Changes in demographics, treatment and outcomes in a consecutive cohort who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation between 2005 and 2020.

INTRODUCTION: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has matured to the treatment of choice for most patients with aortic stenosis (AS). We sought to identify trends in patient and procedural characteristics, and clinical outcomes in all patients who underwent TAVI between 2005 and 2020. METHODS: A single-centre analysis was performed on 1500 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI, divided into three tertiles (T) of 500 patients treated between November 2005 and December 2014 (T1), January 2015 and May 2018 (T2) and June 2018 and April 2020 (T3). RESULTS: Over time, mean age and gender did not change (T1 to T3: 80, 80 and 79 years and 53%, 55% and 52% men, respectively), while the Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score declined (T1: 4.5% to T3: 2.7%, p < 0.001). Use of general anaesthesia also declined over time (100%, 24% and 1% from T1 to T3) and transfemoral TAVI remained the default approach (87%, 94% and 92%). Median procedure time and contrast volume decreased significantly (186, 114 and 56 min and 120, 100 and 80 ml, respectively). Thirty-day mortality (7%, 4% and 2%), stroke (7%, 3% and 3%), need for a pacemaker (19%, 22% and 8%) and delirium (17%, 12% and 8%) improved significantly, while major bleeding/vascular complications did not change (both approximately 9%, 6% and 6%). One-year survival was 80%, 88% and 92%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Over our 15 years' experience, patient age remained unchanged but the patient risk profile became more favourable. Simplification of the TAVI procedure occurred in parallel with major improvement in outcomes and survival. Bleeding/vascular complications and the need for pacemaker implantation remain the Achilles' heel of TAVI.

Transcatheter mitral valve repair in proportionate and disproportionate functional mitral regurgitation-insights from a small cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) can be subclassified based on its proportionality relative to left ventricular function and end-diastolic volume. FMR proportionality could help identify responders to transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (MitraClip) in terms of residual FMR and/or clinical improvement. METHODS: This single-centre retrospective cohort study evaluated the feasibility of determining FMR proportionality in symptomatic heart failure patients with reduced left ventricular function who were treated with MitraClip for ≥ moderate-to-severe FMR. Baseline proportionate (pFMR) and disproportionate FMR (dFMR) were distinguished. Patient characteristics and MitraClip procedural outcomes were described. RESULTS: From an overall cohort of 81 eligible FMR patients, 23/81 (28%) had to be excluded due to missing transthoracic echocardiogram parameters, 22/81 were excluded based on FMR severity. The remaining cohort, of 36/81 patients (44%), could be classified into dFMR (n = 26) or pFMR (n = 10). Conduction disorders were numerically increased in dFMR. All cases requiring > 2 clips were in the dFMR group and absence of FMR reduction occurred more frequently with dFMR. POINT OF VIEW/CONCLUSION: Important limitations in terms of imaging acquisition affect the translation of the FMR proportionality concept to a real-world data set. We did observe different demographic and FMR response patterns in patients with proportionate and disproportionate FMR that warrant further investigation.