Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of Neurologic Events After TAVR According to VARC-3 Criteria.

BACKGROUND: The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3 definition for neurologic events after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) lacks clinical validation. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of neurologic events following TAVR as defined by VARC-3 criteria. METHODS: This was a multicenter study including 2,924 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. Based on Neurologic Academic Research Consortium (NeuroARC) classification, neurologic events were classified as NeuroARC type 1 (stroke), NeuroARC type 2 (covert central nervous system injury), and NeuroARC type 3 (transient ischemic attack and delirium). Baseline, procedural, and follow-up data were prospectively collected in a dedicated database. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 13 (7-37) months, neurologic events occurred in 471 patients (16.1%), NeuroARC type 1, 2, and 3 in 37.4%, 4.7%, and 58.0% of cases, respectively, and the majority (58.6%) were periprocedural. Advanced age, chronic kidney disease, atrial fibrillation, major vascular complications, and in-hospital bleeding determined an increased risk of periprocedural events (P < 0.03 for all). Neurologic events occurring during the periprocedural time frame were independently associated with a substantial increase in mortality at 1 year after the intervention (HR: 1.91; 95% CI: 1.23-2.97; P = 0.004). However, although NeuroARC type 1 was associated with an increased mortality risk (IRR: 3.38; 95% CI: 2.30-5.56; P < 0.001 and IRR: 21.7; 95% CI: 9.63-49.1; P < 0.001 for ischemic and hemorrhagic stroke, respectively), the occurrence of NeuroARC type 3 events had no impact on mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Neurologic events after TAVR were associated with poorer short- and long-term survival. This correlation was related to the type of NeuroARC event defined by the VARC-3 criteria. Given the negative impact on clinical outcomes, every attempt should be made to reduce the risk of neurologic complications after TAVR.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with and without Diabetes Mellitus.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients undergoing cardiac transcatheter or surgical interventions usually is correlated with poor outcomes. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been developed as a therapy choice for inoperable, high-, or intermediate-risk surgical patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of DM and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) on outcomes and survival after TAVI. METHODS: Five hundred and fifty-two symptomatic severe AS patients who underwent TAVI, of whom 164 (29.7%) had DM, were included in this retrospective study. Follow-up was performed after 30 days, six months, and annually. RESULTS: The device success and risks of procedural-related complications were similar between patients with and without DM, except for acute kidney injury, which was more frequent in the DM group (2.4% vs. 0%, P=0.021). In-hospital and first-year mortality were similar between the groups (4.9% vs. 3.6%, P=0.490 and 15.0% vs. 11.2%, P=0.282, respectively). There was a statistical difference between HbA1c ≥ 6.5 and HbA1c ≤ 6.49 groups in total mortality (34.4% vs. 15.8%, P<0.001, respectively). The only independent predictors were Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (hazard ratio [HR] 1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-1.51; P=0.003) and HbA1c level ≥ 6.5 (HR 10.78, 95% CI 2.58-21.50; P=0.003) in multivariable logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSION: In this study, we conclude that DM was not correlated with an increased mortality risk or complication rates after TAVI. Also, it was shown that mortality was higher in patients with HbA1c ≥ 6.5, and it was an independent predictor for long-term mortality.

Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement vs. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with Small Aortic Annulus: Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes from a Multi-Institutional Study.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes of patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: From 2015 to 2020, 622 consecutive patients with SAA underwent either SUAVR or TAVI. Through a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis, two homogeneous groups of 146 patients were formed. Primary endpoint: all cause-death at 36 months. Secondary endpoints: incidence of moderate to severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs). RESULTS: All-cause death at three years was higher in the TAVI group (SUAVR 12.2% vs. TAVI 21.0%, P=0.058). Perioperatively, comparable hemodynamic performances were recorded in terms of indexed effective orifice area (SUAVR 1.12 ± 0.23 cm2/m2 vs. TAVI 1.17 ± 0.28 cm2/m2, P=0.265), mean transvalvular gradients (SUAVR 12.9 ± 5.3 mmHg vs. TAVI 12.2 ± 6.2 mmHg, P=0.332), and moderate-to-severe PPM (SUAVR 4.1% vs. TAVI 8.9%, P=0.096). TAVI group showed a higher cumulative incidence of MACCEs at 36 months (SUAVR 18.1% vs. TAVI 32.6%, P<0.001). Pacemaker implantation (PMI) and perivalvular leak ≥ 2 were significantly higher in TAVI group and identified as independent predictors of mortality (PMI: hazard ratio [HR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-6.94, P=0.008; PPM: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.25-5.94, P=0.012). CONCLUSION: In patients with SAA, SUAVR and TAVI showed comparable hemodynamic performances. Moreover, all-cause death and incidence of MACCEs at follow-up were significantly higher in TAVI group.

