Anticoagulation Alone vs Anticoagulation Plus Aspirin or DAPT Following Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of and outcomes associated with different antithrombotic strategies after left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) are not well described. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate patterns of antithrombotic medication strategies at discharge following LAAO with the Watchman FLX device in real-world practice and to compare the risk of adverse events among the different antithrombotic regimens. METHODS: The authors evaluated patients in the NCDR (National Cardiovascular Data Registry) LAAO Registry who underwent LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device between 2020 and 2022. They grouped patients by mutually exclusive discharge antithrombotic strategies and compared the rates of adverse events at 45 days and 6 months using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: Among 53,878 patients undergoing successful LAAO with the second-generation LAA closure device, the most common antithrombotic discharge regimens were direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) plus aspirin (48.3%), DOAC alone (22.6%), dual antiplatelet therapy (8.1%), warfarin plus aspirin (7.7%), and DOAC plus P2Y12 inhibitor (4.9%). In multivariate analysis, DOAC alone had a lower rate of major adverse events and major bleeding at 45 days of follow-up compared with DOAC plus aspirin (major adverse events: HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68-0.91; major bleeding: HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.60-0.80). These differences persisted at 6 months. Warfarin without aspirin also showed lower rates of major bleeding at both time points. No differences were seen in stroke/transient ischemic attack or device-related thrombus. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world U.S. practice, discharge on DOAC alone or warfarin alone was associated with a lower rate of adverse events compared with DOAC plus aspirin.

Outcomes With the WATCHMAN FLX in Everyday Clinical Practice From the NCDR Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry.

BACKGROUND: PINNACLE FLX (Protection Against Embolism for Nonvalvular AF Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the WATCHMAN FLX LAA Closure Technology) demonstrated improved outcomes and low incidence of adverse events with the WATCHMAN FLX device in a controlled setting. The National Cardiovascular Disease Registry's Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion Registry was utilized to assess the safety and effectiveness of WATCHMAN FLX in contemporary clinical practice in the United States. METHODS: The WATCHMAN FLX Device Surveillance Post Approval Analysis Plan used data from the Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion registry to identify patients undergoing WATCHMAN FLX implantation between August 2020 and September 2022. The key safety end point was defined as all-cause death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device or procedure-related events requiring open cardiac surgery or major endovascular intervention between device implantation and hospital discharge. Major adverse events were reported at hospital discharge, 45 days, and 1 year. RESULTS: Among 97 185 patients in the Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion registry undergoing WATCHMAN FLX, successful implantation occurred in 97.5% (n=94 784) of patients. The key safety end point occurred in 0.45% of patients. At 45 days post-procedure, all-cause death occurred in 0.81% patients, ischemic stroke in 0.23%, major bleeding in 3.1%, pericardial effusion requiring intervention in 0.50%, device-related thrombus in 0.44%, and device embolism in 0.04% patients. No peri-device leak was observed in 83.1% of patients at 45 days. At 1 year, the rate of all-cause death was 8.2%, the rate of any stroke was 1.5% (ischemic stroke, 1.2%), and major bleeding occurred in 6.4% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In a large contemporary cohort of patients with the WATCHMAN FLX device, the rates of implant success and clinical outcomes through 1 year were comparable with the PINNACLE FLX study, demonstrating that favorable outcomes achieved in the pivotal approval study can be replicated in routine clinical practice.

Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: The AGENT IDE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Drug-coated balloons offer a potentially beneficial treatment strategy for the management of coronary in-stent restenosis. However, none have been previously evaluated or approved for use in coronary circulation in the United States. Objective: To evaluate whether a paclitaxel-coated balloon is superior to an uncoated balloon in patients with in-stent restenosis undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Design, Setting, and Participants: AGENT IDE, a multicenter randomized clinical trial, enrolled 600 patients with in-stent restenosis (lesion length <26 mm and reference vessel diameter >2.0 mm to ≤4.0 mm) at 40 centers across the United States between May 2021 and August 2022. One-year clinical follow-up was completed on October 2, 2023. Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 2:1 allocation to undergo treatment with a paclitaxel-coated (n = 406) or an uncoated (n = 194) balloon. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point of 1-year target lesion failure-defined as the composite of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or cardiac death-was tested for superiority. Results: Among 600 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 157 females [26.2%]; 42 Black [7%], 35 Hispanic [6%] individuals), 574 (95.7%) completed 1-year follow-up. The primary end point at 1 year occurred in 17.9% in the paclitaxel-coated balloon group vs 28.6% in the uncoated balloon group, meeting the criteria for superiority (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.84]; 2-sided P = .003). Target lesion revascularization (13.0% vs 24.7%; HR, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.34-0.74]; P = .001) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (5.8% vs 11.1%; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.28-0.92]; P = .02) occurred less frequently among patients treated with paclitaxel-coated balloon. The rate of cardiac death was 2.9% vs 1.6% (HR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.49-6.28]; P = .38) in the coated vs uncoated balloon groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients undergoing coronary angioplasty for in-stent restenosis, a paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to an uncoated balloon with respect to the composite end point of target lesion failure. Paclitaxel-coated balloons are an effective treatment option for patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04647253.

One-year safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon for the treatment of small vessel disease and in-stent restenosis.

The Agent device consists of a semi-compliant balloon catheter, which is coated with a therapeutic low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 µg/mm2) blended with an inactive excipient acetyl-tri-n-butyl citrate (ATBC). AGENT Japan SV is a randomized controlled study that enrolled 150 patients from 14 Japanese sites treated with Agent or SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon. This study also includes a single-arm substudy evaluating the safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). Patients with a single de novo native lesion (lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to < 3.00 mm) were randomized 2:1 to receive either Agent (n = 101) or SeQuent Please (n = 49). The ISR substudy enrolled 30 patients with lesion length ≤ 28 mm and reference diameter ≥ 2.00 to ≤ 4.00 mm. In the SV RCT, target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year occurred in four patients treated with Agent (4.0%) versus one patient with SeQuent Please (2.0%; P = 1.00). None of the patients in either treatment arm died. There were no significant differences in the rates of myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and target lesion thrombosis through 1 year. In the ISR substudy, the 1-year rates of TLF and target lesion thrombosis were 6.7% and 0.0%, respectively. These data support the safety and effectiveness of the Agent paclitaxel-coated balloon in patients with small vessels and ISR.

Outcomes and performance of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in clinical practice: one-yearresults of the ACURATE neo2 PMCF Study.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an effective treatment for patients with aortic stenosis; however, complications related to paravalvular leakage (PVL) persist, including increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and rehospitalisation. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes and valve performance at 1 year in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the ACURATE neo2 valve in a post-market clinical setting. METHODS: Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 safety events were assessed up to 1 year. Independent core laboratories evaluated echocardiographic measures of valve performance and hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT; as measured by four-dimensional computed tomography). RESULTS: The study enrolled 250 patients (64% female; mean age: 81 years; baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 patients were implanted with ACURATE neo2. All-cause mortality was 0.8% at 30 days and 5.1% at 1 year. The 1-year rates for stroke and disabling stroke were 3.0% and 1.3%, respectively. Overall, HALT of >50% leaflet involvement of at least one leaflet was present in 9% of patients at 30 days and in 12% of patients at 1 year. No association was observed between the presence of HALT and 1-year clinical or haemodynamic outcomes. Early haemodynamic improvements were maintained up to 1 year (mean aortic valve gradient: 47.6±14.5 mmHg at baseline, 7.6±3.2 mmHg at 1 year; mean aortic valve area: 0.7±0.2 cm2 at baseline, 1.7±0.4 cm2 at 1 year). At 1 year, 99% of patients had mild or no/trace PVL (<1% had moderate PVL; no patient had severe PVL). CONCLUSIONS: The study outcomes confirm favourable performance and safety up to 1 year in patients treated with ACURATE neo2 in routine clinical practice. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04655248).

