheter heart valve (THV) type on the outcomes of surgical explantation after THV failure. AIMS: We sought to determine the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) explantation for failed balloon-expandable valves (BEV) versus self-expanding valves (SEV). METHODS: From November 2009 to February 2022, 401 patients across 42 centres in the EXPLANT-TAVR registry underwent TAVR explantation during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Mechanically expandable valves (N=10, 2.5%) were excluded. The outcomes of TAVR explantation were compared for 202 (51.7%) failed BEV and 189 (48.3%) failed SEV. RESULTS: Among 391 patients analysed (mean age: 73.0±9.8 years; 33.8% female), the median time from index TAVR to TAVR explantation was 13.3 months (interquartile range 5.1-34.8), with no differences between groups. Indications for TAVR explantation included endocarditis (36.0% failed SEV vs 55.4% failed BEV; p<0.001), paravalvular leak (21.2% vs 11.9%; p=0.014), structural valve deterioration (30.2% vs 21.8%; p=0.065) and prosthesis-patient mismatch (8.5% vs 10.4%; p=0.61). The SEV group trended fewer urgent/emergency surgeries (52.0% vs 62.3%; p=0.057) and more root replacement (15.3% vs 7.4%; p=0.016). Concomitant cardiac procedures were performed in 57.8% of patients, including coronary artery bypass graft (24.8%), and mitral (38.9%) and tricuspid (14.6%) valve surgery, with no differences between groups. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality and stroke rates were similar between groups (allp>0.05), with no differences in cumulative mortality at 3 years (log-rank p=0.95). On multivariable analysis, concomitant mitral surgery was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality after BEV explant (hazard ratio [HR] 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-3.72) and SEV explant (HR 2.00, 95% CI: 1.08-3.69). CONCLUSIONS: In the EXPLANT-TAVR global registry, BEV and SEV groups had different indications for surgical explantation, with more root replacements in SEV failure, but no differences in midterm mortality and morbidities. Further refinement of TAVR explantation techniques are important to improving outcomes.

Cardiac amyloidosis and aortic stenosis: a state-of-the-art review.

Cardiac amyloidosis is caused by the extracellular deposition of amyloid fibrils in the heart, involving not only the myocardium but also any cardiovascular structure. Indeed, this progressive infiltrative disease also involves the cardiac valves and, specifically, shows a high prevalence with aortic stenosis. Misfolded protein infiltration in the aortic valve leads to tissue damage resulting in the onset or worsening of valve stenosis. Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis and aortic stenosis coexist in patients > 65 years in about 4-16% of cases, especially in those undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Diagnostic workup for cardiac amyloidosis in patients with aortic stenosis is based on a multi-parametric approach considering clinical assessment, electrocardiogram, haematologic tests, basic and advanced echocardiography, cardiac magnetic resonance, and technetium labelled cardiac scintigraphy like technetium-99 m (99mTc)-pyrophosphate, 99mTc-3,3-diphosphono-1,2-propanodicarboxylic acid, and 99mTc-hydroxymethylene diphosphonate. However, a biopsy is the traditional gold standard for diagnosis. The prognosis of patients with coexisting cardiac amyloidosis and aortic stenosis is still under evaluation. The combination of these two pathologies worsens the prognosis. Regarding treatment, mortality is reduced in patients with cardiac amyloidosis and severe aortic stenosis after undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and to understand whether the diagnosis of cardiac amyloidosis could affect therapeutic strategies. The aim of this review is to critically expose the current state-of-art regarding the association of cardiac amyloidosis with aortic stenosis, from pathophysiology to treatment.

Challenges and Future Directions in Redo Aortic Valve Reintervention After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Failure.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly being performed in younger and lower surgical risk patients. Reintervention for failed transcatheter heart valves will likely increase in the future as younger patients are expected to outlive the initial bioprosthesis. While redo-TAVR has emerged as an attractive and less invasive alternative to surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) to treat transcatheter heart valve failure, it may not be feasible in all patients due to the risk of coronary obstruction and impaired coronary access. Conversely, TAVR-explant can be offered to most patients who are surgical candidates, but the reported outcomes have shown high mortality and morbidity. This review provides the latest evidence, current challenges, and future directions on redo-TAVR and TAVR-explant for transcatheter heart valve failure, to guide aortic valve reintervention and facilitate patients' lifetime management of aortic stenosis.