Sex-specific aspects on prognosis after aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis: a SWEDEHEART registry study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term cardiovascular (CV) outcomes between men and women with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) by the type of valve implant. METHODS: The study population consisted of 14 123 non-selected patients with AS undergoing first-time AVR and included in the Swedish Web system for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-based care in Heart disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry during 2008-2016. Comparisons were made between men and women and type of valve implant (ie, surgical implantation with a mechanical (mSAVR) (n=1 966) or biological valve (bioSAVR) (n=9 801)) or by a transcatheter approach (TAVR) (n=2 356). Outcomes included all-cause mortality, ischaemic stroke, major bleeding, thromboembolic events, heart failure and myocardial infarction, continuously adjusted for significant comorbidities and medical treatment. RESULTS: In the mSAVR cohort, there were no significant sex differences in any CV events. In the bioSAVR cohort, a higher risk of death (HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.26, p=0.007) and major bleeding (HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.18 to 1.69, p<0.001) was observed in men. In the TAVR cohort, men suffered a higher risk of death (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.07 to 1.45, p=0.005), major bleeding (HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.82, p=0.022) and thromboembolism (HR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.82, p=0.047). CONCLUSION: No significant long-term difference in CV events was noted between men and women undergoing AVR with a mechanical aortic valve. In both the bioSAVR and TAVR cohort, mortality was higher in men who also had an increased incidence of several other CV events.

3-Year Outcomes From the Evolut Low Risk TAVR Bicuspid Study.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low-surgical risk patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis beyond 2 years are limited. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate 3-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study. METHODS: The Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study conducted in 25 U.S. CENTERS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk with bicuspid aortic valve anatomy (all subtypes) underwent TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular Evolut R or PRO (Medtronic) bioprosthesis. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated all deaths and endpoint-related adverse events, and a central echocardiographic core laboratory assessed hemodynamic endpoints. RESULTS: An attempted implant was performed in 150 patients from December 2018 to October 2019. The mean age was 70.3 ± 5.5 years, 48% (72/150) of the patients were women, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 1.3% (Q1-Q3: 0.9%-1.7%). Sievers type 1 was the dominant bicuspid morphology (90.7%, 136/150). The Kaplan-Meier rates of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke were 1.3% (95% CI: 0.3%-5.3%) at 1 year, 3.4% (95% CI: 1.4%-8.1%) at 2 years, and 4.1% (95% CI: 1.6%-10.7%) at 3 years. The incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 19.4% (95% CI: 12.4%-29.6%) at 3 years. There were no instances of moderate or severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation at 2 and 3 years after TAVR. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-year results from the Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study demonstrate low rates of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke and favorable hemodynamic performance.

Association Between Aortic Wall Thrombus and Thromboembolic Events After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic events, particularly strokes, remain a major complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Embolic protection devices have failed to show significant clinical benefit in large randomized clinical trials. Aortic wall thrombus (AWT) is often observed on multidetector computed tomography during TAVR work-up, but its prognostic significance is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the association between the presence of AWT and the incidence of thromboembolic outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral (TF) TAVR for severe aortic stenosis. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study of consecutive patients who underwent TF TAVR for severe aortic stenosis between January 2011 and April 2022. A dedicated scale (range: 0-10) was qualitatively used to assess AWT. The primary outcome was a composite of procedural thromboembolic events defined as ischemic stroke, blue toe syndrome, bowel ischemia, or other solid organ infarction. The secondary endpoints were ischemic strokes and procedural death. RESULTS: Of the 641 patients included, severe AWT (score ≥8) was identified in 73 (11.4%). The presence of severe AWT was strongly associated with an increase in the primary outcome (OR: 8.48; 95% CI: 3.36-21.40; P < 0.001). This relationship persisted following multivariable analysis, which adjusted for comorbidities and procedural characteristics. The presence of severe AWT was also found to be associated with an increased incidence of stroke and procedural death (OR: 5.66; 95% CI: 2.00-15.30; P = 0.002 and OR: 4.66; 95% CI: 1.80-11.30; P = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The presence of severe AWT on preprocedural multidetector computed tomography is strongly associated with thromboembolic complications including stroke and mortality after TF TAVR.

