Evolut PRO and SAPIEN ULTRA Performance in Small Aortic Annuli: The OPERA-TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: The performance of latest iteration transcatheter aortic valve replacement platforms in patients with small aortic anatomy remains underexplored. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and performance between the self-expanding (SE) Evolut PRO and PRO+ and the balloon-expandable (BE) SAPIEN ULTRA in patients with small aortic annuli. METHODS: Data from the OPERA-TAVI (Comparative Analysis of Evolut PRO vs. SAPIEN 3 ULTRA Valves for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry were used, with 1:1 propensity score matching. Primary endpoints included 1-year effectiveness composite (all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, or heart failure hospitalization) and 30-day device-related (hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction and nonstructural valve dysfunction) outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3,516 patients, 251 matched pairs with aortic annular area <430 mm2 were assessed. The 1-year primary effectiveness outcome did not differ significantly between cohorts (SE 10.8% vs BE 11.2%; P = 0.91). The 30-day device-oriented composite outcome was more favorable in the Evolut PRO group (SE 4.8% vs BE 10.4%; P = 0.027). Notably, SE valve recipients showed higher rates of disabling stroke (SE 4.0% vs BE 0.0%; P < 0.01) and paravalvular leaks (mild or greater: SE 48.5% vs BE 18.6% [P < 0.001]; moderate: SE 4.5% vs BE 1.2% [P = 0.070]). The BE group had higher rates of prosthesis-patient mismatch (moderate or greater: SE 16.0% vs BE 47.1% [P < 0.001]; severe: SE 1.3% vs BE 5.7% [P = 0.197]) and more patients with residual mean gradients >20 mm Hg (SE 1.0% vs BE 13.5%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with small aortic annuli, transcatheter aortic valve replacement with latest iteration devices is safe. SE platforms are associated with more favorable device performance in terms of hemodynamic structural and nonstructural dysfunction. Randomized data are needed to validate these findings and guide informed device selection.

Sex-Related Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Valves: Insights from the OPERA-TAVI Registry.

Evidence regarding gender-related differences in response to transcatheter aortic valve implantation according to the valve type is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of gender on the treatment effect of Evolut PRO/PRO+ (PRO) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) devices on clinical outcomes. The Comparative Analysis of Evolut PRO vs SAPIEN 3 Ultra Valves for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (OPERA-TAVI) is a multicenter, multinational registry including patients who underwent the latest-iteration PRO or ULTRA implantation. Overall, 1,174 of 1,897 patients were matched based on valve type and compared according to gender, whereas 470 men and 630 women were matched and compared according to valve type. The 30-day and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. In the PRO and ULTRA groups, men had a higher co-morbidity burden, whereas women had smaller aortic root. The 30-day (device success [DS], early safety outcome, permanent pacemaker implantation, patient-prosthesis mismatch, paravalvular regurgitation, bleedings, vascular complications, and all-cause death) and 1-year outcomes (all-cause death, stroke, and heart failure hospitalization) did not differ according to gender in both valve groups. However, the male gender decreased the likelihood of 30-day DS with ULTRA versus PRO (p for interaction = 0.047). A higher risk of 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation and 1-year stroke and a lower risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch was observed in PRO versus ULTRA, regardless of gender. In conclusion, gender did not modify the treatment effect of PRO versus ULTRA on clinical outcomes, except for 30-day DS, which was decreased in men (vs women) who received ULTRA (vs PRO).

Impact of balloon post-dilation on valve durability and long-term clinical outcomes after self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Balloon post-dilation (BPD) is a widely adopted strategy to optimize acute results of TAVI, with a positive impact on both paravalvular leak and mean gradients. On the other hand, the inflation of the balloon inside prosthetic leaflets may damage them increasing the risk of structural valve deterioration (SVD). Furthermore, the impact of BPD on long-term clinical outcomes and valve hemodynamics is yet unknown. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of BPD on valve durability and long-term clinical outcomes in patients undergoing self-expanding transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Echocardiographic and clinical data from the ClinicalService (a nation-based data repository and medical care project) were analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups, those who underwent BPD after TAVI and those who did not. Coprimary endpoints were all-cause death and SVD. Cumulative incidence functions for SVD were estimated. RESULTS: Among 1835 patients included in the study, 417 (22.7%) underwent BPD and 1418 (77.3%) did not undergo BPD. No statistically significant differences at 6-year follow-up were found between groups in terms of all-cause mortality (HR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.9-1.22; p = 0.557) and SVD (2.1% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.381). In addition, BPD did not predispose to higher risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, valve thrombosis, and endocarditis at 6-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: BPD following TAVI with a self-expanding prosthesis does not seem to be associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical outcomes or SVD at 6-year follow-up.