Feasibility of Coronary Access Following Redo-TAVR for Evolut Failure: A Computed Tomography Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Coronary accessibility following redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (redo-TAVR) is increasingly important, particularly in younger low-risk patients. This study aimed to predict coronary accessibility after simulated Sapien-3 balloon-expandable valve implantation within an Evolut supra-annular, self-expanding valve using pre-TAVR computed tomography (CT) imaging. METHODS: A total of 219 pre-TAVR CT scans from the Evolut Low-Risk CT substudy were analyzed. Virtual Evolut and Sapien-3 valves were sized using CT-based diameters. Two initial Evolut implant depths were analyzed, 3 and 5 mm. Coronary accessibility was evaluated for 2 Sapien-3 in Evolut implant positions: Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4 and Evolut node 5. RESULTS: With a 3-mm initial Evolut implant depth, suitable coronary access was predicted in 84% of patients with the Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4, and in 31% of cases with the Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 5 (P<0.001). Coronary accessibility improved with a 5-mm Evolut implant depth: 97% at node 4 and 65% at node 5 (P<0.001). When comparing 3- to 5-mm Evolut implant depth, sinus sequestration was the lowest with Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4 (13% versus 2%; P<0.001), and the highest at Evolut node 5 (61% versus 32%; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary accessibility after Sapien-3 in Evolut redo-TAVR relates to the initial Evolut implant depth, the Sapien-3 outflow position within the Evolut, and the native annular anatomy. This CT-based quantitative analysis may provide useful information to inform and refine individualized preprocedural CT planning of the initial TAVR and guide lifetime management for future coronary access after redo-TAVR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02701283.

Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived data.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is as an alternative treatment to surgical AVR, but the long-term outcomes of TAVR remain unclear. AIMS: This study aimed to analyze long-term outcomes following TAVR using meta-analysis. METHODS: A literature search was performed with MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar through November 2022; studies reporting clinical outcomes of TAVR with follow-up periods of ≥8 years were included. The outcomes of interest were overall survival and/or freedom from structural valve deterioration (SVD). Surgical risk was assessed with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) predicted risk of mortality (PROM) score. A subgroup analysis was conducted for intermediate-/high-surgical risk patients only. RESULTS: Eleven studies including 5458 patients were identified and analyzed. The mean age was 82.0 ± 6.5 years, and mean STS PROM score ranged from 2.9 to 10.6%. Survival rate at 5 and 10 years was 47.7% ± 1.4% and 12.1 ± 2.0%. Five studies including 1509 patients were analyzed for SVD. Freedom from SVD at 5 and 8 years was 95.5 ± 0.7% and 85.1 ± 3.1%. Similar results for survival and SVD were noted in the subgroup analysis of intermediate-/high-risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: Following TAVR, approximately 88% of patients died within 10 years, whereas 85% were free from SVD at 8 years. These date suggest that baseline patient demographic have the greatest impact on survival, and SVD does not seem to have a prognostic impact in this population. Further investigations on longer-term outcomes of younger and lower-risk patients are warranted.

Prospective validation of a risk score to predict pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

INTRODUCTION: The need for pacemaker is a common complication after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We previously described the Emory Risk Score (ERS) to predict the need for new pacemaker implant (PPM) after TAVR. Metrics included in the score are a history of syncope, pre-existing RBBB, QRS duration ≥140 ms, and prosthesis oversizing ≥16%. To prospectively validate the previously described risk score. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated all patients without pre-existing pacemakers, ICD, or pre-existing indications for pacing undergoing TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 prosthesis at our institution from March 2019 to December 2020 (n = 661). Patients were scored prospectively; however, results were blinded from clinical decision-making. The primary endpoint was PPM at 30 days after TAVR. Performance of the ERS was evaluated using logistic regression, a calibration curve to prior performance, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 48 patients (7.3%) had PPM after TAVR. A higher ERS predicted an increased likelihood of PPM (OR 2.61, 95% CI: 2.05-3.25 per point, p < 0.001). There was good correlation between observed and expected values on the calibration curve (slope = 1.04, calibration at large = 0.001). The area under the ROC curve was 0.81 (95% CI [0.74-0.88], p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The ERS prospectively predicted the need for PPM in a serial, real-world cohort of patients undergoing TAVR with a balloon-expandable prosthesis, confirming findings previously described in retrospective cohorts. Notably, the prospective performance of the score was comparable with that of the initial cohorts. The risk score could serve as a framework for preprocedural risk stratification for PPM after TAVR.

