RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) determined a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis but data on very long-term durability are lacking. We sought to evaluate the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of the CoreValve porcine pericardial self-expanding bioprosthesis at 12-year follow-up. METHODS: 882 inoperable or high-risk patients were treated with the CoreValve bioprosthesis in 8 Italian high-volume centers between 2007 and 2011. The endpoints were 12-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, and Cumulative Incidence Functions (CIFs) for severe Structural Valve Deterioration (SVD), Bioprosthetic Valve Dysfunction (BVD), Bioprosthetic Valve Failure (BVF), and severe Hemodynamic Valve Deterioration (HVD). VARC-3 definitions were applied. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics included a mean age of 83 ± 6 years, and NYHA class III or IV in 76.3 % of patients. The actuarial risk of death at 12 years after TAVR was 95.5 % (CI 93.5 %- 97.1 %). The actual risk of cardiovascular death, weighted against the risk of non-cardiac death at 12 years was 23.9 % (21.0 %-26.8 %). The 12-year actual risk of BVD was 7.0 % (5.3 %-8.9 %), of SVD was 3.6 % (2.5 %-5.2 %), of BVF was 3.12 % (2.02 %-4.57 %), and of severe HVD was 1.7 % (0.9 %-2.9 %). Mean transaortic gradient significantly decreased after the procedure (52 ± 15 mmHg vs 9 ± 5 mmHg, p < 0.001), and remained stable up to 12 years (12 ± 4 mmHg, P = 0.08 vs. discharge). CONCLUSIONS: The first-generation CoreValve bioprosthesis showed reassuring clinical and hemodynamic performance at 12-year follow-up.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis is technically challenging and is burdened by an increased risk of paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify the incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes of PVR after TAVR in Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis. METHODS: Consecutive patients with Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis undergoing TAVR with current-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs) in 24 international centers were enrolled. PVR was graded as none/trace, mild, moderate, and severe according to echocardiographic criteria. The endpoint of major adverse events (MAEs), defined as a composite of all-cause death, stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure, was assessed at the last available follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 946 patients were enrolled. PVR occurred in 423 patients (44.7%)-mild, moderate, and severe in 387 (40.9%), 32 (3.4%), and 4 (0.4%) patients, respectively. Independent predictors of moderate or severe PVR were a larger virtual raphe ring perimeter (adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.02-1.13), severe annular or left ventricular outflow tract calcification (adjusted OR: 5.21; 95% CI: 1.45-18.77), a self-expanding valve (adjusted OR: 9.01; 95% CI: 2.09-38.86), and intentional supra-annular THV positioning (adjusted OR: 3.31; 95% CI: 1.04-10.54). At a median follow-up of 1.3 years (Q1-Q3: 0.5-2.4 years), moderate or severe PVR was associated with an increased risk of MAEs (adjusted HR: 2.52; 95% CI: 1.24-5.09). CONCLUSIONS: After TAVR with current-generation THVs in Sievers type 1 BAV stenosis, moderate or severe PVR occurred in about 4% of cases and was associated with an increased risk of MAEs during follow-up.
Assuntos
Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica , Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Valva Aórtica , Doença da Válvula Aórtica Bicúspide , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Fatores de Risco , Idoso , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/instrumentação , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/mortalidade , Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica/etiologia , Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/mortalidade , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/fisiopatologia , Valva Aórtica/anormalidades , Resultado do Tratamento , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Incidência , Fatores de Tempo , Doença da Válvula Aórtica Bicúspide/cirurgia , Doença da Válvula Aórtica Bicúspide/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças das Valvas Cardíacas/diagnóstico por imagem , Doenças das Valvas Cardíacas/cirurgia , Doenças das Valvas Cardíacas/fisiopatologia , Europa (Continente) , Medição de Risco , Desenho de Prótese , Razão de Chances , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Cardíaca/fisiopatologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/etiologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/diagnóstico , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in native pure aortic regurgitation (AR) with off-label use of balloon-expandable valves (BEV) has been reported. However, there are scant data regarding optimal oversizing and its safety, and our study assessed BEV oversizing and outcomes of TAVI. Thirteen consecutive tricuspid aortic valve patients who underwent transfemoral TAVIs for pure AR with Sapien BEV at our center between 2019 and 2023 (69.2% males, mean age 80.8 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons 4.0%) were divided into small annulus (SA) group (≤618 mm2) where ≥20% oversizing is achievable based on published data on BEV overexpansion, and larger annulus (LA) group (>618 mm2). Overexpansion and actual oversizing were measured on postprocedural computed tomography scan. Technical success was 92.3% with 1 valve embolization in the LA group. The postprocedural computed tomography showed a mean 28.3% oversizing, significantly higher in SA (31.2%) than in LA group (19.4%), p = 0.0092. Oversizing ≥20% was achieved in 100% SA versus 33.3% LA patients (p = 0.046). In conclusion, TAVI in pure AR with oversized Sapien BEV showed good procedural and short-term outcomes when ≥20% oversizing was predictably achievable.
Assuntos
Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Desenho de Prótese , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/métodos , Masculino , Feminino , Insuficiência da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Idoso , Estudos Retrospectivos , Uso Off-Label , Resultado do Tratamento , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios XRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Desenho de Prótese , Resultado do Tratamento , Sistema de Registros , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologiaRESUMO
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).
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Desenho de Prótese , Sistema de Registros , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/métodos , Masculino , Feminino , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Fatores Sexuais , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Idoso , Resultado do Tratamento , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Valva Aórtica/cirurgiaRESUMO
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.
Assuntos
Estenose da Valva Aórtica , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas , Acidente Vascular Cerebral , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter , Humanos , Substituição da Valva Aórtica Transcateter/efeitos adversos , Valva Aórtica/diagnóstico por imagem , Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Estenose da Valva Aórtica/cirurgia , Próteses Valvulares Cardíacas/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Sistema de Registros , Acidente Vascular Cerebral/etiologia , Desenho de PróteseRESUMO
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.