One-year clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the latest iteration of self-expanding or balloonexpandable devices: insights from the OPERA-TAVI registry.

BACKGROUND: Midterm comparative analyses of the latest iterations of the most used Evolut and SAPIEN platforms for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are lacking. AIMS: We aimed to compare 1-year clinical outcomes of TAVI patients receiving Evolut PRO/PRO+ (PRO) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) devices in current real-world practice. METHODS: Among patients enrolled in the OPERA-TAVI registry, patients with complete 1-year follow-up were considered for the purpose of this analysis. One-to-one propensity score matching was used to compare TAVI patients receiving PRO or ULTRA devices. The primary endpoint was a composite of 1-year all-cause death, disabling stroke and rehospitalisation for heart failure. Five prespecified subgroups of patients were considered according to leaflet and left ventricular outflow tract calcifications, annulus dimensions and angulation, and leaflet morphology. RESULTS: Among a total of 1,897 patients, 587 matched pairs of patients with similar clinical and anatomical characteristics were compared. The primary composite endpoint did not differ between patients receiving PRO or ULTRA devices (Kaplan-Meier [KM] estimates 14.0% vs 11.9%; log-rank p=0.27). Patients receiving PRO devices had higher rates of 1-year disabling stroke (KM estimates 2.6% vs 0.4%; log-rank p=0.001), predominantly occurring within 30 days after TAVI (1.4% vs 0.0%; p=0.004). Outcomes were consistent across all the prespecified subsets of anatomical scenarios (all pinteraction>0.10). CONCLUSIONS: One-year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI and receiving PRO or ULTRA devices in the current clinical practice were similar, but PRO patients had higher rates of disabling stroke. Outcomes did not differ across the different anatomical subsets of the aortic root.

Impact of Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Long-Term Survival in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Valve.

Limited data are available about the impact of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation on long-term survival in patients with a bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and severe aortic stenosis (AS) treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with BAV with AS who underwent periprocedural PPM implantation after TAVR with a self-expandable prosthesis. Data from patients with BAV and severe AS who underwent TAVR between April 2009 and January 2022 and followed in the framework of the One Hospital ClinicalService-CoreValve Project were collected. Patients were categorized in 2 groups according to PPM implantation after TAVR ("PPM" group) or not ("no PPM" group). The coprimary end points were all-cause death and a composite of cardiac mortality, rehospitalization because of cardiac causes, stroke, and myocardial infarction. Overall, 106 patients were considered (74 in the "no PPM" group and 32 in the "PPM" group). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of follow-up and baseline characteristics. Patients in the PPM group were more likely to show baseline conduction abnormalities (p = 0.023). Patients in the PPM group were more often treated with older generation prosthesis than those in the no PPM group (28.1% vs 5.4%, respectively, p = 0.013). At 2 years of follow-up, all-cause death in the no PPM and PPM groups occurred in 20.0% and 10.0% of patients, respectively (hazard ratio 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.08 to 1.67). Similarly, no difference was evident for the composite end point between the 2 groups (no PPM vs PPM: 8 [14.6%] vs 6 [19.3%], hazard ratio 1.67, 95% CI 0.58 to 4.81). In conclusion, patients with severe AS and BAV treated with TAVR complicated by PPM implantation are not exposed to an increased risk of major adverse events at 2 years of follow-up.