DAPT Is Comparable to OAC Following LAAC With WATCHMAN FLX: A National Registry Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is an approved alternative for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation for patients with an "appropriate rationale" to avoid long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC). Many patients undergoing LAAO are at high risk of bleeding. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate whether dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is a safe alternative to OAC (direct oral anticoagulation [DOAC] or warfarin) with aspirin after LAAO. METHODS: Using National Cardiovascular Data Registry LAAO registry data, patients undergoing Watchman FLX (Boston Scientific) implantation (August 5, 2020-September 30, 2021) were included in 1:1 propensity-matched analyses comparing discharge medication regimens (DAPT, DOAC/aspirin, or warfarin/aspirin). A composite endpoint (death, stroke, major bleeding, and systemic embolism), its components, and device-related thrombus between discharge and 45 days were evaluated. RESULTS: In 49,968 patients implanted with the Watchman FLX during the study period, the mean age was 77 years, and 40% were women. Postimplant DOAC/aspirin was prescribed in 24,497 patients, warfarin/aspirin in 3,913, and DAPT in 4,155. DAPT patients had more comorbid conditions than patients receiving OAC/aspirin. After propensity score matching, the 45-day composite endpoint rates were similar among the groups (DAPT = 3.44% vs DOAC/aspirin: 4.06%; P = 0.13 and DAPT = 3.23% vs warfarin/aspirin: 3.08%; P = 0.75). Death, stroke, and device-related thrombus were also similar; major bleeding was slightly increased in DOAC/aspirin patients (DAPT = 2.48% vs DOAC/aspirin = 3.25%; P = 0.04 and DAPT = 2.25% vs warfarin/aspirin = 2.22%; P = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In a large registry, DAPT had a similar safety profile compared with current Food and Drug Administration-approved postimplant drug regimens of OAC with aspirin following LAAO with the Watchman FLX. Shared decision making for nonpharmacologic stroke prevention should include a discussion of postprocedure medical therapy options.

Intracardiac vs Transesophageal Echocardiography for Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion With Watchman FLX in the U.S.

BACKGROUND: Intraprocedural imaging is critical for device delivery in transcatheter left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO). Although pivotal trials of LAAO devices were conducted using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is an emerging imaging modality. OBJECTIVES: This study compared outcomes after ICE- and TEE-guided Watchman FLX implantation in the SURPASS (SURveillance Post Approval AnalySiS Plan) nationwide LAAO registry. METHODS: Baseline characteristics were compared using chi-square and t-tests. Outcomes were reported in unadjusted and adjusted comparisons via propensity weighting. RESULTS: Between August 2020 and September 2021, LAAO was attempted in 39,759 patients at 698 sites, including 2,272 cases (5.7%) with ICE and 31,835 (80.0%) with TEE. ICE and TEE patients had similar baseline characteristics and mean procedural times (ICE 82 minutes vs TEE 78 minutes). ICE patients were less likely to receive general anesthesia (54% vs 98%, P < 0.01). Successful device implantation (98.3% vs 97.6%) and complete seal rates at 45 days were similar (n = 25,280; 83% vs 82%). Most adverse event rates were similar; unadjusted mortality rates at 45 days were 1.1% for ICE vs 0.8% for TEE (P = 0.14), and 1.0% vs 0.7% (P = 0.27) in adjusted analyses. Even after adjustment, pericardial effusion rates requiring intervention were significantly higher with ICE at 45 days (1.0% vs 0.5%; P = 0.02). This rate decreased as operators performed more ICE-guided procedures, although 82% of operators had performed <10 ICE-guided procedures overall. CONCLUSIONS: In the largest comparison to date, ICE use was infrequent. ICE and TEE both achieved high rates of complete LAAO. ICE was associated with significantly higher rates of pericardial effusion requiring intervention.