A high-volume study on the impact of diabetes mellitus on clinical outcomes after surgical and percutaneous cardiac interventions.

BACKGROUND: Type I and type II diabetes mellitus (DM) patients have a higher prevalence of cardiovascular diseases, as well as a higher mortality risk of cardiovascular diseases and interventions. This study provides an update on the impact of DM on clinical outcomes, including mortality, complications and reinterventions, using data on percutaneous and surgical cardiac interventions in the Netherlands. METHODS: This is a retrospective, nearby nationwide study using real-world observational data registered by the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR) between 2015 and 2020. Patients treated for combined or isolated coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic valve disease (AVD) were studied. Bivariate analyses and multivariate logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between DM and clinical outcomes both unadjusted and adjusted for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: 241,360 patients underwent the following interventions; percutaneous coronary intervention(N = 177,556), coronary artery bypass grafting(N = 39,069), transcatheter aortic valve implantation(N = 11,819), aortic valve replacement(N = 8,028) and combined CABG and AVR(N = 4,888). The incidence of DM type I and II was 21.1%, 26.7%, 17.8%, 27.6% and 27% respectively. For all procedures, there are statistically significant differences between patients living with and without diabetes, adjusted for baseline characteristics, at the expense of patients with diabetes for 30-days mortality after PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001); 120-days mortality after CABG (OR = 1.35; p <.001), AVR (OR = 1.5; p <.03) and CABG + AVR (OR = 1.42; p =.02); and 1-year mortality after CABG (OR = 1.43; p <.001), TAVI (OR = 1.21; p =.01) and PCI (OR = 1.68; p <.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with DM remain to have unfavourable outcomes compared to nondiabetic patients which calls for a critical reappraisal of existing care pathways aimed at diabetic patients within the cardiovascular field.

Performance of Purpose-Built vs Off-Label Transcatheter Devices for Aortic Regurgitation: The PURPOSE Study.

BACKGROUND: Severe pure aortic regurgitation (AR) carries a high mortality and morbidity risk, and it is often undertreated because of the inherent surgical risk. Transcatheter heart valves (THVs) have been used off-label in this setting with overall suboptimal results. The dedicated "purpose-built" Jena Valve Trilogy (JVT, JenaValve Technology) showed an encouraging performance, although it has never been compared to other THVs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study was to assess the performance of the latest iteration of THVs used off-label in comparison to the purpose-built JVT in inoperable patients with severe AR. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective registry with 18 participating centers worldwide collecting data on inoperable patients with severe AR of the native valve. A bicuspid aortic valve was the main exclusion criterion. The primary endpoints were technical and device success, 1-year all-cause mortality, and the composite of 1-year mortality and the heart failure rehospitalization rate. RESULTS: Overall, 256 patients were enrolled. THVs used off-label were used in 168 cases (66%), whereas JVT was used in 88 (34%). JVT had higher technical (81% vs 98%; P < 0.001) and device success rates (73% vs 95%; P < 0.001), primarily driven by significantly lower incidences of THV embolization (15% vs 1.1%; P < 0.001), the need for a second valve (11% vs 1.1%; P = 0.004), and moderate residual AR (10% vs 1.1%; P = 0.007). The permanent pacemaker implantation rate was comparable and elevated for both groups (22% vs 24%; P = 0.70). Finally, no significant difference was observed at the 1-year follow-up in terms of mortality (HR: 0.99; P = 0.980) and the composite endpoint (HR: 1.5; P = 0.355). CONCLUSIONS: The JVT platform has a better acute performance than other THVs when used off-label for inoperable patients with severe AR. A longer follow-up is conceivably needed to detect a possible impact on prognosis.