Mid-term outcomes and hemodynamic performance of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: Insights from the bicuSpid TAvi duraBILITY (STABILITY) registry.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on transcatheter heart valves (THVs) durability in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis. AIMS: To evaluate evaluating 4-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients with BAV undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: The bicuSpid TAvi duraBILITY (STABILITY) registry is an Italian multicentre registry including all consecutive patients with BAV and severe aortic stenosis (AS), treated by means of TAVI between January 2011 and December 2017. Outcomes of interest were all-cause death at 4-year, over time changes in echocardiographic measurements, and THV durability according to the valve aortic research consortium (VARC)-3 update definitions. RESULTS: Study population included 109 patients (50% females; mean age 78 ± 7.5 years) with a mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score of 5.1 ± 4.3%. Median follow-up (FU) duration was 4.1 years [interquartile range: 2.8-5.1]. The overall cumulative incidence of all-cause death by Kaplan-Meier estimates at 4 years was 32%. Compared to baseline, a significant decrease in transprosthetic mean gradient was obtained after TAVI (54 ± 16 vs. 10 ± 5 mmHg; p < 0.001), whereas a significant increase was observed at 4-year (13 ± 6.4 mmHg, p = 0.03). Cumulative incidence of hemodynamic valve dysfunction (HVD) was 4%. Six patients met HVD criteria: three moderate and three severe HVD. All three cases of severe HVD were clinically relevant (bioprosthetic valve failure [BVF]) with two patients receiving a reintervention (TAVI in TAVI), and one patient experiencing a valve-related death due to endocarditis. CONCLUSIONS: The STABILITY registry suggests that in patients with severe AS and BAV undergoing TAVI, postprocedural clinical benefits might last, over time, up to 4-year FU. The low rates of severe HVD and BVF may support the hypothesis of good THV durability also in BAV recipient.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE Neo2 in patients with horizontal aorta: Insights from the ITAL-neo registry.

BACKGROUND: Horizontal aorta (HA), defined by an aortic angulation (AA) ≥48°, is associated with worse outcomes particularly after self-expanding (SE) trans-catheter heart valve (THV) implantation. Although the SE ACURATE Neo THV demonstrated favorable procedural success rates in patients with HA, it remains associated with a non-negligible rate of moderate or greater paravalvular leak (PVL). OBJECTIVES: Aim of the study was to assess the performance of ACURATE Neo2 in the setting of HA. METHODS: We performed a multicenter cohort analysis on patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and HA undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Neo or Neo2 THV enrolled in the ITAL-neo registry. The primary endpoint was a composite of early safety and clinical efficacy at 30 days according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3). Secondary endpoints included the occurrence of moderate or severe PVL and 90-day clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 900 patients included in the ITAL-neo registry, 407 exhibited HA; of these, 300 received a Neo THV and 107 a Neo2 THV. HA, irrespective of the THV implanted, emerged as an independent risk factor for developing ≥ moderate PVL. Technical and device success at 30-day follow-up was comparable between groups. However, Neo2 was associated with a significantly lower rate of ≥moderate PVL vs. Neo: (5% vs. 15%; p < 0.001), which was confirmed also at 90-day follow-up. Additionally, no correlation was found between ≥moderate PVL and AA in the Neo2 group, while PVL degree increased proportionally to the AA in the Neo cohort. CONCLUSION: In patients with HA, the new generation Acurate Neo2 THV was associated with a comparable device success rate and a significantly lower rate of ≥moderate PVL, when compared with its predecessor.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Pure Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation: The PANTHEON International Project.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with pure severe native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) has been associated with suboptimal results. The available evidence concerns mostly outdated transcatheter heart valves (THVs). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the performance of new-generation THVs in patients treated for pure severe NAVR. METHODS: The PANTHEON (Performance of Currently Available Transcatheter Aortic Valve Platforms in Inoperable Patients With Pure Aortic Regurgitation of a Native Valve) study retrospectively included patients who underwent TAVR with currently available devices (both self-expanding [SE] and balloon expandable [BE]) for severe NAVR. Technical and device success rates as well as a composite of all-cause mortality and heart failure rehospitalization at 1 year were evaluated. The rate and clinical consequences of acute transcatheter valve embolization or migration (TVEM) were also considered. RESULTS: A total of 201 patients were included. Overall technical and device success rates were 83.6% and 76.1%, respectively, and did not differ between SE and BE devices. These figures were due mostly to TVEM occurrence (14.6% vs 16.1%; P = 0.47) and residual moderate or greater aortic regurgitation (9.2% vs 10.1%; P = 0.87). Patients who experienced TVEM compared with those without TVEM had a significantly higher incidence of the composite endpoint at 1 year (25.7% vs 15.8%; P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Despite improved THV platforms and techniques, TAVR for pure severe NAVR remains a challenging procedure, with significant risk for TVEM. SE and BE platforms demonstrated comparable performance in this setting. (Performance of Currently Available Transcatheter Aortic Valve Platforms in Inoperable Patients With Pure Aortic Regurgitation of a Native Valve [PANTHEON]; NCT05319171).