First results from the ACURATE Prime XL human feasibility study.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: This prospective, open-label, single-arm study evaluated transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis with ACURATE Prime XL, an iteration of the ACURATE neo2 device designed with improved radial force and adaptations for compatibility with a larger annulus diameter (≥ 26.5 mm and ≤ 29 mm based on pre-procedure diagnostic imaging). METHODS: The composite primary device success endpoint was based on Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 criteria. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and all stroke at 30 days. Aortic valve (AV) performance, including mean AV gradient, AV area, and grade of paravalvular leak (PVL), was assessed by an independent core laboratory. RESULTS: 13 male patients were enrolled at 3 Australian centers (mean age: 83.1 years; 10 of 13 were considered high/extreme operative risk). 61.5 % of patients met the primary device success endpoint. At 30 days, no patients experienced death or stroke; one patient received a permanent pacemaker. Mean AV gradient improved from baseline (42.7 ± 11.0 mmHg) to discharge (7.7 ± 2.5 mmHg) and through 30 days (7.2 ± 2.3 mmHg). Mean AV area was 0.8 ± 0.1 cm2 at baseline, 1.9 ± 0.3 cm2 at discharge, and 1.7 ± 0.3 cm2 at 30 days. Per core-laboratory adjudication, no patient had moderate or severe PVL at 30 days; 91.7 % had no/trace PVL and 8.3 % had mild PVL. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this first-in-human feasibility study of the ACURATE Prime XL valve, there were no safety concerns, and no deaths or strokes within 30 days. Valve hemodynamics were favorable, and no patient had >mild PVL.

Rationale and design of a randomized study comparing the Watchman FLX device to DOACs in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure (LAAC) was developed as a nonpharmacologic alternative to oral anticoagulants (OACs) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who are at an increased risk for stroke or systemic embolism. The Watchman device permanently seals off the LAA to prevent thrombi from escaping into the circulation. Previous randomized trials have established the safety and efficacy of LAAC compared to warfarin. However, direct OACs (DOACs) have become the preferred pharmacologic strategy for stroke prevention in patients with AF, and there is limited data comparing Watchman FLX to DOACs in a broad AF patient population. CHAMPION-AF is designed to prospectively determine whether LAAC with Watchman FLX is a reasonable first-line alternative to DOACs in patients with AF who are indicated for OAC therapy. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 3,000 patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women) were randomized to Watchman FLX or DOAC in a 1:1 allocation at 142 global clinical sites. Patients in the device arm were to be treated with DOAC and aspirin, DOAC alone, or DAPT for at least 3 months postimplant followed by aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor for 1-year. Control patients were required to take an approved DOAC for the duration of the trial. Clinical follow-up visits are scheduled at 3- and 12-months, and then annually through 5 years; LAA imaging is required at 4 months in the device group. Two primary end points will be evaluated at 3 years: (1) composite of stroke (ischemic/hemorrhagic), cardiovascular death, and systemic embolism compared for noninferiority, and (2) nonprocedural bleeding (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] major and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding) tested for superiority in the device arm against DOACs. The third primary noninferiority end point is the composite of ischemic stroke and systemic embolism at 5 years. Secondary end points include 3- and 5-year rates of (1) ISTH-defined major bleeding and (2) the composite of cardiovascular death, all stroke, systemic embolism, and nonprocedural ISTH bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: This study will prospectively evaluate whether LAAC with the Watchman FLX device is a reasonable alternative to DOACs in patients with AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04394546.

Real-world clinical outcomes with a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device: the FLXibility Post-Approval Study.