Comparison of Patient Outcomes Between Leadless vs Transvenous Pacemakers Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Evidence is limited regarding the effectiveness of leadless pacemaker implantation for conduction disturbance following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to examine the national trends in the use of leadless pacemaker implantation following TAVR and compare its performance with transvenous pacemakers. METHODS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged ≥65 years who underwent leadless or transvenous pacemakers following TAVR between 2017 and 2020 were included. Outcomes included in-hospital overall complications as well as midterm (up to 2 years) all-cause death, heart failure hospitalization, infective endocarditis, and device-related complications. Propensity score overlap weighting analysis was used. RESULTS: A total of 10,338 patients (730 leadless vs 9,608 transvenous) were included. Between 2017 and 2020, there was a 3.5-fold increase in the proportion of leadless pacemakers implanted following TAVR. Leadless pacemaker recipients had more comorbidities, including atrial fibrillation and end-stage renal disease. After adjusting for potential confounders, patients with leadless pacemakers experienced a lower rate of in-hospital overall complications compared with patients who received transvenous pacemakers (7.2% vs 10.1%; P = 0.014). In the midterm, we found no significant differences in all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.96-1.32; P = 0.15), heart failure hospitalization (subdistribution HR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.74-1.08; P = 0.24), or infective endocarditis (subdistribution HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.44-2.17; P = 0.95) between the 2 groups, but leadless pacemakers were associated with a lower risk of device-related complications (subdistribution HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.21-0.64; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Leadless pacemakers are increasingly being used for conduction disturbance following TAVR and were associated with a lower rate of in-hospital complications and midterm device-related complications compared to transvenous pacemakers without a difference in midterm mortality.

Learning Curve for In-Hospital Mortality of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights from the Brazilian National Registry. / Curva de Aprendizagem da Mortalidade Hospitalar da Substituição da Válvula Aórtica Transcateter: Insights do Registro Nacional Brasileiro.

BACKGROUND: Robust data on the learning curve (LC) of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are lacking in developing countries. OBJECTIVE: To assess TAVR's LC in Brazil over time. METHODS: We analyzed data from the Brazilian TAVR registry from 2008 to 2023. Patients from each center were numbered chronologically in case sequence numbers (CSNs). LC was performed using restricted cubic splines adjusted for EuroSCORE-II and the use of new-generation prostheses. Also, in-hospital outcomes were compared between groups defined according to the level of experience based on the CSN: 1st to 40th (initial-experience), 41st to 80th (early-experience), 81st to 120th (intermediate-experience), and over 121st (high-experience). Additional analysis was performed grouping hospitals according to the number of cases treated before 2014 (>40 and ≤40 procedures). The level of significance adopted was <0.05. RESULTS: A total of 3,194 patients from 25 centers were included. Mean age and EuroSCORE II were 80.7±8.1 years and 7±7.1, respectively. LC analysis demonstrated a drop in adjusted in-hospital mortality after treating 40 patients. A leveling off of the curve was observed after case #118. In-hospital mortality across the groups was 8.6%, 7.7%, 5.9%, and 3.7% for initial-, early-, intermediate-, and high-experience, respectively (p<0.001). High experience independently predicted lower mortality (OR 0.57, p=0.013 vs. initial experience). Low-volume centers before 2014 showed no significant decrease in the likelihood of death with gained experience, whereas high-volume centers had a continuous improvement after case #10. CONCLUSION: A TAVR LC phenomenon was observed for in-hospital mortality in Brazil. This effect was more pronounced in centers that treated their first 40 cases before 2014 than those that reached this milestone after 2014.

Short-term outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement in elderly patients - results of a comparative cohort study.

BACKGROUND: With the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, the role of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in elderly patients has been called into question. We investigated the short-term outcomes of SAVR in the elderly population. METHODS: All patients aged ≥ 70 years who underwent isolated SAVR in our centre between 2008 and 2017 were included in the study. Survival at 30 days and 1 year were compared for patients aged 70-79 years (n = 809) versus patients aged ≥ 80 years (n = 322). Factors associated with poorer survival outcomes were identified using multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Patients aged 70-79 years and patients aged ≥ 80 years had similar survival rates at 30 days (98.1% vs. 98.4%, p = 0.732) and 1 year (96.0% vs. 94.1%, p = 0.162) post-SAVR. This remained true after multivariable adjustment. Risk factors for 30 day all-cause mortality included insulin dependent diabetes (HR 6.17, 95% CI 1.32-28.92, p = 0.021) and increasing cardiopulmonary bypass time (HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.89-3.91, p < 0.0001). Significant risk factors for 1 year all-cause mortality were New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV (HR 6.25, 95% CI 1.55-25.24, p = 0.010) and longer cardiopulmonary bypass time (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.40-2.69, p < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained for cardiac-specific mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term outcomes of SAVR are excellent in elderly patients and age alone is not a predictor of poorer outcomes. However, the increased risk of mortality in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes and those with severe functional impairment (NYHA class IV) should be carefully considered when selecting patients for SAVR in this elderly population.

