Experience with the ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves in Spain. The PRECISA (PRospective Evaluation Complementing Investigation with ACURATE devices) registry.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have documented a high rate of implantation success with the ACURATE neo2 valve, as well as a reduction in paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to its predecessor, the ACURATE neo. However, there are no studies that have reviewed and compared the long-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of these patients. AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the results of the ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve in a real-world context, and to compare the results of the outcomes of both generations of this device (ACURATE neo and ACURATE neo2), with a specific focus on procedural success, safety, and long-term effectiveness. METHODS: A prospective study including all consecutive patients treated with the ACURATE neo device in seven hospitals was conducted (Clinical Trials Identification Number: NCT03846557). The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of adverse events, including mortality, aortic insufficiency, and other procedural complications. As the second-generation device (ACURATE neo2) replaced the ACURATE neo during the study period, hemodynamic and clinical results before admission, at 30 days, and at 1 year of follow-up were compared between the two generations. RESULTS: A total of 296 patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the ACURATE device, with 178 patients receiving the ACURATE neo and 118 patients receiving the ACURATE neo2. In the overall population, the absence of device success occurred in 14.5%. The primary reason for the absence of device success was the presence of para-valvular regurgitation ≥ 2. There were no instances of coronary occlusions, valve embolization, annulus rupture, or procedural deaths. ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significantly higher device success rate (91.7% vs. 82%, p = 0.04), primarily due to a significantly lower rate of para-valvular regurgitation, which remained significant at 1 year. CONCLUSION: The use of ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves is associated with satisfactory clinical results and an extremely low rate of complications. The ACURATE neo2 enables a significantly higher device success rate, primarily attributed to a significant reduction in the rate of PVL.

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic significance of impaired functional status early after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There are scarce data on the factors associated with impaired functional status after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and its clinical impact. This study aimed to determine the incidence, predictors, and prognostic implications of impaired functional class (NYHA class III-IV) following TAVR. METHODS: This multicenter study included 3462 transarterial TAVR patients receiving newer generation devices. The patients were compared according to their NYHA class at 1 month of follow-up (NYHA I-II vs NYHA III-IV). A multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the predictors of 30-day NYHA class III-IV. Patient survival was compared with the Kaplan-Meier method and factors associated with decreased survival were identified with Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 80.3±7.3 years, with 47% of women, and a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 3.8% [IQR, 2.5-5.8]. A total of 208 patients (6%) were in NYHA class III-IV 1 month after TAVR. Predictors of 30-day NYHA class III-IV were baseline NYHA class III-IV (OR, 1.76; 95%CI, 1.08-2.89; P=.02), chronic pulmonary obstructive disease (OR, 1.80; 95%CI, 1.13-2.83; P=.01), and post-TAVR severe mitral regurgitation (OR, 2.00; 95%CI, 1.21-3.31; P<.01). Patients in NYHA class III-IV 1 month after TAVR were at higher risk of death (HR, 3.68; 95%CI, 2.39-5.70; P<.01) and heart failure-related hospitalization (HR, 6.00; 95%CI, 3.76-9.60; P<.01) at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Up to 6% of contemporary TAVR patients exhibited an impaired functional status following TAVR. Worse baseline NYHA class, chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, and severe mitral regurgitation predicted 30-day NYHA class III/IV, and this determined a higher risk of mortality and heart failure hospitalization at 1-year follow-up. Further studies on the prevention and treatment optimization of patients with impaired functional status after TAVR are needed.

Balloon- vs Self-Expanding Transcatheter Valves for Failed Small Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses: 1-Year Results of the LYTEN Trial.

