Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Navitor System: Real-World United Kingdom Experience.

The Navitor transcatheter heart valve (THV) is the latest iteration of the Portico self-expanding valve system. Early prospective studies have shown promising outcomes, however, there is a lack of complementary 'real-world' data. This study aimed to assess early safety and efficacy outcomes of the Navitor THV using registry data from 6 high-volume United Kingdom transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) centers. Demographic, procedural, and in-hospital outcome data were retrieved from 6 United Kingdom centers. The primary safety end point was 30-day mortality. Primary efficacy end points were procedural success, mean aortic gradient, and ≥moderate paravalvular leak. Secondary end points included rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, and vascular injury. A total of 574 patients (mean age 83.4 years; 54.5% female) underwent Navitor TAVR between January 2020 and May 2023. The 30-day mortality in this patient cohort was 1.6%. Procedural success was 98.1%, mean echo-derived gradient post-TAVR was 7.7 ± 4.8 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.2 to 8.3, p <0.001) and 5.1% of patients had ≥moderate paravalvular leak (sample proportion estimate [p̂] = 0.051, 95% CI [0.035, 0.073], p <0.001). New permanent pacemaker implantation to discharge was required in 11% (p̂ = 0.119, 95% CI 0.088 to 0.158, p <0.001), stroke occurred in 1.2% of patients (p̂ = 0.017, 95% CI 0.006 to 0.036, p <0.001) and significant vascular injury in 1.6% (p̂ = 0.014, 95% CI 0.005 to 0.032, p <0.001). In conclusion, early procedural outcomes with Navitor TAVR compare favorably to new-generation THVs. Procedural success was high with a low incidence of complications.

Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After TAVR With Self-Expanding Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR with self-expanding valves

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Evolut PRO/PRO+ Self-Expanding Valves: Insights From the NEOPRO/NEOPRO-2 Registries.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) techniques and technology have continuously improved. Data regarding the impact of these advancements on outcomes in large real-world settings are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate temporal trends and assess contemporary outcomes after TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ supra-annular self-expanding valves. METHODS: This study included patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Procedural dates (August 2017 through November 2021) were stratified in quartiles (Q) and used to investigate temporal trends in TAVR outcomes. Predischarge, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 defined, and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 1616 patients from 28 centers were included. Over time, patients had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score (Q1-4, 4.1% [2.8-6.3%], 3.7% [2.6-5.3%], 3.3% [2.4-4.9%], 2.9% [2.2-4.3%]; P<0.001) and more moderate or heavy valve calcification (Q1-4, 80%, 80%, 82%, 88%; P=0.038). Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 technical success was 94.1%, with 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality of 2.4% and 10%, respectively. Throughout the study period, procedures were associated with higher rates of 30-day device success (Q1-4, 81.2%, 82.2%, 82.0%, 88.0%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and early safety (Q1-4, 66.8%, 67.5%, 74.0%, 77.6%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001), with fewer permanent pacemaker implantations (Q1-4: 15.3%, 20.0%, 12.1%, 11.6%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and residual mild or greater paravalvular leaks (Q1-4, 50.4%, 42.1%, 36.5%, 35.8%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding valve is safe and effective. Despite the treatment of heavier calcified anatomies, procedural outcomes are improving over time with less need for pacemaker implantation and less significant paravalvular leaks.

