A randomised multicentre study of angiography- versus physiologyguided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing TAVI: design and rationale of the FAITAVI trial.

The treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (AVS) eligible for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is not supported by clinical evidence, and the role of physiology over anatomy as well as the timing of coronary intervention are not defined. FAITAVI (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03360591) is a nationwide prospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled study comparing the angiography-guided versus the physiology-guided coronary revascularisation strategy in patients with combined significant CAD and severe AVS undergoing TAVI. Significant CAD will be defined as coronary stenosis ≥50%, as assessed by visual estimation in vessels ≥2.5 mm. Physiology will be tested by fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). The study will be conducted at 15 sites in Italy. In the angiography arm, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) will be performed either before TAVI, during the TAVI procedure - before or after the valve implantation - or within 1 month±5 days of the valve implantation, left to the operator's decision. In the physiology arm, FFR and iFR will be performed before TAVI, and PCI will be indicated for FFR ≤0.80, otherwise the intervention will be deferred. In case of borderline values (0.81-0.85), FFR and iFR will be repeated after TAVI, with PCI performed when needed. With a sample size of 320 patients, the study is powered to evaluate the primary endpoint (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, major bleeding, or ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation). TAVI indication, strategy and medical treatment will be the same in both groups. After discharge, patients will be contacted at 1, 6, 12 and 24 months after the procedure to assess their general clinical status, and at 12 months for the occurrence of events included in the primary and secondary endpoints. FAITAVI is the first randomised clinical trial to investigate "optimal" percutaneous coronary intervention associated with TAVI in patients with severe AVS and CAD.

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).

Predicted clinical and economic burden associated with reduction in access to acute coronary interventional care during the COVID-19 lockdown in two European countries.

AIMS: As a consequence of untimely or missed revascularization of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients died at home or survived with serious sequelae, resulting in potential long-term worse prognosis and related health-economic implications.This analysis sought to predict long-term health outcomes [survival and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and cost of reduced treatment of STEMIs occurring during the first COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a Markov decision-analytic model, we incorporated probability of hospitalization, timeliness of PCI, and projected long-term survival and cost (including societal costs) of mortality and morbidity, for STEMI occurring during the first UK and Spanish lockdowns, comparing them with expected pre-lockdown outcomes for an equivalent patient group.STEMI patients during the first UK lockdown were predicted to lose an average of 1.55 life-years and 1.17 QALYs compared with patients presenting with a STEMI pre-pandemic. Based on an annual STEMI incidence of 49 332 cases, the total additional lifetime costs calculated at the population level were £36.6 million (€41.3 million), mainly driven by costs of work absenteeism. Similarly in Spain, STEMI patients during the lockdown were expected to survive 2.03 years less than pre-pandemic patients, with a corresponding reduction in projected QALYs (-1.63). At the population level, reduced PCI access would lead to additional costs of €88.6 million. CONCLUSION: The effect of a 1-month lockdown on STEMI treatment led to a reduction in survival and QALYs compared to the pre-pandemic era. Moreover, in working-age patients, untimely revascularization led to adverse prognosis, affecting societal productivity and therefore considerably increasing societal costs.

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.

Coronary microvascular dysfunction in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic value of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) at long term after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and to explore its relationship with extravalvular cardiac damage (EVCD). Moreover, we sought to test the correlation between angiography-derived index of microcirculatory resistance (IMRangio) and invasive IMR in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Verona Valvular Heart Disease Registry (Italy) including 250 patients (83 (80-86) years, 53% female) with severe AS who underwent TAVI between 2019 and 2021. IMRangio was calculated offline using a computational flow model applied to coronary angiography obtained during the TAVI workup. CMD was defined as IMRangio ≥30 units.The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death and rehospitalisation for heart failure (HF). Advanced EVCD was defined as pulmonary circulation impairment, severe tricuspid regurgitation or right ventricular dysfunction.The correlation between IMR and IMRangio was prospectively assessed in 31 patients undergoing TAVI. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 28 (11.2%) patients at a median follow-up of 22 (IQR 12-30) months. Patients with CMD met the primary endpoint more frequently than those without CMD (22.9% vs 2.8%, p<0.0001). Patients with CMD were more frequently characterised by advanced EVCD (33 (31.4%) vs 27 (18.6%), p=0.024). CMD was an independent predictor of adverse outcomes (adjusted HR 6.672 (2.251 to 19.778), p=0.001) and provided incremental prognostic value compared with conventional clinical and imaging variables. IMRangio demonstrated fair correlation with IMR. CONCLUSIONS: CMD is an independent predictor of cardiovascular mortality and HF after TAVI.

Performance of wearable watch-type home blood pressure measurement devices in a real-world clinical sample.