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Latest-Iteration Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Valves: The Multicenter OPERA-TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: The latest iterations of devices for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have brought refinements to further improve patient outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare early outcomes of patients undergoing TAVR with the self-expanding (SE) Evolut PRO/PRO+ (Medtronic, Inc) or balloon-expandable (BE) Sapien 3 ULTRA (Edwards Lifesciences) devices. METHODS: The OPERA-TAVI (Comparative Analysis of Evolut PRO vs Sapien 3 Ultra Valves for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry collected data from 14 high-volume centers worldwide on patients undergoing TAVR with SE or BE devices. After excluding patients who were not eligible for both devices, patients were compared using 1:1 propensity score matching. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 device success and early safety, respectively. RESULTS: Among 2,241 patients eligible for the present analysis, 683 pairs of patients were matched. The primary efficacy outcome did not differ between patients receiving SE or BE transcatheter aortic valves (SE: 87.4% vs BE: 85.9%; P = 0.47), but the BE device recipients showed a higher rate of the primary safety outcome (SE: 69.1% vs BE: 82.6%; P < 0.01). This finding was driven by the higher rates of permanent pacemaker implantation (SE: 17.9% vs BE: 10.1%; P < 0.01) and disabling stroke (SE: 2.3% vs BE: 0.7%; P = 0.03) in SE device recipients. On post-TAVR echocardiography, the rate of moderate to severe paravalvular regurgitation was similar between groups (SE: 3.2% vs BE: 2.3%; P = 0.41), whereas lower mean transvalvular gradients were observed in the SE cohort (median SE: 7.0 vs BE: 12.0 mm Hg; P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The OPERA-TAVI registry showed that SE and BE devices had comparable Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 device success rates, but the BE device had a higher rate of early safety. The higher permanent pacemaker implantation and disabling stroke rates in SE device recipients drove this composite endpoint.

Prognostic value of right ventricle to pulmonary artery coupling in transcatheter aortic valve implantation recipients.

AIMS: To investigate the impact of the right ventricle to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling on the outcome of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI), and to describe changes in right ventricular function, pulmonary hypertension, and their ratio after TAVI. METHODS: Three hundred and seventy-seven patients from the Italian ClinicalService Project, who underwent TAVI between February 2011 and August 2020, were included. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/pulmonary artery systolic pressure (TAPSE/PASP) ratio was retrospectively calculated as a surrogate of RV-PA coupling. The population was stratified according to TAPSE/PASP using a cut-off of 0.36 mm/mmHg derived from a receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The primary end point was 6-month all-cause death. RESULTS: Compared with patients with a TAPSE/PASP ratio ≥0.36 mm/mmHg (81%), those with TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg (19%) had more comorbidities and were more symptomatic.Moreover, they were more likely to receive general anesthesia and an old generation device. Device success was similar between the two groups. A TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death at 6-months (17.3% versus 5.3%; adjusted HR 2.66; P = 0.041). The prognostic impact of the TAPSE/PASP ratio was stronger than the impact of TAPSE and PASP as separate parameters and was independent of the surgical risk score. Both TAPSE, PASP, and their ratio improved from baseline to 1 month and 6 months after TAVI. CONCLUSIONS: A TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg is strongly associated with an increased risk of mortality after TAVI. Providing a left ventricle unloading, TAVI is associated with improvement of both TAPSE, PASP, and their ratio.

Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type.