Predictors and 5-Year Clinical Outcomes of Pacemaker After TAVR: Analysis From the PARTNER 2 SAPIEN 3 Registries.

BACKGROUND: Conduction disturbances requiring a permanent pacemaker (PPM) are a frequent complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with few reports of rates, predictors, and long-term clinical outcomes following implantation of the third-generation, balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valve (THV). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the rates, predictors, and long-term clinical outcomes of PPM implantation following TAVR with the S3 THV. METHODS: The current study included 857 patients in the PARTNER 2 S3 registries with intermediate and high surgical risk without prior PPM, and investigated predictors and 5-year clinical outcomes of new PPM implanted within 30 days of TAVR. RESULTS: Among 857 patients, 107 patients (12.5%) received a new PPM within 30 days after TAVR. By multivariable analysis, predictors of PPM included increased age, pre-existing right bundle branch block, larger THV size, greater THV oversizing, moderate or severe annulus calcification, and implantation depth >6 mm. At 5 years (median follow-up 1,682.0 days [min 2.0 days, max 2,283.0 days]), new PPM was not associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality (Adj HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.85-1.70; P = 0.30) or repeat hospitalization (Adj HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.67-2.21; P = 0.52). Patients with new PPM had a decline in left ventricular ejection fraction at 1 year that persisted at 5 years (55.1 ± 2.55 vs 60.4 ± 0.65; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: PPM was required in 12.5% of patients without prior PPM who underwent TAVR with a SAPIEN 3 valve in the PARTNER 2 S3 registries and was not associated with worse clinical outcomes, including mortality, at 5 years. Modifiable factors that may reduce the PPM rate include bioprosthetic valve oversizing, prosthesis size, and implantation depth.

Mitral regurgitation carries greater prognostic significance than mitral stenosis in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

AIMS: This study assessed the outcomes of concomitant mitral valve disease and severe aortic stenosis in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: Echocardiographic data of 813 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR were collected, and clinical outcomes were analyzed for individuals with mitral stenosis and mitral regurgitation. RESULTS: The final cohort includes 788 patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis. Among single parameters of mitral stenosis, a smaller baseline mitral valve area (MVA) by the continuity equation and higher postprocedural mean mitral gradients (MMG) were associated with an increased risk of death at 1 year (P-values 0.02 and <0.01, respectively), but no correlation with outcomes was demonstrated after multivariate adjustment for major prognosticators. Mitral stenosis (based on MVA + MMG) was not associated with complications or mortality. Mitral regurgitation was present in 94.6% of the population at baseline and regressed by at least one grade post-TAVR in 28% of the patients. The improvement in mitral regurgitation was associated with a greater prosthetic effective orifice area (P-value 0.03). Significant (at least moderate) residual mitral regurgitation was correlated with short-term complications and shown to be an independent predictor of 1-year mortality (P-value 0.02, odds ratio (OR) 5.37, confidence interval 1.34-21.5). CONCLUSION: Mitral regurgitation has a greater impact on TAVR patients than mitral stenosis as assessed by functional methods.

Selection for transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement and mid-term survival: results of the AUTHEARTVISIT study.

OBJECTIVES: Limited data are available from randomized trials comparing outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgery in patients with different risks and with follow-up of at least 4 years or longer. In this large, population-based cohort study, long-term mortality and morbidity were investigated in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe aortic stenosis using a surgically implanted bioprosthesis (surgical/biological aortic valve replacement; sB-AVR) or TAVR. METHODS: Individual data from the Austrian Insurance Funds from 2010 through 2020 were analysed. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality, assessed in the overall and propensity score-matched populations. Secondary outcomes included reoperation and cardiovascular events. RESULTS: From January 2010 through December 2020, a total of 18 882 patients underwent sB-AVR (n = 11 749; 62.2%) or TAVR (n = 7133; 37.8%); median follow-up was 5.8 (95% CI 5.7-5.9) years (maximum 12.3 years). The risk of all-cause mortality was higher with TAVR compared with sB-AVR: hazard ratio 1.552, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.469-1.640, P < 0.001; propensity score-matched hazard ratio 1.510, 1.403-1.625, P < 0.001. Estimated median survival was 8.8 years (95% CI 8.6-9.1) with sB-AVR versus 5 years (4.9-5.2) with TAVR. Estimated 5-year survival probability was 0.664 (0.664-0.686) with sB-AVR versus 0.409 (0.378-0.444) with TAVR overall, and 0.690 (0.674-0.707) and 0.560 (0.540-0.582), respectively, with propensity score matching. Separate subgroup analyses for patients aged 65-75 years and >75 years indicated a significant survival benefit in patients selected for sB-AVR in both groups. Other predictors of mortality were age, sex, previous heart failure, diabetes and chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective national population-based study, selection for TAVR was significantly associated with higher all-cause mortality compared with sB-AVR in patients ≥65 years with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis in the >2-year follow-up.