Effect of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement on All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Aortic Stenosis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a less invasive alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement and is the treatment of choice for patients at high operative risk. The role of TAVI in patients at lower risk is unclear. Objective: To determine whether TAVI is noninferior to surgery in patients at moderately increased operative risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this randomized clinical trial conducted at 34 UK centers, 913 patients aged 70 years or older with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis and moderately increased operative risk due to age or comorbidity were enrolled between April 2014 and April 2018 and followed up through April 2019. Interventions: TAVI using any valve with a CE mark (indicating conformity of the valve with all legal and safety requirements for sale throughout the European Economic Area) and any access route (n = 458) or surgical aortic valve replacement (surgery; n = 455). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 1 year. The primary hypothesis was that TAVI was noninferior to surgery, with a noninferiority margin of 5% for the upper limit of the 1-sided 97.5% CI for the absolute between-group difference in mortality. There were 36 secondary outcomes (30 reported herein), including duration of hospital stay, major bleeding events, vascular complications, conduction disturbance requiring pacemaker implantation, and aortic regurgitation. Results: Among 913 patients randomized (median age, 81 years [IQR, 78 to 84 years]; 424 [46%] were female; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score, 2.6% [IQR, 2.0% to 3.4%]), 912 (99.9%) completed follow-up and were included in the noninferiority analysis. At 1 year, there were 21 deaths (4.6%) in the TAVI group and 30 deaths (6.6%) in the surgery group, with an adjusted absolute risk difference of -2.0% (1-sided 97.5% CI, -∞ to 1.2%; P < .001 for noninferiority). Of 30 prespecified secondary outcomes reported herein, 24 showed no significant difference at 1 year. TAVI was associated with significantly shorter postprocedural hospitalization (median of 3 days [IQR, 2 to 5 days] vs 8 days [IQR, 6 to 13 days] in the surgery group). At 1 year, there were significantly fewer major bleeding events after TAVI compared with surgery (7.2% vs 20.2%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.33 [95% CI, 0.24 to 0.45]) but significantly more vascular complications (10.3% vs 2.4%; adjusted HR, 4.42 [95% CI, 2.54 to 7.71]), conduction disturbances requiring pacemaker implantation (14.2% vs 7.3%; adjusted HR, 2.05 [95% CI, 1.43 to 2.94]), and mild (38.3% vs 11.7%) or moderate (2.3% vs 0.6%) aortic regurgitation (adjusted odds ratio for mild, moderate, or severe [no instance of severe reported] aortic regurgitation combined vs none, 4.89 [95% CI, 3.08 to 7.75]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients aged 70 years or older with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis and moderately increased operative risk, TAVI was noninferior to surgery with respect to all-cause mortality at 1 year. Trial Registration: isrctn.com Identifier: ISRCTN57819173.

Procedural Mortality With Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement - Balloon Inflation is Associated With Increased Risk.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of balloon use for predilation, valve implantation, or postdilation on in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: TAVR utilizes self-expanding, mechanically expanding, or balloon-expandable valves. Balloon inflation is inherent to deployment of balloon-expandable valves. Balloons may additionally be used with all valve types for pre- and postdilation. The relationships between valve mechanism, balloon use, and in-hospital mortality are not fully characterized. METHODS: Prospective data were collected on 4063 patients undergoing TAVR for aortic stenosis at 4 high-volume centers in the United Kingdom. In-hospital mortality was analyzed according to valve expansion mechanism, use of balloons for pre- and postdilation, and specific cause of death. RESULTS: Mean patient age was 83 ± 8 years. Implanted valves were self expanding (n = 2241; 55%), mechanically expanding (n = 1092; 27%), or balloon expandable (n = 727; 18%). In-hospital death occurred in 66 cases (1.6%). Thirty-six deaths (54.5%) were classified as implantation-related mortalities, with rates of 0.8%, 0.5%, and 1.7% (P=.04) among self-expanding, mechanically expanding, and balloon-expandable technologies, respectively. Patients who underwent balloon inflation at any stage of their procedure (n = 2556; 63%) had significantly higher implantation-related mortality than those who did not (1.3% vs 0.3%, respectively; P<.01). Balloon-expandable valve procedures were associated with significantly higher all-cause mortality (2.6% vs 1.4%; P=.02) and implantation-related mortality (1.7% vs 0.7%; P=.02) than non-balloon-expandable valve procedures. Balloon-related complications accounted for 18 cases (26%) of total in-hospital mortality, including all 12 cases (17.4%) of annular rupture and 5 cases (7.2%) of coronary occlusion. CONCLUSIONS: Balloon use for predilation, valve implantation, or postdilation was associated with an increased mortality risk. Balloon-related complications were the largest contributor to in-hospital mortality, comprising all cases of annular rupture and the majority of coronary occlusion cases.