BACKGROUND: Data comparing valve systems in the valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) field have been obtained from retrospective studies. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the 1-year hemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes between balloon-expandable valves (BEV) SAPIEN 3/ULTRA (Edwards Lifesciences) and self-expanding valves (SEV) Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ (Medtronic) in ViV-TAVR. METHODS: Patients with a failed small (≤23 mm) surgical valve undergoing ViV-TAVR were randomized to receive a SEV or a BEV. Patients had a clinical and valve hemodynamic (Doppler echocardiography) evaluation at 1-year follow-up. Study outcomes were defined according to VARC-2/VARC-3 criteria. Intended performance of the valve was defined as mean gradient <20 mm Hg, peak velocity <3 m/s, Doppler velocity index ≥0.25 and less than moderate AR. RESULTS: A total of 98 patients underwent ViV-TAVR (46 BEV, 52 SEV). At 1-year follow-up, patients receiving a SEV had a lower mean transaortic gradient (22 ± 8 mm Hg BEV vs 14 ± 7 mm Hg SEV; P < 0.001), and a higher rate of intended valve performance (BEV: 30%, SEV:76%; P < 0.001). There were no cases of greater than mild aortic regurgitation. There were no differences in functional status (NYHA functional class >II, BEV: 7.3%, SEV: 4.1%; P = 0.505) or quality of life (Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire, BEV: 77.9 ± 21.2, SEV: 81.8 ± 14.8; P = 0.334). No differences in all-cause mortality (BEV: 6.5%, SEV: 3.8; P = 0.495), heart failure hospitalization (BEV: 6.5%, SEV: 1.9%; P = 0.214), stroke (BEV: 0%, SEV: 1.9%; P = 0.369), myocardial infarction (BEV: 0%, SEV: 1.9%; P = 0.347), or pacemaker implantation (BEV: 2.2%, SEV: 1.9%; P = 0.898) were found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who underwent ViV-TAVR for failed small aortic bioprostheses, those receiving a SEV exhibited a better valve hemodynamic profile at 1-year follow-up. There were no differences between SEV and BEV regarding functional status, quality of life, or clinical outcomes.

Late Bleeding Events in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in the Workup Pre-TAVR.

BACKGROUND: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the work-up pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the incidence and clinical impact of late bleeding events (LBEs) remain largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the incidence, clinical characteristics, associated factors, and outcomes of LBEs in patients undergoing PCI in the work-up pre-TAVR. METHODS: This was a multicenter study including 1,457 consecutive patients (mean age 81 ± 7 years; 41.5% women) who underwent TAVR and survived beyond 30 days. LBEs (>30 days post-TAVR) were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. RESULTS: LBEs occurred in 116 (7.9%) patients after a median follow-up of 23 (IQR: 12-40) months. Late bleeding was minor, major, and life-threatening or disabling in 21 (18.1%), 63 (54.3%), and 32 (27.6%) patients, respectively. Periprocedural (<30 days post-TAVR) major bleeding and the combination of antiplatelet and anticoagulation therapy at discharge were independent factors associated with LBEs (P ≤ 0.02 for all). LBEs conveyed an increased mortality risk at 4-year follow-up compared with no bleeding (43.9% vs 36.0; P = 0.034). Also, LBE was identified as an independent predictor of all-cause mortality after TAVR (HR: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.05-1.83; P = 0.020). CONCLUSIONS: In TAVR candidates with concomitant significant coronary artery disease requiring percutaneous treatment, LBEs after TAVR were frequent and associated with increased mortality. Combining antiplatelet and anticoagulation regimens and the occurrence of periprocedural bleeding determined an increased risk of LBEs. Preventive strategies should be pursued for preventing late bleeding after TAVR, and further studies are needed to provide more solid evidence on the most safe and effective antithrombotic regimen post-TAVR in this challenging group of patients.

Cardiac Death After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Contemporary Devices.