The evolution of TAVI performance overtime: an overview of systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for high and intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Recent studies have demonstrated non-inferiority of TAVI compared to surgery in low-risk patients. In the past decade, numerous literature reviews (SLRs) have assessed the use of TAVI in different risk groups. This is the first attempt to provide an overview of SRs (OoSRs) focusing on secondary studies reporting clinical outcomes/process indicators. This research aims to summarize the findings of extant literature on the performance of TAVI over time. METHODS: A literature search took place from inception to April 2024. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for SLRs. SLRs reporting at least one review of clinical indicators were included. Subsequently, a two-step inclusion process was conducted: [1] screening based on title and abstracts and [2] screening based on full-text papers. Relevant data were extracted and the quality of the reviews was assessed. RESULTS: We included 33 SLRs with different risks assessed via the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score. Mortality rates were comparable between TAVI and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) groups. TAVI is associated with lower rates of major bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Vascular complications, pacemaker implantation, and residual aortic regurgitation were more frequent in TAVI patients. CONCLUSION: This study summarizes TAVI performance findings over a decade, revealing a shift to include both high and low-risk patients since 2020. Overall, TAVI continues to evolve, emphasizing improved outcomes, broader indications, and addressing challenges.

Predicting mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using preprocedural CT.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a widely used intervention for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Identifying high-risk patients is crucial due to potential postprocedural complications. Currently, this involves manual clinical assessment and time-consuming radiological assessment of preprocedural computed tomography (CT) images by an expert radiologist. In this study, we introduce a probabilistic model that predicts post-TAVR mortality automatically using unprocessed, preprocedural CT and 25 baseline patient characteristics. The model utilizes CT volumes by automatically localizing and extracting a region of interest around the aortic root and ascending aorta. It then extracts task-specific features with a 3D deep neural network and integrates them with patient characteristics to perform outcome prediction. As missing measurements or even missing CT images are common in TAVR planning, the proposed model is designed with a probabilistic structure to allow for marginalization over such missing information. Our model demonstrates an AUROC of 0.725 for predicting all-cause mortality during postprocedure follow-up on a cohort of 1449 TAVR patients. This performance is on par with what can be achieved with lengthy radiological assessments performed by experts. Thus, these findings underscore the potential of the proposed model in automatically analyzing CT volumes and integrating them with patient characteristics for predicting mortality after TAVR.

Comparison of Contemporary Treatment Strategies in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock Due to Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to understand the incidence and outcomes of patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) due to severe aortic stenosis (AS), and the impact of conventional treatment strategies in this population. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients admitted to the Cleveland Clinic cardiac intensive care unit between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2021 with CS were retrospectively identified and categorized into those with CS in the setting of severe AS versus CS without AS. The impact of various treatment strategies on mortality was further assessed. We identified 2754 patients with CS during the study period, of whom 216 patients (8%) had CS in the setting of severe AS. Medical management was associated with the highest 30-day mortality when compared with either balloon aortic valve replacement or aortic valve replacement (surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement) (hazard ratio, 3.69 [95% CI, 2.04-6.66]; P<0.0001). Among patients who received transcatheter therapy, 30-day mortality was significantly higher in patients who received balloon aortic valvuloplasty versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (26% versus 4%, P=0.02). Both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement had considerably lower mortality than medical management and balloon aortic valvuloplasty at 30 days and 1 year (P<0.05 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: CS due to severe AS is associated with high in-hospital and 30-day mortality, worse compared with those with CS without AS. In suitable patients, urgent surgical aortic valvuloplasty or transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with favorable short- and long-term outcomes. Although balloon aortic valvuloplasty may be used to temporize patients with CS in the setting of severe AS, mortality is ≈50% if not followed by definitive aortic valve replacement within 90 days.