Survival relative to pacemaker status after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a permanent pacemaker (PPM) in situ can enhance survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), in a predominantly inoperable or high risk cohort. BACKGROUND: New conduction disturbances are the most frequent complication of TAVI, often necessitating PPM implantation before hospital discharge. METHODS: We performed an observational cohort analysis of the UK TAVI registry (2007-2015). Primary and secondary endpoints were 30-day post-discharge all-cause mortality and long-term survival, respectively. RESULTS: Of 8,651 procedures, 6,815 complete datasets were analyzed. A PPM at hospital discharge, irrespective of when implantation occurred (PPM 1.68% [22/1309] vs. no PPM 1.47% [81/5506], odds ratio [OR] 1.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.84; p = .58), or a PPM implanted peri- or post-TAVI only (PPM 1.44% [11/763] vs. no PPM 1.47% [81/5506], OR 0.98 [0.51-1.85]; p = .95) did not significantly reduce the primary endpoint. Patients with a PPM at discharge were older, male, had right bundle branch block at baseline, were more likely to have received a first-generation self-expandable prosthesis and had experienced more peri- and post-procedural complications including bailout valve-in-valve rescue, bleeding and acute kidney injury. A Cox proportional hazards model demonstrated significantly reduced long-term survival in all those with a PPM, irrespective of implantation timing (hazard ratio [HR] 1.14 [1.02-1.26]; p = .019) and those receiving a PPM only at the time of TAVI (HR 1.15 [1.02-1.31]; p = .032). The reasons underlying this observation warrant further investigation. CONCLUSIONS: A PPM did not confer a survival advantage in the first 30 days after hospital discharge following TAVI.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the LOTUS Edge System: Early European Experience.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the LOTUS Edge system. BACKGROUND: The LOTUS Edge system was commercially re-released in April 2019. The authors report the first European experience with this device. METHODS: A multicenter, single-arm, retrospective registry was initiated to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes. Included cases are the first experience with this device and new implantation technique in Europe. Clinical, echocardiographic, and computed tomographic data were analyzed. Endpoints were defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 and were site reported. RESULTS: Between April and November 2019, 286 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with the LOTUS Edge system at 18 European centers were included. The mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score were 81.2 ± 6.9 years and 5.2 ± 5.4%, respectively. Nearly one-half of all patients (47.9%) were considered to have complex anatomy. Thirty-day major adverse events included death (2.4% [n = 7]) and stroke (3.5% [n = 10]). After TAVR, the mean aortic valve area was 1.9 ± 0.9 cm2, and the mean transvalvular gradient was 11.9 ± 5.7 mm Hg. None or trace paravalvular leak (PVL) occurred in 84.4% and moderate PVL in 2.0%. There were no cases of severe PVL. New permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation was required in 25.9% among all patients and 30.8% among PPM-naive patients. CONCLUSIONS: Early experience with the LOTUS Edge system demonstrated satisfactory short-term safety and efficacy, favorable hemodynamic data, and very low rates of PVL in an anatomically complex cohort. New PPM implantation remained high. Further study will evaluate if increasing operator experience with the device and new implantation technique can reduce the incidence of PPM implantation.