BACKGROUND: The burden of cardiac death after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), particularly from advanced heart failure (HF) and sudden cardiac death (SCD), remains largely unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the incidence and predictors of SCD and HF-related death in TAVR recipients treated with newer-generation devices. METHODS: This study included a total of 5,421 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with newer-generation devices using balloon (75.7%) or self-expandable (24.3%) valves. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 2 (IQR: 1-3) years, 976 (18.0%) patients had died, 50.8% from cardiovascular causes. Advanced HF and SCD accounted for 11.6% and 7.5% of deaths, respectively. Independent predictors of HF-related death were atrial fibrillation (HR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.47-3.22; P < 0.001), prior pacemaker (HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.10-2.92; P = 0.01), reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HR: 1.08 per 5% decrease; 95% CI: 1.01-1.14; P = 0.02), transthoracic approach (HR: 2.50; 95% CI: 1.37-4.55; P = 0.003), and new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (HR: 1.85; 95% CI: 1.14-3.02; P = 0.01). Two baseline characteristics (diabetes, HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.13-2.89; P = 0.01; and chronic kidney disease, HR: 1.72; 95% CI: 1.02-2.90; P = 0.04) and 3 procedural findings (valve in valve, HR: 2.17; 95% CI: 1.01-4.64; P = 0.04; transarterial nontransfemoral approach, HR: 2.23; 95% CI: 1.23-4.48; P = 0.01; and periprocedural ventricular arrhythmia, HR: 7.19; 95% CI: 2.61-19.76; P < 0.001) were associated with an increased risk of SCD after TAVR. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced HF and SCD accounted for a fifth of deaths after TAVR in contemporary practice. Potentially treatable factors leading to increased risk of HF deaths and SCD were identified, such as arrhythmia/dyssynchrony factors for HF and valve-in-valve TAVR or periprocedural ventricular arrhythmias for SCD.

Coronary Obstruction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the Spanish TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: Coronary obstruction (CO) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a life-threatening complication, scarcely studied. OBJECTIVES: The authors analyzed the incidence of CO after TAVR, presentation, management, and in-hospital and 1-year clinical outcomes in a large series of patients undergoing TAVR. METHODS: Patients from the Spanish TAVI (Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry who presented with CO in the procedure, during hospitalization or at follow-up were included. Computed tomography (CT) risk factors were assessed. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year all-cause mortality rates were analyzed and compared with patients without CO using logistic regression models in the overall cohort and in a propensity score-matched cohort. RESULTS: Of 13,675 patients undergoing TAVR, 115 (0.80%) presented with a CO, mainly during the procedure (83.5%). The incidence of CO was stable throughout the study period (2009-2021), with a median annual rate of 0.8% (range 0.3%-1.3%). Preimplantation CT scans were available in 105 patients (91.3%). A combination of at least 2 CT-based risk factors was less frequent in native than in valve-in-valve patients (31.7% vs 78.3%; P < 0.01). Percutaneous coronary intervention was the treatment of choice in 100 patients (86.9%), with a technical success of 78.0%. In-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rates were higher in CO patients than in those without CO (37.4% vs 4.1%, 38.3% vs 4.3%, and 39.1% vs 9.1%, respectively; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, nationwide TAVR registry, CO was a rare, but often fatal, complication that did not decrease over time. The lack of identifiable predisposing factors in a subset of patients and the frequently challenging treatment when established may partly explain these findings.

Optimal Degree of Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Valve Oversizing in Patients With Borderline Aortic Annulus Measurements: Insights From a Multicenter Real-World Experience.

BACKGROUND: The potential benefit of using larger or smaller transcatheter heart valves (THV) in patients with borderline aortic annulus measurement (BAM) remains uncertain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes associated with the selection of larger or smaller THV in the context of BAM. METHODS: This was a multicenter observational study including patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the SAPIEN 3 or SAPIEN 3 Ultra-valve systems (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) from April 2014 to June 2021. BAM was defined according to the manufacturer sizing chart and included the following annulus areas: 314 to 346, 400 to 430, 500 to 546 mm2. A 1:1 propensity score matching was used to compare outcomes of patients with larger or smaller THV. RESULTS: From a total of 2467 patients, BAM was identified in 852 patients (34.5%). A larger and smaller THV was selected in 338 (39.7%) and 514 patients (60.3%) patients, respectively. The choice of a larger THV was associated (before and after propensity matching) with a higher risk of new-onset left bundle branch block (HR, 2.25 [95% CI, 1.39-3.65; P=0.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation (HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.11-3.09]; P=0.016) without any impact on gradients or the risk of moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation at discharge (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.41-1.45]; P=0.427). The risk of periprocedural complications such as aortic rupture and tamponade was low (<1%) and similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patient with BAM, selecting a larger SAPIEN 3/Ultra THV increased the risk of conduction disturbances without any benefit on valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes.

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for the Assessment of Intermediate Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: Correlations With Fractional Flow Reserve/Intravascular Ultrasound and Prognostic Implications: The iLITRO-EPIC07 Study.