[Waiting time to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and mortality during wait period in Algeria]. / Délais d'attente d'implantation de valve aortique transcutanée (TAVI) et mortalité durant la période d'attente en Algérie.

BACKGROUND: Trans Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) has become the primary treatment for aortic stenosis in patients over 75 years old. Despite its clinical efficacy, it's adoption in emerging countries remains low due to the high cost of prostheses and limited healthcare funding resources. This leads to prolonged waiting times for the TAVI procedure, which may lead to complications; these data are missing particularly in emerging countries. AIMS: To describe waiting time for TAVI and mortality rate in this waiting period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was prospective registry, patients referred for TAVI were prospectively followed; waiting time was calculated from the first visit after referral to TAVI implantation, clinical and, call fellow up was performed every 3 months. We divided patients into two groups: Group 1 (G1) patients still awaiting TAVI (105 patients), and those who underwent TAVI (36 patients). Group 2 (G2) patients who died while awaiting TAVI (16 patients, 10,2 %). RESULTS: Demographic characteristics were similar, with a tendency for older age in G2 (79.5 ± 5.7 years vs. 82.5 ± 7.4 years, p=0,06). G2 exhibited more left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) impairment (8.5% vs. 25%, p=0,03) and a higher rate of severe heart failure with dyspnea stages III or IV (2.8% vs. 12.5%, p<0,001). The mean follow-up in G1 was 242.9 ± 137.4 days; the waiting time for TAVI was 231.7 ± 134.1 days, and the average time between the first consultation and death while awaiting TAVI (G2) was 335.1 ± 167.4 days. CONCLUSION: in our series, waiting time is high due to limited Trans aortic heart valve availability, mortality during this wait exceeds 10%. Adverse prognostic factors include impaired LVEF and severe dyspnea stages III or IV.

Deep-learning survival analysis for patients with calcific aortic valve disease undergoing valve replacement.

Calcification of the aortic valve (CAVDS) is a major cause of aortic stenosis (AS) leading to loss of valve function which requires the substitution by surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI). These procedures are associated with high post-intervention mortality, then the corresponding risk assessment is relevant from a clinical standpoint. This study compares the traditional Cox Proportional Hazard (CPH) against Machine Learning (ML) based methods, such as Deep Learning Survival (DeepSurv) and Random Survival Forest (RSF), to identify variables able to estimate the risk of death one year after the intervention, in patients undergoing either to SAVR or TAVI. We found that with all three approaches the combination of six variables, named albumin, age, BMI, glucose, hypertension, and clonal hemopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), allows for predicting mortality with a c-index of approximately 80 % . Importantly, we found that the ML models have a better prediction capability, making them as effective for statistical analysis in medicine as most state-of-the-art approaches, with the additional advantage that they may expose non-linear relationships. This study aims to improve the early identification of patients at higher risk of death, who could then benefit from a more appropriate therapeutic intervention.

The impact of the Naples Prognostic Score on the short- and long-term prognosis of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative systemic inflammation and nutritional status have been shown to affect prognosis in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In this study, we investigated the effect of the Naples Prognostic Score (NPS), which consists of four different parameters including these two components on short- and long-term prognosis in patients undergoing TAVI. METHODS: In 343 patients (mean age 78.1 ±â€Š8.4 years, 51.3% female) who underwent TAVI, the NPS score was calculated from the blood tests obtained before the procedure and the study population was divided into three according to the NPS value: those with 0 and 1 were divided into Group-1, those with 2 into Group-2, and those with 3 and 4 into Group-3. The relationship between NPS group and in-hospital adverse events and long-term survival was evaluated. RESULTS: Systolic pulmonary artery pressure, STS score, presence of chronic lung disease and being in NPS Group-3 [adjusted odds ratio (adjOR): 3.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.02-15.17), P  = 0.047] were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. According to the multivariate Cox-regression model, both Group-2 NPS [adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR): 4.81, 95% CI (1.09-21.14), P  = 0.037] and Group-3 NPS [adjHR: 10.1, 95% CI (2.31-43.36), P  = 0.002] was an independent predictor of 2-year all-cause mortality after TAVI. There was no significant difference in perioperative adverse events between the groups except for postprocedural acute kidney injury. According to receiver-operating characteristic analysis, the optimal predictive value of NPS for in-hospital and long-term mortality was 2.5. CONCLUSION: In patients who will be candidates for TAVI, NPS is a simple and effective tool for determining both short- and long-term prognosis.