In-hospital stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A UK observational cohort analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify baseline demographics and procedural factors that might independently predict in-hospital stroke following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). BACKGROUND: Stroke is a recognized, albeit infrequent, complication of TAVI. Established predictors of procedure-related in-hospital stroke; however, remain poorly defined. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort analysis of the multicenter UK TAVI registry. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of in-hospital stroke. RESULTS: A total of 8,652 TAVI procedures were performed from 2007 to 2015. There were 205 in-hospital strokes reported by participating centers equivalent to an overall stroke incidence of 2.4%. Univariate analysis showed that the implantation of balloon-expandable valves caused significantly fewer strokes (balloon-expandable 96/4,613 [2.08%] vs. self-expandable 95/3,272 [2.90%]; p = .020). After multivariable analysis, prior cerebrovascular disease (CVD) (odds ratio [OR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI 1.05-2.17]; p = .03), advanced age at time of operation (OR 1.02 [0.10-1.04]; p = .05), bailout coronary stenting (OR 5.94 [2.03-17.39]; p = .008), and earlier year of procedure (OR 0.93 [0.87-1.00]; p = .04) were associated with an increased in-hospital stroke risk. There was a reduced stroke risk in those who had prior cardiac surgery (OR 0.62 [0.41-0.93]; p = .01) and a first-generation balloon-expandable valve implanted (OR 0.72 [0.53-0.97]; p = .03). In-hospital stroke significantly increased 30-day (OR 5.22 [3.49-7.81]; p < .001) and 1-year mortality (OR 3.21 [2.15-4.78]; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital stroke after TAVI is associated with substantially increased early and late mortality. Factors independently associated with in-hospital stroke were previous CVD, advanced age, no prior cardiac surgery, and deployment of a predominantly first-generation self-expandable transcatheter heart valve.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation via surgical subclavian versus direct aortic access: A United Kingdom analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical subclavian (SC) and direct aortic (DA) access are established alternatives to the default transfemoral route for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We sought to find differences in survival and procedure-related outcomes after SC- versus DA-TAVI. METHODS: We performed an observational cohort analysis of cases prospectively uploaded to the UK TAVI registry. To ensure the most contemporaneous comparison, the analysis focused on SC and DA procedures performed from 2013 to 2015. RESULTS: Between January 2013 and July 2015, 82 (37%) SC and 142 (63%) DA cases were performed that had validated 1-year life status. Multivariable regression analysis showed procedure duration was longer for SC cases (SC 193.5 ± 65.8 vs. DA 138.4 ± 57.7 min; p < .01) but length of hospital stay was shorter (SC 8.6 ± 9.5 vs. DA 11.9 ± 10.8 days; p = .03). Acute kidney injury was observed less frequently after SC cases (odds ratio [OR] 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI 0.12-0.96]; p = .042) but vascular access site-related complications were more common (OR 9.75 [3.07-30.93]; p < .01). Procedure-related bleeding (OR 0.54 [0.24-1.25]; p = .15) and in-hospital stroke rate (SC 3.7% vs. DA 2.1%; p = .67) were similar. There were no significant differences in in-hospital (SC 2.4% vs. DA 4.9%; p = .49), 30-day (SC 2.4% vs. DA 4.2%; p = .71) or 1-year (SC 14.5% vs. DA 21.9%; p = .344) mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical subclavian and direct aortic approaches can offer favourable outcomes in appropriate patients. Neither access modality conferred a survival advantage but there were significant differences in procedural metrics that might influence which approach is selected.

Cangrelor versus Ticagrelor in Patients Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Impact on Platelet Activity, Myocardial Microvascular Function and Infarct Size: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral P2Y12 inhibitors take more than 2 hours to achieve full effect in healthy subjects and this action is further delayed in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Intravenous P2Y12 inhibition might lead to more timely and potent anti-platelet effect in the context of emergency primary angioplasty, improving myocardial recovery. OBJECTIVES: This article compares the efficacy of intravenous cangrelor versus ticagrelor in a ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In an open-label, prospective, randomized controlled trial, 100 subjects with STEMI were assigned 1:1 to intravenous cangrelor or oral ticagrelor. The co-primary endpoints were platelet P2Y12 inhibition at infarct vessel balloon inflation time, 4 and 24 hours. Secondary endpoints included indices of coronary microcirculatory function: index of microvascular resistance (IMR), initial infarct size (troponin at 24 hours) and final infarct size at 12 weeks (cardiac magnetic resonance). Secondary endpoints included indices of coronary microcirculatory function (index of microvascular resistance [IMR]), initial infarct size (troponin at 24 hours), final infarct size at 12 weeks (cardiac magnetic resonance), corrected thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) frame count, TIMI flow grade, myocardial perfusion grade, and ST-segment resolution (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02733341). RESULTS: P2Y12 inhibition at first balloon inflation time was significantly greater in cangrelor-treated patients (cangrelor P2Y12 reaction unit [PRU] 145.2 ± 50.6 vs. ticagrelor 248.3 ± 55.1). There was no difference in mean PRU at 4 and 24 to 36 hours post-dosing. IMR, final infarct size, angiographic and electrocardiographic measures of reperfusion were all similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Cangrelor produces more potent P2Y12 inhibition at the time of first coronary balloon inflation time compared with ticagrelor. Despite this enhanced P2Y12 inhibition, coronary microvascular function and final infarct size did not differ between groups.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Next-Generation Self-Expanding Devices: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Comparison of Evolut PRO Versus Acurate neo Transcatheter Heart Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter registry, transfemoral TAVR with the NEO and PRO bioprostheses was associated with high device success, acceptable rates of paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and good 30-day clinical outcomes. After adjusting for potential confounders, short-term outcomes were similar between the devices.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with next-generation self-expanding devices: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched comparison of evolut pro versus acurate neo transcatheter heart valves