BACKGROUND: As transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement is increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy, a sizable proportion will require redo TAV replacement (TAVR). The unique configuration of balloon-expandable TAV (bTAV) vs a self-expanding TAV (sTAV) potentially affects TAV-in-TAV outcome. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to better inform prosthesis selection, TAV-in-TAV outcomes were assessed according to the type of initial and subsequent TAV. METHODS: Patients from the Redo-TAVR registry were analyzed using propensity weighting according to their initial valve type (bTAV [n = 115] vs sTAV [n = 106]) and subsequent valve type (bTAV [n = 130] vs sTAV [n = 91]). RESULTS: Patients with failed bTAVs presented later (vs sTAV) (4.9 ± 2.1 years vs 3.7 ± 2.3 years; P < 0.001), with smaller effective orifice area (1.0 ± 0.7 cm2 vs 1.3 ± 0.8 cm2; P = 0.018) and less frequent dominant regurgitation (16.2% vs 47.3%; P < 0.001). Mortality at 30 days was 2.3% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 0% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.499) and 1.7% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 1.0% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.612); procedural safety was 72.6% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 71.2% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.817) and 73.2% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 76.5% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.590). Device success was similar according to initial valve type but higher with subsequent sTAV vs bTAV (77.2% vs 64.3%; P = 0.045), primarily because of lower residual gradients (10.3 mm Hg [8.9-11.7 mm Hg] vs 15.2 mm Hg [13.2-17.1 mm Hg]; P < 0.001). Residual regurgitation (moderate or greater) was similar after bTAV-in-TAV and sTAV-in-TAV (5.7%) and nominally higher after TAV-in-bTAV (9.1%) vs TAV-in-sTAV (4.4%) (P = 0.176). CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients, no association was observed between TAV type and redo TAVR safety or mortality, yet subsequent sTAV was associated with higher device success because of lower redo gradients. These findings are preliminary, and more data are needed to guide valve choice for redo TAVR.

Predictors of early discharge after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insight from the CoreValve ClinicalService.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to minimize the procedure, and reduce the length of hospital stay (LoS) is the future objective for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI).Aims of the study are to identify procedural and electrocardiographical predictors of fast-track discharge in patients who underwent TAVI. METHODS: Patients treated with TAVI included in the One Hospital ClinicalService project were categorized according to the LoS. 'Fast-Track' population, with a postprocedural LoS less than or equal to 3 days, was compared with the 'Slow-Track' population with a postprocedural LoS greater than 3 days. RESULTS: One thousand five hundred and one patients were collected. Despite single baseline characteristics being almost similar between the two groups, Slow-Track group showed a higher surgical risk (P < 0.001). Patients in the Slow-Track group were more frequently treated with general anaesthesia (P = 0.002) and less frequently predilated (P < 0.001) and received a lower amount of contrast media. No difference between Slow-Track and Fast-Track patients was observed at 30 days in death and in cardiovascular rehospitalization.In the multivariable analysis, STS score of at least 4% [odds ratio (OR): 1.64; P = 0.01], general anaesthesia (OR: 2.80; P = 0.03), predilation (OR: 0.45; P < 001), NYHA 3-4 at baseline (OR: 1.65; P = 0.01), AVB I/LBBB/RBBB onset (OR: 2.41; P < 0.001) and in-hospital new PM (OR: 2.63; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a higher probability of Slow-Track. CONCLUSION: Fast-Track patients were safely discharged home showing no difference in clinical outcomes after discharge up to 30 days compared with the Slow-Track group. The STS score, general anaesthesia, NYHA 3--4 at baseline, in-hospital onset of conduction disturbances and new PM implantation after TAVI turned out to be predictors of Slow-Track.

Center Valve Preference and Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the AMTRAC Registry.