AIMS: The FLXibility Post-Approval Study collected data on unselected patients implanted with a WATCHMAN FLX in a commercial clinical setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were implanted with a WATCHMAN FLX per local standard of care, with a subsequent first follow-up visit from 45 to 120 days post-implant and a final follow-up at 1-year post-procedure. A Clinical Event Committee adjudicated all major adverse events and TEE/CT imaging results were adjudicated by a core laboratory. Among 300 patients enrolled at 17 centres in Europe, the mean age was 74.6 ± 8.0 years, mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.3 ± 1.6, and 62.1% were male. The device was successfully implanted in 99.0% (297/300) of patients. The post-implant medication regimen was DAPT for 87.3% (262/300). At first follow-up, core-lab adjudicated complete seal was 88.2% (149/169), 9.5% (16/169) had leak <3 mm, 2.4 (4/169) had leak ≥3 mm to ≤5 mm, and 0% had >5 mm leak. At 1 year, 93.3% (280/300) had final follow-up; 60.5% of patients were on a single antiplatelet medication, 21.4% were on DAPT, 5.6% were on direct oral anticoagulation, and 12.1% were not taking any antiplatelet/anticoagulation medication. Adverse event rates through 1 year were: all-cause death 10.8% (32/295); CV/unexplained death 5.1% (15/295); disabling and non-disabling stroke each 1.0% (3/295, all non-fatal); pericardial effusion requiring surgery or pericardiocentesis 1.0% (3/295); and device-related thrombus 2.4% (7/295). CONCLUSION: The WATCHMAN FLX device had excellent procedural success rates, high LAA seal rates, and low rates of thromboembolic events in everyday clinical practice.

Intracardiac Echocardiography to Guide Watchman FLX Implantation: The ICE LAA Study.

BACKGROUND: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) is increasingly used to guide left atrial appendage closure (LAAC). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of ICE-guided LAAC with the Watchman FLX device. METHODS: The ICE LAA (I Can See Left Atrial Appendage) study was a prospective, multicenter study with independent adjudication of echocardiographic data by a core laboratory and clinical events by a clinical events committee. Patients with atrial fibrillation with CHA2DS2-VASc scores ≥2 and clinical indications for LAAC were eligible. Preplanning with either cardiac computed tomography or transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) within 7 days prior to LAAC was mandatory. Intraprocedural ICE was carried out from the left atrium. The primary outcome was the rate of significant peridevice leaks (>5 mm) at 45-day TEE. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 76 ± 8 years, the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.0 ± 1.5, and the mean HAS-BLED score was 2.5 ± 0.9. The incidence of the primary outcome of significant peridevice leak (>5 mm) was 0%; all patients evaluated by TEE at 45 days had effective LAAC. All patients received Watchman FLX devices, and technical success was 100%. The number of devices per case was 1.0 ± 0.1. ICE successfully guided the assessment of device release criteria, including device compression (19.2% ± 7.1%; recommended range: 10%-30%). No subject required conversion to TEE. Procedural complications were 4 access-site bleeds. There was no stroke, transient ischemic attack, systemic embolization, pericardial effusion, device embolization, or device-related thrombus during the procedure or 45-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: ICE can be used to successfully guide LAAC with the Watchman FLX, with excellent procedural success, a high rate of effective LAAC, and minimal periprocedural complications. (I Can See Left Atrial Appendage [ICELAA] Clinical Study; NCT04196335).

Two-Year Outcomes With a Next-Generation Left Atrial Appendage Device: Final Results of the PINNACLE FLX Trial.

Background The PINNACLE FLX (Protection Against Embolism for Non-valvular AF [Atrial Fibrillation] Patients: Investigational Device Evaluation of the Watchman FLX LAA [Left Atrial Appendage] Closure Technology) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of a next-generation left atrial appendage closure device (WATCHMAN FLX; Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA). At 1 year, the study met the primary end points of safety and anatomical efficacy/appendage closure. This final report of the PINNACLE FLX trial includes the prespecified secondary end point of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism at 2 years, also making it the first report of 2-year outcomes with this next-generation left atrial appendage closure device. Methods and Results Patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation with CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 (men) or ≥3 (women), with an appropriate rationale for left atrial appendage closure, were enrolled to receive the left atrial appendage closure device at 29 US centers. Adverse events were assessed by an independent clinical events committee, and imaging was assessed by independent core laboratories. Among 395 implanted patients (36% women; mean age, 74 years; CHA2DS2-VASc, 4.2±1.5), the secondary efficacy end point of 2-year ischemic stroke or systemic embolism was met, with an absolute rate of 3.4% (annualized rate, 1.7%) and an upper 1-sided 95% confidence bound of 5.3%, which was superior to the 8.7% performance goal. Two-year rates of adverse events were as follows: 9.3% all-cause mortality, 5.5% cardiovascular death, 3.4% all stroke, and 10.1% major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5). There were no additional systemic embolisms, device embolizations, pericardial effusions, or symptomatic device-related thrombi after 1 year. Conclusions The secondary end point of 2-year stroke or systemic embolism was met at 3.4%. In these final results of the PINNACLE FLX trial, the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX device demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy outcomes.