First-in-Human Multicenter Experience of the Newest Generation Supra-Annular Self-Expanding Evolut FX TAVR System.

BACKGROUND: The latest-generation Evolut FX TAVR system (Medtronic) offers several potential design improvements over its predecessors, but early reported experience has been limited. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to report our multicenter, limited market release, first-in-human experience of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Evolut FX system and compare it with a single-center PRO+ (Medtronic) experience. METHODS: From June 27 to September 16, 2022, 226 consecutive patients from 9 US centers underwent transfemoral TAVR with the Evolut FX system for native aortic stenosis (89.4%) or prosthetic valve degeneration (10.6%). Commissural alignment was defined as 0° to 30° between native and FX commissures. Patient, anatomical, and procedural characteristics were retrospectively reviewed, and 30-day clinical and echocardiographic outcomes per Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 definitions were reported. RESULTS: Of 226 patients, 34.1% were low risk, 4% had a bicuspid valve, and 11.5% had a horizontal root (≥60°). Direct Inline sheath (Medtronic) was used in 67.6% and Lunderquist stiff wire (Cook Medical) in 35.4% of cases. Optimal hat marker orientation during deployment was achieved in 98.4%, with commissural alignment in 96.5%. At 30 days, 14.3% mild, 0.9% moderate, and no severe paravalvular leak were observed. Compared with the Evolut PRO+ experience from 1 center, FX had a more symmetrical implantation with shallower depth at the left coronary cusp (P < 0.001), fewer device recaptures (26.1% vs 39.5%; P = 0.004), and improved commissural alignment (96.5% vs 80.2%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The Evolut FX system demonstrated favorable 30-day outcomes with a significant improvement over PRO+ in achieving commissural alignment, fewer device recaptures, and more symmetrical implantation. These features may benefit younger patients undergoing TAVR with the supra-annular, self-expanding valve, where lifetime management would be important.

Trends in surgical aortic valve replacement in pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement eras at a structural heart center.

Background: The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has directly impacted the lifelong management of patients with aortic valve disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved TAVR for all surgical risk: prohibitive (2011), high (2012), intermediate (2016), and low (2019). Since then, TAVR volumes are increasing and surgical aortic valve replacements (SAVR) are decreasing. This study sought to evaluate trends in isolated SAVR in the pre- and post-TAVR eras. Methods: From January 2000 to June 2020, 3,861 isolated SAVRs were performed at a single academic quaternary care institution which participated in the early trials of TAVR beginning in 2007. A formal structural heart center was established in 2012 when TAVR became commercially available. Patients were divided into the pre-TAVR era (2000-2011, n = 2,426) and post-TAVR era (2012-2020, n = 1,435). Data from the institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database was analyzed. Results: The median age was 66 years, similar between groups. The post-TAVR group had a statistically higher rate of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, more reoperative SAVR, and lower STS Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) (2.0% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.0001). There were more urgent/emergent/salvage SAVRs (38% vs. 24%) and fewer elective SAVRs (63% vs. 76%), (p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR group. More bioprosthetic valves were implanted in the post-TAVR group (85% vs. 74%, p < 0.0001). Larger aortic valves were implanted (25 vs. 23 mm, p < 0.0001) and more annular enlargements were performed (5.9% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR era. Postoperatively, the post-TAVR group had less blood product transfusion (49% vs. 58%, p < 0.0001), renal failure (1.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.0001), pneumonia (2.3% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.01), shorter lengths of stay, and lower in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.0007). Conclusion: The approval of TAVR changed the landscape of aortic valve disease management. At a quaternary academic cardiac surgery center with a well-established structural heart program, patients undergoing isolated SAVR in the post-TAVR era had lower STS PROM, more implantation of bioprosthetic valves, utilization of larger valves, annular enlargement, and lower in-hospital mortality. Isolated SAVR continues to be performed in the TAVR era with excellent outcomes. SAVR remains an essential tool in the lifetime management of aortic valve disease.