BACKGROUND: There is little information available on agreement between fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in left main coronary artery (LMCA) intermediate stenosis. Besides, several meta-analyses support the use of FFR to guide LMCA revascularization, but limited information is available on iFR in this setting. Our aims were to establish the concordance between FFR and iFR in intermediate LMCA lesions, to evaluate with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in cases of FFR/iFR discordance, and to prospectively validate the safety of deferring revascularization based on a hybrid decision-making strategy combining iFR and IVUS. METHODS: Prospective, observational, multicenter registry with 300 consecutive patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis who underwent FFR and iFR and, in case of discordance, IVUS and minimal lumen area measurements. Primary clinical end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, LMCA lesion-related nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned LMCA revascularization. RESULTS: FFR and iFR had an agreement of 80% (both positive in 67 and both negative in 167 patients); in case of disagreement (31 FFR+/iFR- and 29 FFR-/iFR+) minimal lumen area was ≥6 mm2 in 8.7% of patients with FFR+ and 14.6% with iFR+. Among the 300 patients, 105 (35%) underwent revascularization and 181 (60%) were deferred according to iFR and IVUS. At a median follow-up of 20 months, major adverse cardiac events incidence was 8.3% in the defer group and 13.3% in the revascularization group (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI 0.30-1.72]; P=0.45). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis, a physiology-guided treatment decision is feasible either with FFR or iFR with moderate concordance between both indices. In case of disagreement, the use of IVUS may be useful to indicate revascularization. Deferral of revascularization based on iFR appears to be safe in terms of major adverse cardiac events. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03767621.

New-onset persistent left bundle branch block following sutureless aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence, predictive factors and prognostic value of new-onset persistent left bundle branch block (NOP-LBBB) in patients undergoing sutureless surgical aortic valve replacement (SU-SAVR). METHODS: A total of 329 consecutive patients without baseline conduction disturbances or previous permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) who underwent SU-SAVR with the Perceval valve (LivaNova Group, Saluggia, Italy) in two centres from 2013 to 2019 were included. Patients were on continuous ECG monitoring during hospitalisation and 12-lead ECG was performed after the procedure and at hospital discharge. NOP-LBBB was defined as a new postprocedural LBBB that persisted at hospital discharge. Baseline, procedural and follow-up clinical and echocardiography data were collected in a dedicated database. RESULTS: New-onset LBBB was observed in 115 (34.9%) patients, and in 76 (23.1%) persisted at hospital discharge. There were no differences in baseline and procedural characteristics between patients with (n=76) and without (n=253) NOP-LBBB. After a median follow-up of 3.3 years (2.3-4.4 years), patients with NOP-LBBB had a higher incidence of PPI (14.5% vs 6.3%, p=0.016), but exhibited similar rates of all-cause mortality (19.4% vs 19.2%, p=0.428), cardiac mortality (8.1% vs 9.4%, p=0.805) and heart failure readmission (21.0% vs 23.2%, p=0.648), compared with the no/transient LBBB group. NOP-LBBB was associated with a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at 1-year follow-up (delta: -5.7 vs +0.2, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: NOP-LBBB occurred in approximately a quarter of patients without prior conduction disturbances who underwent SU-SAVR and was associated with a threefold increased risk of PPI along with a negative impact on LVEF at follow-up.

Balloon- vs Self-Expanding Valve Systems for Failed Small Surgical Aortic Valve Bioprostheses.