Drug-Coated Balloon for the Treatment of Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease　- A Randomized Non-Inferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) have shown promising results for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and small vessel disease (SVD). However, data comparing the treatment efficacy of different DCBs are limited.Methods and Results: AGENT Japan is a prospective randomized controlled trial that compares the Agent balloon coated with a low-dose formulation of paclitaxel (2 µg/mm2) to the SeQuent Please paclitaxel-coated balloon (3 µg/mm2) for the treatment of SVD. Patients with target lesion length ≤28 mm and reference diameter between ≥2.00 and <3.00 mm were randomized 2 : 1 for treatment with Agent (n=101) or SeQuent Please (n=49). This trial also includes a separate single-arm substudy evaluating the clinical safety and effectiveness of Agent in patients with ISR. The primary endpoint of 6-month target lesion failure (TLF) was observed in 3.0% of Agent and 0.0% of SeQuent Please patients (difference=3.0%; 97.5% upper confidence bound [UCB]=9.57%, which is less than the prespecified margin of 13.2%; Pnon-inferiority=0.0012). There were no deaths or thrombosis, and angiographic and quality-of-life outcomes were comparable between groups. The AGENT Japan ISR substudy (n=30) primary endpoint was met because the one-sided 97.5% UCB for 6-month TLF (3.3%) was significantly less than the study success criterion of 15.1% (97.5% UCB=9.8%; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this study demonstrate good clinical outcomes with the Agent DCB when used to treat patients with SVD or ISR.

Clinical outcomes of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve: a prospective, multicenter, observational, post-market surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: The next-generation ACURATE neo2 transcatheter aortic valve was designed for simplified implantation and to mitigate the risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to the earlier device. AIMS: To collect clinical outcomes and device performance data, including echocardiography and 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) data, with the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: ACURATE neo2 PMCF is a single-arm, multicentre study of patients with severe AS treated in routine clinical practice. The primary safety endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30-days. The primary imaging endpoint was hypo-attenuated leaflet thickening (HALT), measured by core laboratory-adjudicated 4D-CT at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included VARC safety endpoints, procedural success, and evaluation of valve performance via core laboratory-adjudicated echocardiography. RESULTS: The study enrolled 250 patients at 18 European centres (mean age: 80.8 years; 63.6% female; mean STS score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 (98.4%) were successfully treated with ACURATE neo2. The 30-day rates for mortality and disabling stroke were 0.8% and 0%, respectively. The new permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 6.5%. HALT >50% was present in 9.3% of patients at 30 days. Valve haemodynamics improved from baseline to 30 days (mean aortic valve gradient: from 47.6±14.5 mmHg to 8.6±3.9 mmHg; mean aortic valve area: from 0.7±0.2 cm2 to 1.6±0.4 cm2). At 30 days, PVL was evaluated as none/trace in 79.2% of patients, mild in 18.9%, moderate in 1.9%, and severe in 0%. CONCLUSIONS: The study results support the safety and efficacy of TAVI with ACURATE neo2 in patients in routine clinical practice.