BACKGROUND: Data on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) or self-expandable valves (SEVs) as well as the impact of center valve preference on these outcomes are limited. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of TAVR procedures using third-generation BEVs and SEVs stratified by center valve preference. METHODS: In a multicenter registry (n = 17), 13 centers exhibited valve preference (66.6%-90% of volume) and were included. Outcomes were compared between BEVs and SEVs stratified by center valve preference. RESULTS: In total, 7,528 TAVR procedures (3,854 with SEVs and 3,674 with BEVs) were included. The mean age was 81 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.2. Baseline characteristics were similar between BEVs and SEVs. Need for pacemaker implantation was higher with SEVs at BEV- and SEV-dominant centers (17.8% vs 9.3% [P < 0.001] and 12.7% vs 10.0% [P = 0.036], respectively; HR: 1.51; P for interaction = 0.021), risk for cerebrovascular accident was higher with SEVs at BEV-dominant but not SEV-dominant centers (3.6% vs 1.1% [P < 0.001] and 2.2% vs 1.4% [P = 0.162]; HR: 2.08; P for interaction < 0.01). Aortic regurgitation greater than mild was more frequent with SEVs at BEV-dominant centers and similar with BEVs regardless of center dominance (5.2% vs 2.8% [P < 0.001] and 3.4% vs 3.7% [P = 0.504], respectively). Two-year mortality was higher with SEVs at BEV-dominant centers but not at SEV-dominant centers (21.9% vs 16.9% [P = 0.021] and 16.8% vs 16.5% [P = 0.642], respectively; HR: 1.20; P for interaction = 0.032). CONCLUSIONS: Periprocedural outcomes, aortic regurgitation greater than mild, and 2-year mortality are worse when TAVR is performed using SEVs at BEV-dominant centers. Outcomes are similar regardless of valve type at SEV-dominant centers. The present results stress the need to account for this factor when comparing BEV and SEV outcomes. (The Aortic+Mitral Transcatheter [AMTRAC] Valve Registry; NCT04031274).

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Self-Expanding ACURATE neo2: Postprocedural Hemodynamic and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The first-generation ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) (Boston Scientific) was associated with a non-negligible occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. To overcome this issue, the ACURATE neo2 iteration, which incorporates a taller outer skirt aimed at reducing the occurrence of paravalvular AR, has recently been developed. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the ACURATE neo2 (Boston Scientific) THV in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. METHODS: ITAL-neo was an observational, retrospective, multicenter registry enrolling consecutive patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, treated with first- and second-generation ACURATE neo THVs, via transfemoral and trans-subclavian access, in 13 Italian centers. One-to-one propensity score matching was applied to account for baseline characteristics unbalance. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular AR on predischarge echocardiographic assessment. Secondary endpoints included postprocedural technical success and 90-day device success and safety. RESULTS: Among 900 patients included in the registry, 220 received the ACURATE neo2 THV, whereas 680 were treated with the first-generation device. A total of 410 patients were compared after 1:1 propensity score matching. The ACURATE neo2 THV was associated with a 3-fold lower frequency of postprocedural moderate or greater paravalvular AR (11.2% vs 3.5%; P < 0.001). No other hemodynamic differences were observed. Postprocedural technical success was similar between the 2 cohorts. Fewer adverse events were observed in patients treated with the ACURATE neo2 at 90 days. CONCLUSIONS: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significant lower frequency of moderate or greater paravalvular AR compared with the earlier generation ACURATE neo device, with encouraging short-term safety and efficacy.

Mitral Valve Infective Endocarditis after Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Scarce data exist on mitral valve (MV) infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This multicenter study included a total of 579 patients with a diagnosis of definite IE after TAVI from the IE after TAVI International Registry and aimed to evaluate the incidence, characteristics, management, and outcomes of MV-IE after TAVI. A total of 86 patients (14.9%) had MV-IE. These patients were compared with 284 patients (49.1%) with involvement of the transcatheter heart valve (THV) only. Two factors were found to be associated with MV-IE: the use of self-expanding valves (adjusted odds ratio 2.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23 to 5.07, p = 0.012), and the presence of an aortic regurgitation ≥2 at discharge (adjusted odds ratio 3.33; 95% CI 1.43 to 7.73, p <0.01). There were no differences in IE timing and causative microorganisms between groups, but surgical management was significantly lower in patients with MV-IE (6.0%, vs 21.6% in patients with THV-IE, p = 0.001). All-cause mortality rates at 2-year follow-up were high and similar between patients with MV-IE (51.4%, 95% CI 39.8 to 64.1) and patients with THV-IE (51.5%, 95% CI 45.4 to 58.0) (log-rank p = 0.295). The factors independently associated with increased mortality risk in patients with MV-IE were the occurrence of heart failure (adjusted p <0.001) and septic shock (adjusted p <0.01) during the index hospitalization. One of 6 IE episodes after TAVI is localized on the MV. The implantation of a self-expanding THV and the presence of an aortic regurgitation ≥2 at discharge were associated with MV-IE. Patients with MV-IE were rarely operated on and had a poor prognosis at 2-year follow-up.