Abstract OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: (AU)

Clinical outcomes of the Lotus Valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: An analysis from the RESPOND study.

AIMS: Patients with bicuspid valves represent a challenging anatomical subgroup for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This analysis evaluated the clinical outcomes of the fully repositionable and retrievable Lotus Valve System in patients with bicuspid aortic valves enrolled in the RESPOND post-market registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prospective, open-label RESPOND study enrolled 1,014 patients at 41 centers in Europe, New Zealand, and Latin America, 31 (3.1%) of whom had bicuspid aortic valves. The mean age in the bicuspid patient cohort was 76.4 years, 64.5% were male, and the baseline STS score was 6.0 ± 10.2. Procedural success was 100%, with no cases of malpositioning, valve migration, embolization, or valve-in-valve. Repositioning was attempted in 10 cases (32.3%). There was one death (3.2%) and one stroke (3.2%) at 30-day follow-up. Mean AV gradient was reduced from 48.7 ± 17.0 mmHg at baseline to 11.8 ± 5.1 mmHg at hospital discharge (P < 0.001); mean effective orifice area (EOA) was increased from 0.6 ± 0.2 cm2 to 1.7 ± 0.4 cm2 (P < 0.001). There were no cases of moderate or severe paravalvular leak (PVL) adjudicated by the core laboratory; four subjects (13.8%) had mild PVL, 5 (17.2%) had trace PVL. The rate of pacemaker (PM) implantation for PM-naïve patients was 22.2% (6/27). CONCLUSIONS: Data from the RESPOND registry demonstrate good clinical and echocardiographic outcomes up to 1 year postimplantation in patients with bicuspid aortic valves using the repositionable Lotus Valve.

Incidental abnormal CT scan findings during transcatheter aortic valve implantation assessment: incidence and implications.

Objectives: The aim of this retrospective series is to describe the prevalence and clinical significance of the incidental findings found during pre-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) work-up and to ascertain the clinical course of such patients. Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing TAVI from 2013 to 2015 where a TAVI CT assessment was performed (n=138) were included in the study. All incidental findings that were not expected from the patient's history were discussed at the TAVI multidisciplinary meeting in order to ascertain the clinical significance of said findings and whether they would alter the proposed course of treatment. Mortality data were determined by careful retrospective case note and follow-up appointment analysis. Results: Seventy-eight patients (57%) were found to have incidental findings on pre-TAVI CT scan. The majority of patients had benign pathology with high incidence in particular of diverticular disease, pleural effusions, gallstones, hiatus hernia and degenerative spinal disease. Vascular pathology such as superior mesenteric, renal and iliac artery stenoses and abdominal aortic aneurysm was detected in seven patients. In terms of long-term mortality data, we found no significant difference between those with incidental findings and those without (p=0.48). Survival as assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no significant difference between those with and without incidental abnormal CT scan findings (p=0.98). Conclusions: Incidental findings with potential for malignancy are common in an elderly, comorbid population. Ultimately, clinical correlation and prognosis must be swiftly ascertained in order to streamline the patients down the appropriate management pathway while avoiding unnecessary delay for treatment of their aortic stenosis.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in decompensated aortic stenosis within the same hospital admission: early clinical experience.