Long-term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Lotus Valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR: A Secondary Analysis of the REPRISE III Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Long-term follow-up after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is of interest given that longitudinal data on mortality and durability of transcatheter heart valves are limited. The REPRISE III (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System-Randomized Clinical Evaluation) randomized clinical trial compared the mechanically expanded Lotus valve with the self-expanding CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms. Objective: To describe the final 5-year outcomes of the REPRISE III trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis assessed the final 5-year clinical, functional, and echocardiographic outcomes of 912 patients from the REPRISE III trial, which was conducted at 55 centers in North America, Europe, and Australia between September 22, 2014, and December 24, 2015. Patients had high risk for aortic stenosis or severe or symptomatic aortic stenosis. Data were analyzed from September 22, 2014, to May 21, 2021. Intervention: Lotus valve or CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms. Main Outcomes and Measures: Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 end points, hemodynamic measures, functional status, and health status were examined through the 5-year follow-up. Results: A total of 912 patients (mean [SD] age, 82.8 [7.3] years; 463 women [50.8%]) were randomized to either the Lotus valve group (n = 607) or CoreValve/EvolutR group (n = 305), with a baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score of 6.8%. Clinical follow-up data from the REPRISE III trial were available for 581 patients (95.7%) in the Lotus valve group and 285 patients (93.4%) in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. At 5 years, the cumulative event rate for all-cause mortality was 50.9% in the Lotus valve group vs 52.8% in the CoreValve/EvolutR group (P = .59). Disabling stroke was less frequent with the Lotus valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR (cumulative event rates, 8.3% vs 12.2%; P = .04), whereas the cumulative event rates for overall stroke were similar in both groups (14.1% vs 15.3%; P = .38). Insertion of a new permanent pacemaker (38.9% vs 27.3%; P < .001) and detection of prosthetic aortic valve thrombosis (5.8% vs 1.8%; P = .007) were more common in the Lotus valve group than in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. A smaller proportion of patients who received the Lotus valve experienced valve malpositioning (0% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and required the use of a second valve (1.0% vs 3.8%; P < .001) during the procedure compared with those who received the CoreValve/EvolutR. Compared with the Lotus valve group, the CoreValve/EvolutR group had a significantly lower mean (SD) aortic gradient (7.8 [4.2] mm Hg vs 12.6 [6.7] mm Hg; P < .001) and larger valve areas (1.57 [0.56] cm2 vs 1.42 [0.42] cm2; P = .10). After 5 years, the proportion of patients with moderate or greater paravalvular leak was not significantly higher with the CoreValve/EvolutR than with the Lotus valve (1.9% vs 0%; P = .31); however, the proportion of patients with mild paravalvular leak was higher in the CoreValve/EvolutR group compared with the Lotus valve group (23.1% vs 7.8%; P = .006). Long-term, similar improvements in New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score were observed in both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: The REPRISE III trial found that, at 5 years, the clinical outcomes of the Lotus valve were comparable to those of the CoreValve/EvolutR and that the Lotus valve was safe and effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02202434.

Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.

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

Impact of Peridevice Leak on 5-Year Outcomes After Left Atrial Appendage Closure.

BACKGROUND: In the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clinical trials of left atrial appendage (LAA) closure, a postimplantation peridevice leak (PDL) of ≤5 mm (PDL≤5) was accepted as sufficient LAA "closure." However, the clinical consequences of these PDLs on subsequent thromboembolism are poorly characterized. OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the impact of PDL≤5 on clinical outcomes after implantation of the Watchman device. METHODS: Using combined data from the FDA studies PROTECT-AF (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation), PREVAIL (Evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation vs Long Term Warfarin Therapy), and CAP2 (Continued Access to PREVAIL), we assessed patients with successful device implantation for PDL by means of protocol-mandated transesophageal echocardiograms (TEEs) at 45 days and 1 year. Five-year outcomes were assessed as a function of the absence or presence of PDL≤5. RESULTS: The cohort included 1,054 patients: mean age 74 ± 8.3 years, 65% male, and CHA2DS2-VASc 4.1 ± 1.4. TEE imaging at 45 days revealed 634 patients (60.2%) without and 404 (38.3%) with PDL≤5, and 1-year TEE revealed 704 patients (71.6%) without and 272 (27.7%) with PDL≤5. The presence of PDL≤5 at 1 year, but not at 45 days, was associated with an increased 5-year risk of ischemic stroke or systemic embolism (adjusted HR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.15-3.29; P = 0.014), largely driven by an increase in nondisabling stroke (HR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.03-3.78; P = 0.04), while disabling or fatal stroke rates were similar (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.19-2.46; P = 0.56). PDL≤5 was not associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular or unexplained death (HR: 1.20; P = 0.45) or all-cause death (HR: 0.87; P = 0.42). CONCLUSIONS: PDL≤5 at 1 year after percutaneous LAA closure with the Watchman device are associated with increased thromboembolism, driven by increased nondisabling stroke, but similar mortality. (Watchman Left Atrial Appendage System for Embolic Protection in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation [PROTECT-AF; NCT00129545]; Evaluation of the Watchman Left Atrial Appendage Closure Device in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation vs Long Term Warfarin Therapy [PREVAIL; NCT01182441]; Continued Access to PREVAIL [CAP2; NCT01760291]).