BACKGROUND: Independent testing of home blood pressure (BP) measurement (HBPM) devices is often lacking, particularly among older and multi-morbid patients. METHODS: We studied the Bpro G2 (using tonometry), Omron HeartGuide (using occlusive oscillometric technology), and Heartisans (using photoplethysmography) wrist watch HBPM devices against a gold standard brachial sphygmomanometer. To test device performance, we used the ISO81060-2 protocol (though this protocol cannot formally validate cuffless devices). We also used linear mixed models to compare adjusted longitudinal BP measurements between devices. Finally, as a surrogate for usability, we recorded instances of device failure where no BP measurement was returned. RESULTS: We enrolled 128 participants (median [Q1-Q3] age 53 [40-65] years, 51% male, 46% on antihypertensive drugs), of whom 100 were suitable for the primary analysis. All three devices had mean BP values within 5 mmHg of sphygmomanometry. However, due to insufficient reliability (e.g., wider than accepted standard deviations of mean BP), none of the three devices passed all criteria required by the ISO81060-2 protocol. In adjusted longitudinal analyses, the Omron device also systematically underestimated systolic and diastolic BP (- 8.46 mmHg; 95% CI 6.07, 10.86; p < 0.001; and - 2.53 mmHg; 95% CI - 4.03, - 1.03; p = 0.001; respectively). Nevertheless, compared to the Omron device, BPro and Heartisans devices had increased odds of failure (BPro: odds ratio [OR] 5.24; p < 0.0001; Heartisans: OR 5.61; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While we could not formally validate the cuffless devices, our results show that wearable technologies will require improvements to offer reliable BP assessment. This study also highlights the need for validation protocols specifically designed for cuffless BP measurement technologies.

Comparison of different percutaneous revascularisation timing strategies in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains unknown. AIMS: We sought to compare different PCI timing strategies in TAVI patients. METHODS: The REVASC-TAVI registry is an international registry including patients undergoing TAVI with significant, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) at preprocedural workup. In this analysis, patients scheduled to undergo PCI before, after or concomitantly with TAVI were included. The main endpoints were all-cause death and a composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 2 years. Outcomes were adjusted using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method. RESULTS: A total of 1,603 patients were included. PCI was performed before, after or concomitantly with TAVI in 65.6% (n=1,052), 9.8% (n=157) or 24.6% (n=394), respectively. At 2 years, all-cause death was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (6.8% vs 20.1% vs 20.6%; p<0.001). Likewise, the composite endpoint was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (17.4% vs 30.4% vs 30.0%; p=0.003). Results were confirmed at landmark analyses considering events from 0 to 30 days and from 31 to 720 days. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and stable coronary artery disease scheduled for TAVI, performance of PCI after TAVI seems to be associated with improved 2-year clinical outcomes compared with other revascularisation timing strategies. These results need to be confirmed in randomised clinical trials.

Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After TAVR With Self-Expanding Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR with self-expanding valves

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Intracoronary physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The risk of vessel-oriented cardiac adverse events (VOCE) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing intracoronary physiology-guided coronary revascularization is poorly defined. The purpose of this work is to evaluate the risk of VOCE in patients with and without DM in whom percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed or deferred based on pressure-wire functional assessment. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a multicenter registry of patients evaluated with fractional flow reserve (FFR) and/or non-hyperaemic pressure ratio (NHPR). Primary endpoint was a composite of VOCE including cardiac death, vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS: A large cohort of 2828 patients with 3353 coronary lesions was analysed to assess the risk of VOCE at long-term follow-up (23 [14-36] months). Non-insulin-dependent-DM (NIDDM) was not associated with the primary endpoint in the overall cohort (adjusted Hazard Ratio [aHR] 1.18, 95% CI 0.87-1.59, P = 0.276) or in patients with coronary lesions treated with PCI (aHR = 1.30, 95% CI 0.78-2.16, P = 0.314). Conversely, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) demonstrated an increased risk of VOCE in the overall cohort (aHR 1.76, 95% CI 1.07-2.91, P = 0.027), but not in coronary lesions undergoing PCI (aHR 1.26, 95% CI 0.50-3.16, P = 0.621). Importantly, in coronary lesions deferred after functional assessment IDDM (aHR 2.77, 95% CI 1.11-6.93, P = 0.029) but not NIDDM (aHR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.61-1.44, P = 0.776) was significantly associated with the risk of VOCE. IDDM caused a significant effect modification of FFR-based risk stratification (P for interaction < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Overall, DM was not associated with an increased risk of VOCE in patients undergoing physiology-guided coronary revascularization. However, IDDM represents a phenotype at high risk of VOCE.

Impact of repeat revascularization within 5 years on 10-year mortality after percutaneous or surgical revascularization.