BACKGROUND: Data comparing valve systems in the valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) field have been obtained from retrospective studies. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the hemodynamic results between the balloon-expandable valve (BEV) SAPIEN (3/ULTRA, Edwards Lifesciences) and self-expanding valve (SEV) Evolut (R/PRO/PRO+, Medtronic) in ViV-TAVR. METHODS: Patients with a failed small (≤23 mm) surgical valve were randomized to receive a BEV or an SEV. The primary endpoint was valve hemodynamics (maximal/mean residual gradients, severe prosthesis patient mismatch [PPM], or moderate-severe aortic regurgitation) at 30 days as evaluated by Doppler echocardiography. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients were randomized, and of these, 98 patients finally underwent a ViV-TAVR procedure (BEV: n = 46, SEV: n = 52). The procedure was successful in all cases, with no differences in clinical outcomes at 30 days between groups (no death or stroke events). Patients in the SEV group exhibited lower mean and maximal transvalvular gradient values (15 ± 8 mm Hg vs 23 ± 8 mm Hg; P ˂ 0.001; 28 ± 16 mm Hg vs 40 ± 13 mm Hg, P ˂ 0.001), and a tendency toward a lower rate of severe PPM (44% vs 64%; P = 0.07). There were no cases of moderate-severe aortic regurgitation. In total, 55 consecutive patients (SEV: n = 27; BEV: n = 28) underwent invasive valve hemodynamic evaluation during the procedure, with no differences in mean and peak transvalvular gradients between both groups (P = 0.41 and P = 0.70, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with small failed aortic bioprostheses, ViV-TAVR with an SEV was associated with improved valve hemodynamics as evaluated by echocardiography. There were no differences between groups in intraprocedural invasive valve hemodynamics and 30-day clinical outcomes (Comparison of the Balloon-Expandable Edwards Valve and Self-Expandable CoreValve Evolut R or Evolut PRO System for the Treatment of Small, Severely Dysfunctional Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses. The 'LYTEN' Trial; NCT03520101).

Outcomes in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

The use of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is increasing, but studies evaluating clinical outcomes in these patients are scarce. Also, there are limited data to guide the choice of valve type in ViV-TAVI. Therefore, this CENTER-study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI compared to patients with native valve TAVI (NV-TAVI). In addition, we compared outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI treated with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable valves. A total of 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 11333 patients with NV-TAVI were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching, resulting in 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 512 patients with NV-TAVI. Mean age was 81±7 years, 58% were female, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.3% (4.0% to 12.8%). Mortality rates were comparable between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI patients at 30 days (4.1% vs 5.9%, p = 0.30) and 1 year (14.2% vs 17.3%, p = 0.34). Stroke rates were also similar at 30 days (2.8% vs 1.8%, p = 0.38) and 1 year (4.9% vs 4.3%, p = 0.74). Permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted in patients with ViV-TAVI (8.8% vs 15.0%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.92, p = 0.02). Patients with ViV-TAVI were treated with self-expandable valves (n = 162) and balloon-expandable valves (n = 94). Thirty-day major bleeding was less frequent in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 13%, odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.42 to 18.52, p = 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was numerically lower in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 7%, odds ratio 3.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 14.51, p = 0.11). In conclusion, ViV-TAVI seems a safe and effective treatment for failing bioprosthetic valves with low mortality and stroke rates comparable to NV-TAVI for both valve types.

Long-Term Intracoronary Structural and Vasomotor Assessment of the ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold.

We systematically categorized the longer-term (≥3 years) structural and functional characteristics of the ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) using optical coherence tomography imaging and coronary vasomotor reactivity testing and further compared the functional characteristics of BVS stented versus remote coronary segments. A total of 92 patients (mean age 56.4 ± 9.7 years, 22.8% women) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (76% with acute coronary syndrome) using the ABSORB BVS (112 lesions) were included. Optical coherence tomography analysis (38,790 visible struts) comprised in-segment quantitative lumen/plaque and semiquantitative plaque composition analysis of the neointimal pattern. Epicardial endothelium-dependent and-independent vasomotion was defined as any vasodilatation at low/intermediate intracoronary dose of acetylcholine (ACh) and nitroglycerine, assessed using quantitative coronary angiography. At a median time of 3.2 years follow-up, 79.8% of BVS segments still demonstrated visible struts with a predominant neointimal fibrotic healing pattern in 84% of BVS segments, with 99.5% of struts demonstrating coverage with apposition. Compared with remote segments, BVS segments demonstrated less endothelium-dependent vasodilatation at low (p = 0.06) and intermediate ACh doses (p = 0.04). Hypertension, longer time interval from index percutaneous coronary intervention, and the degree of in-BVS segment neointimal volume (p <0.03 for all) were each independently associated with abnormal BVS endothelium-dependent vasomotor function. Endothelium-independent function was more likely preserved in non-BVS (remote) segments compared with BVS segments (p = 0.06). In conclusion, at 3+ years post-ABSORB BVS insertion, the rate of complete scaffold resorption was low and residual strut presence was high, with a dominant fibrous healing response contributing toward neointimal hyperplasia and endothelium-dependent and-independent vasomotor dysfunction.