One-Year Outcomes and Trends over Two Eras of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Real-World Practice.

BACKGROUND: Data reflecting the benefit of procedural improvements in real-world transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) practice are sparse. AIMS: To compare outcomes and trends of two TAVI eras from real Italian practice. METHODS: A total of 1811 and 2939 TAVI patients enrolled in the national, prospective OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II studies in 2010-2012 and 2016-2018, respectively, were compared in a cohort study. Outcomes were adjusted using inverse propensity of treatment weighting and propensity score matching. RESULTS: The median age (83.0 (79.0-86.0) vs. 83.0 (79.0-86.0)) and EuroSCORE II (5.2 (3.2-7.7) vs. 5.1 (3.1-8.1)) of OBSERVANT and OBSERVANT II patients were similar. At 1 year, patients of the OBSERVANT II study had a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (10.6% vs. 16.3%, Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.63 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.52-0.76)) and rehospitalization for heart failure (HF) (14.3% vs. 19.5%, Sub-distribution HR 0.71 (95%CI 0.60-0.84)), whereas rates of stroke (3.1% vs. 3.6%) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (16.6% vs. 18.0%) were comparable between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Age and risk profile among patients undergoing TAVI in Italy remained substantially unchanged between the 2010-2012 and 2016-2018 time periods. After adjustment, patients undergoing TAVI in the most recent era had lower risk of all-cause death and rehospitalization for HF at 1 year, whereas rates of stroke and PPI did not differ significantly.

Surgical Treatment of Patients With Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of patients developing infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with TAVI-IE treated with cardiac surgery and antibiotics (IE-CS) compared with patients treated with antibiotics alone (IE-AB). METHODS: Crude and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses were applied for the treatment effect of cardiac surgery vs medical therapy on 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with definite TAVI-IE. The study used data from the Infectious Endocarditis after TAVI International Registry. RESULTS: Among 584 patients, 111 patients (19%) were treated with IE-CS and 473 patients (81%) with IE-AB. Compared with IE-AB, IE-CS was not associated with a lower in-hospital mortality (HRunadj: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.58-1.25) and 1-year all-cause mortality (HRunadj: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.64-1.22) in the crude cohort. After adjusting for selection and immortal time bias, IE-CS compared with IE-AB was also not associated with lower mortality rates for in-hospital mortality (HRadj: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.80-1.05) and 1-year all-cause mortality (HRadj: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.84-1.07). Results remained similar when patients with and without TAVI prosthesis involvement were analyzed separately. Predictors for in-hospital and 1-year all-cause mortality included logistic EuroSCORE I, Staphylococcus aureus, acute renal failure, persistent bacteremia, and septic shock. CONCLUSIONS: In this registry, the majority of patients with TAVI-IE were treated with antibiotics alone. Cardiac surgery was not associated with an improved all-cause in-hospital or 1-year mortality. The high mortality of patients with TAVI-IE was strongly linked to patients' characteristics, pathogen, and IE-related complications.