Comparison of anticoagulation with left atrial appendage closure after atrial fibrillation ablation: Rationale and design of the OPTION randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF), physicians typically offer AF ablation for symptom relief; however, patients often anticipate/expect a life free from anticoagulation. This belief puts patients at increased risk of stroke due to the potential for asymptomatic AF postablation if anticoagulation is ceased contrary to clinical guidelines. Although the WATCHMAN device has been FDA-approved to decrease the risk of thromboembolism from the left atrial appendage (LAA) in patients with an appropriate rationale to avoid oral anticoagulation, it has not been well-studied following AF ablation. Additionally, there are limited data comparing the WATCHMAN device to direct oral anticoagulants. The OPTION study will investigate whether LAA closure with the WATCHMAN FLX device is a reasonable alternative to oral anticoagulation following percutaneous catheter ablation for nonvalvular AF. TRIAL DESIGN: OPTION is a multinational, multicenter, prospective randomized clinical trial. Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc of ≥2 in men or ≥3 in women and who underwent a AF catheter ablation procedure between 90 and 180 days prior to randomization (sequential) or are planning to have catheter ablation within 10 days of randomization (concomitant) will be randomized in a 1:1 allocation of WATCHMAN FLX vs control. Control patients will start or continue market-approved oral anticoagulation for the duration of the trial. A total of 1600 patients were randomized from 130 global investigational sites. Follow-up for both device and control patients will occur at 3, 12, 24, and 36 months. The primary effectiveness noninferiority endpoint is stroke (ischemic or hemorrhagic), all-cause death, or systemic embolism at 36 months. The primary safety superiority endpoint is nonprocedural bleeding through 36 months (International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis [ISTH] major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding). The secondary noninferiority endpoint is ISTH major bleeding through 36 months (including procedural bleeding). CONCLUSIONS: This trial will assess the safety and efficacy of WATCHMAN FLX in a postablation contemporary clinical AF patient population at risk of stroke.

Clinical outcomes following transapical TAVR with ACURATE neo in the CHANGE neo TA study.

BACKGROUND: A transapical (TA) approach to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be used when a transfemoral (TF) approach is not feasible. The CHANGE neo TA study evaluated patients treated in routine clinical practice via TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo bioprosthetic aortic valve. METHODS AND RESULTS: This single-arm post-market study had a planned enrolment of 200 subjects; enrolment was terminated early due to declining TA-TAVR procedures at participating centers. Final enrolment was 107 patients (mean age: 79.3 years; 54.2% female; mean STS score at baseline: 6.2%). The mortality rate in the intent-to-treat population was 11.2% at 30 days (primary endpoint) and 25.6% at 12 months. The VARC-2 composite endpoint for 30-day safety occurred in 24.3% of patients. Six patients (5.6%) received a permanent pacemaker within 30 days. Site-reported echocardiographic data showed early improvements in mean aortic valve gradient (baseline: 38.8 [SD 13.1] mmHg, discharge: 6.7 [SD 3.7] mmHg) and effective orifice area (baseline: 0.7 [SD 0.2] cm2, discharge: 1.9 [SD 0.6] cm2), and the discharge rate of paravalvular regurgitation was low (74.7% none/trace, 24.2% mild, 1.1% severe). CONCLUSIONS: TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo valve system yields acceptable clinical outcomes, providing an alternative for patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for TF-TAVR.