Management and outcomes of patients with left atrial appendage thrombus prior to percutaneous closure.

OBJECTIVE: Left atrial appendage (LAA) thrombus has heretofore been considered a contraindication to percutaneous LAA closure (LAAC). Data regarding its management are very limited. The aim of this study was to analyse the medical and invasive treatment of patients referred for LAAC in the presence of LAA thrombus. METHODS: This multicentre observational registry included 126 consecutive patients referred for LAAC with LAA thrombus on preprocedural imaging. Treatment strategies included intensification of antithrombotic therapy (IAT) or direct LAAC. The primary and secondary endpoints were a composite of bleeding, stroke and death at 18 months, and procedural success, respectively. RESULTS: IAT was the preferred strategy in 57.9% of patients, with total thrombus resolution observed in 60.3% and 75.3% after initial and subsequent IAT, respectively. Bleeding complications and stroke during IAT occurred in 9.6% and 2.9%, respectively, compared with 3.8% bleeding and no embolic events in the direct LAAC group before the procedure. Procedural success was 90.5% (96.2% vs 86.3% in direct LAAC and IAT group, respectively, p=0.072), without cases of in-hospital thromboembolic complications. The primary endpoint occurred in 29.3% and device-related thrombosis was found in 12.8%, without significant difference according to treatment strategy. Bleeding complications at 18 months occurred in 22.5% vs 10.5% in the IAT and direct LAAC group, respectively (p=0.102). CONCLUSION: In the presence of LAA thrombus, IAT was the initial management strategy in half of our cohort, with initial thrombus resolution in 60% of these, but with a relatively high bleeding rate (~10%). Direct LAAC was feasible, with high procedural success and absence of periprocedural embolic complications. However, a high rate of device-related thrombosis was detected during follow-up.

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare, in a cohort of patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), the clinical outcomes associated with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (plus percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (plus coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]). BACKGROUND: Patients with complex CAD were excluded from the main randomized trials comparing TAVR with SAVR, and no data exist comparing TAVR + PCI vs SAVR + CABG in such patients. METHODS: A multicenter study was conducted including consecutive patients with severe AS and complex CAD (SYNTAX [Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery] score >22 or unprotected left main disease). A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis was performed to account for unbalanced covariates. The rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including all-cause mortality, nonprocedural myocardial infarction, need for new coronary revascularization, and stroke, were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 800 patients (598 undergoing SAVR + CABG and 202 undergoing transfemoral TAVR + PCI) were included, and after propensity matching, a total of 156 pairs of patients were generated. After a median follow-up period of 3 years (interquartile range: 1-6 years), there were no significant differences between groups for MACCE (HR for transfemoral TAVR vs SAVR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.89-1.98), all-cause mortality (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.81-1.94), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.41-3.27), and stroke (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.13-1.32), but there was a higher rate of new coronary revascularization in the TAVR + PCI group (HR: 5.38; 95% CI: 1.73-16.7). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe AS and complex CAD, TAVR + PCI and SAVR + CABG were associated with similar rates of MACCE after a median follow-up period of 3 years, but TAVR + PCI recipients exhibited a higher risk for repeat coronary revascularization. Future trials are warranted.

Caval Valve Implantation (CAVI): An Emerging Therapy for Treating Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation.

Severe tricuspid regurgitation remains a challenging heart-valve disease to effectively treat with high morbidity and mortality at mid-term. Currently guideline-directed medical treatment is limited to escalating dose of diuretics, and the rationale and timing of open-heart surgery remains controversial. Emerging percutaneous therapies for severe tricuspid regurgitation continue to show promising results in early feasibility studies. However, randomized trial data is lacking. Additionally, many patients are deemed unsuitable for these emerging therapies due to anatomical or imaging constraints. Given the technical simplicity of the bicaval valve implantation (CAVI) technique compared to other transcatheter devices, CAVI is postulated as a suitable alternative for a wide variety of patients affected with severe+ tricuspid regurgitation. In this review we illustrate the current evidence and ongoing uncertainties of CAVI, focusing on the novel CAVI-specific devices.