Valve-in-Valve Implantation of Medtronic CoreValve Prosthesis in Patients With Failing Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves: Mid-term Outcomes From the Italian CoreValve Clinical Service Project.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the acute and two-year safety and efficacy of using the Corevalve, Evolut R, and Evolut PRO valves for treating failed surgical bioprosthesis from the Italian CoreValve Clinical Service Project. BACKGROUND: Valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR is an emerging treatment option for failed surgical bioprosthesis. Choice of transcatheter valve is an important determinant of procedural and clinical outcomes, however, longer-term data are lacking. METHODS: The Clinical Service Project is a national clinical data repository evaluating the use of implantable devices across Italy. The present multi-center analysis includes consecutive patients who underwent ViV-TAVR with the Medtronic CoreValve series between October 2008 to June 2019. Evaluated endpoints included rates of overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accidents at 2-year follow-up. Procedural success, complications, and echocardiographic outcomes were reported according to VARC-2 criteria. RESULTS: A total of 139 patients (mean age, 80 ± 7 years; 47.5% male; mean STS score, 10.0 ± 9.7%) underwent ViV-TAVR with CoreValve (28.5%), Evolut R (68.6%), and Evolut Pro (2.9%) valves. Device success was achieved in 68% and acute coronary obstruction requiring PCI was observed in 4 patients (2.9%). Moderate PVL was observed in 3.7% and 2.8% of patients at 30-day and 2-year follow-up and moderate structural valve degeneration seen only 5 patients (3.6%). All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were 3.6% and 2.9% at 30 days, respectively, and 20.6% and 10.2% at 2-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This real-world nationwide analysis demonstrates the acute and longer-term safety and efficacy of using the self-expanding Medtronic THV for ViV-TAVR.

Infective Endocarditis Caused by Staphylococcus aureus After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus (SA) has been extensively studied as causative microorganism of surgical prosthetic-valve infective endocarditis (IE). However, scarce evidence exists on SA IE after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: Data were obtained from the Infectious Endocarditis After TAVR International Registry, including patients with definite IE after TAVR from 59 centres in 11 countries. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to microbiologic etiology: non-SA IE vs SA IE. RESULTS: SA IE was identified in 141 patients out of 573 (24.6%), methicillin-sensitive SA in most cases (115/141, 81.6%). Self-expanding valves were more common than balloon-expandable valves in patients presenting with early SA IE. Major bleeding and sepsis complicating TAVR, neurologic symptoms or systemic embolism at admission, and IE with cardiac device involvement (other than the TAVR prosthesis) were associated with SA IE (P < 0.05 for all). Among patients with IE after TAVR, the likelihood of SA IE increased from 19% in the absence of those risk factors to 84.6% if ≥ 3 risk factors were present. In-hospital (47.8% vs 26.9%; P < 0.001) and 2-year (71.5% vs 49.6%; P < 0.001) mortality rates were higher among patients with SA IE vs non-SA IE. Surgery at the time of index SA IE episode was associated with lower mortality at follow-up compared with medical therapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: SA IE represented approximately 25% of IE cases after TAVR and was associated with very high in-hospital and late mortality. The presence of some features determined a higher likelihood of SA IE and could help to orientate early antibiotic regimen selection. Surgery at index SA IE was associated with improved outcomes, and its role should be evaluated in future studies.

Clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients younger than 70 years rejected for surgery: the AMTRAC registry.

BACKGROUND: The mean age of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients is steadily decreasing. AIMS: The aim of the study was to describe the characteristics, the indications for and the outcomes of TAVI in patients <70 years old. METHODS: All patients undergoing TAVI (n=8,626) from the 18 participating centres between January 2007 and June 2020 were stratified by age (70). For patients <70, the indications for TAVI were extracted from Heart Team discussions and the baseline characteristics and mortality were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Overall, 640 (7.4%) patients were <70 (9.1% during 2018-2020, p<0.001); the mean age was 65.0±2.3 years. The younger patients were more often male, with bicuspid valves or needing valve-in-valve procedures. They had a higher prevalence of lung disease and diabetes. In 80.7% of cases, the Heart Team estimated an increased surgical risk and TAVI was selected, reflected by an STS score >4% in 20.4%. Five-year mortality was similar (29.4 vs 29.8%, HR 0.95, p=0.432) in the <70 and >70 groups. In the <70 group, mortality was higher for those referred for TAVI due to an increased surgical risk compared to those referred for other reasons (31.6 vs 24.5%, HR 1.23, p=0.021). Mortality was similar regardless of the STS stratum in patients judged by the Heart Team to be at increased surgical risk (32.6 vs 30.4%, HR 0.98, p=0.715). CONCLUSIONS: Use of TAVI in patients <70 is becoming more frequent. The main reason for choosing TAVI is due to an increased surgical risk not adequately represented by the STS score. The outcomes for these patients are similar to those for older TAVI patients. Dedicated trials of TAVI/SAVR in younger patients are needed to guide decisions concerning expansion of TAVI indications. ((ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04031274).