Objective: Severe decompensated aortic valve stenosis is associated with noticeable reduction in survival. Until recently the options for such patients were either high-risk surgery or percutaneous balloon valvuloplasty and medical therapy which does not add any survival benefits and associated with high rate of complications. We present our experience in the use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with decompensated severe aortic stenosis requiring urgent intervention in the same hospital admission. Methods: In this observational study, all patients who were admitted with decompensated severe aortic stenosis were enrolled. Elective patients were excluded from the study. Perioperative records were analysed and clinical, echocardiographic and survival data were presented. Results: 76 patients with a mean age of 81±6 years were enrolled. All patients presented with New York Heart Association (NYHA) IV status. Femoral approach was performed in 86.8%. Median postoperative hospital stay was 6 days and intensive care unit admission rate was 15%. At follow-up, 61.8% of patients were in NYHA status I/II. Moderate or more paravalvular leak occurred in 5.2% of patients. Permanent pacemaker was required in 14.4% of patients. The incidence of in-hospital death was 2.6%. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated a survival rate of 81% at 1 year. Conclusions: Urgent in-hospital TAVI is feasible as the first-line treatment in decompensated severe aortic stenosis. In our cohort, it showed to be safe and achieved satisfactory survival rates and symptom control.

Association of comorbid burden with clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of the CharlsonComorbidity Index (CCI) with clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing TAVI have high comorbid burden; however, there is limited evidence of its impact on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Data from 1887 patients from the UK, Canada, Spain, Switzerland and Italy were collected between 2007 and 2016. The association of CCI with 30-day mortality, Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) composite early safety, long-term survival and length of stay (LoS) was calculated using logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models, as a whole cohort and at a country level, through a two-stage individual participant data (IPD) random effect meta-analysis. RESULTS: Most (60%) of patients had a CCI ≥3. A weak correlation was found between the total CCI and four different preoperative risks scores (ρ=0.16 to 0.29), and approximately 50% of patients classed as low risk from four risk prediction models still presented with a CCI ≥3. Per-unit increases in total CCI were not associated with increased odds of 30-day mortality (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.24) or VARC-2 early safety (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.14) but were associated with increased hazard of long-term mortality (HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.16). The two-stage IPD meta-analysis indicated that CCI was not associated with LoS (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.02). CONCLUSION: In this multicentre international study, patients undergoing TAVI had significant comorbid burden. We found a weak correlation between the CCI and well-established preoperative risks scores. The CCI had a moderate association with long-term mortality up to 5 years post-TAVI.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With or Without Percutaneous Coronary Artery Revascularization Strategy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Recent recommendations suggest that in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation and coexistent significant coronary artery disease, the latter should be treated before the index procedure; however, the evidence basis for such an approach remains limited. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to study the clinical outcomes of patients with coronary artery disease who did or did not undergo revascularization prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a search of Medline and Embase to identify studies evaluating patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. Random-effects meta-analyses with the inverse variance method were used to estimate the rate and risk of adverse outcomes. Nine studies involving 3858 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Patients who underwent revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention had a higher rate of major vascular complications (odd ratio [OR]: 1.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.33-2.60; P=0.0003) and higher 30-day mortality (OR: 1.42; 95% CI, 1.08-1.87; P=0.01). There were no differences in effect estimates for 30-day cardiovascular mortality (OR: 1.03; 95% CI, 0.35-2.99), myocardial infarction (OR: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.14-5.28), acute kidney injury (OR: 0.89; 95% CI, 0.42-1.88), stroke (OR: 1.07; 95% CI, 0.38-2.97), or 1-year mortality (OR: 1.05; 95% CI, 0.71-1.56). The timing of percutaneous coronary intervention (same setting versus a priori) did not negatively influence outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that revascularization before transcatheter aortic valve implantation confers no clinical advantage with respect to several patient-important clinical outcomes and may be associated with an increased risk of major vascular complications and 30-day mortality. In the absence of definitive evidence, careful evaluation of patients on an individual basis is of paramount importance to identify patients who might benefit from elective revascularization.