BACKGROUND: The SYNTAX trial demonstrated negative impact of repeat revascularization (RR) on 5-year outcomes following PCI/CABG in patients with three-vessel(3VD) and/or left main coronary artery disease(LMCAD). We aimed to investigate the impact of RR within 5 years, on 10-year mortality in patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD after PCI/CABG. METHODS: The SYNTAXES study evaluated the vital status out to 10 years of patients with 3VD and/or LMCAD. Patients were stratified by RR within 5 years and randomized treatment. The association between RR within 5 years and 10-year mortality was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 330 out of 1800 patients (18.3%) underwent RR within 5 years. RR occurred more frequently after initial PCI than after initial CABG (25.9% vs. 13.7%, p < 0.001). Overall, 10-year mortality was comparable between patients undergoing RR and those not (28.2% vs. 26.1%, adjusted HR: 1.17, 95%CI 0.93-1.48, p = 0.187). In the PCI arm, RR was associated with a trend toward higher 10-year mortality (adjusted HR: 1.29, 95%CI 0.97-1.72, p = 0.075), while in the CABG arm, the trend was opposite (adjusted HR: 0.74, 95%CI 0.46-1.20, p = 0.219). Among patients requiring RR, those who underwent PCI as initial revascularization had a higher risk of 10-year mortality compared to initial CABG (33.5% vs. 17.6%, adjusted HR: 2.09, 95%CI 1.21-3.61, p = 0.008). CONCLUSION: In the SYNTAXES study, RR within 5 years had no impact on 10-year all-cause death in the population overall. Among patients requiring any repeat procedures, 10-year mortality was higher after initial treatment with PCI than after CABG. These exploratory findings should be investigated with larger populations in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; SYNTAXES Unique identifier: NCT03417050. URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov ; SYNTAX Unique identifier: NCT00114972.

Angiography-Based Superficial Wall Strain of De Novo Stenotic Coronary Arteries: Serial Assessment of Vessels Treated with Bioresorbable Scaffold or Drug-Eluting Stent.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to present an angiography-based computational model for serial assessment of superficial wall strain (SWS, dimensionless) of de-novo coronary stenoses treated with either bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) or drug-eluting stent (DES). BACKGROUND: A novel method for SWS allows the assessment of the mechanical status of arteries in-vivo, which may help for predicting cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: Patients with arterial stenosis treated with BRS (n = 21) or DES (n = 21) were included from ABSORB Cohort B1 and AIDA trials. The SWS analyses were performed along with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at pre-PCI, post-PCI, and 5-year follow-up. Measurements of QCA and SWS parameters were quantified at the treated segment and adjacent 5-mm proximal and distal edges. RESULTS: Before PCI, the peak SWS on the 'to be treated' segment (0.79 ± 0.36) was significantly higher than at both virtual edges (0.44 ± 0.14 and 0.45 ± 0.21; both p < 0.001). The peak SWS in the treated segment significantly decreased by 0.44 ± 0.13 (p < 0.001). The surface area of high SWS decreased from 69.97mm2 to 40.08mm2 (p = 0.002). The peak SWS in BRS group decreased to a similar extent (p = 0.775) from 0.81 ± 0.36 to 0.41 ± 0.14 (p < 0.001), compared with DES group from 0.77 ± 0.39 to 0.47 ± 0.13 (p = 0.001). Relocation of high SWS to device edges was often observed in both groups after PCI (35 of 82 cases, 41.7 %). At follow-up of BRS, the peak SWS remained unchanged compared to post-PCI (0.40 ± 0.12 versus 0.36 ± 0.09, p = 0.319). CONCLUSION: Angiography-based SWS provided valuable information about the mechanical status of coronary arteries. Device implantation led to a significant decrease of SWS to a similar extent with either polymer-based scaffolds or permanent metallic stents.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Evolut PRO/PRO+ Self-Expanding Valves: Insights From the NEOPRO/NEOPRO-2 Registries.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) techniques and technology have continuously improved. Data regarding the impact of these advancements on outcomes in large real-world settings are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate temporal trends and assess contemporary outcomes after TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ supra-annular self-expanding valves. METHODS: This study included patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Procedural dates (August 2017 through November 2021) were stratified in quartiles (Q) and used to investigate temporal trends in TAVR outcomes. Predischarge, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 defined, and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 1616 patients from 28 centers were included. Over time, patients had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score (Q1-4, 4.1% [2.8-6.3%], 3.7% [2.6-5.3%], 3.3% [2.4-4.9%], 2.9% [2.2-4.3%]; P<0.001) and more moderate or heavy valve calcification (Q1-4, 80%, 80%, 82%, 88%; P=0.038). Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 technical success was 94.1%, with 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality of 2.4% and 10%, respectively. Throughout the study period, procedures were associated with higher rates of 30-day device success (Q1-4, 81.2%, 82.2%, 82.0%, 88.0%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and early safety (Q1-4, 66.8%, 67.5%, 74.0%, 77.6%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001), with fewer permanent pacemaker implantations (Q1-4: 15.3%, 20.0%, 12.1%, 11.6%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and residual mild or greater paravalvular leaks (Q1-4, 50.4%, 42.1%, 36.5%, 35.8%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding valve is safe and effective. Despite the treatment of heavier calcified anatomies, procedural outcomes are improving over time with less need for pacemaker implantation and less significant paravalvular leaks.

Comparison of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the ACURATE neo2 versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ devices.

BACKGROUND: The ACURATE neo2 (NEO2) and Evolut PRO/PRO+ (PRO) bioprostheses are new-generation self-expanding valves developed for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). AIMS: We sought to compare the performance of the ACURATE neo2 and Evolut PRO/PRO+ devices. METHODS: The NEOPRO-2 registry retrospectively included patients who underwent TAVR for severe aortic stenosis with either the NEO2 or PRO devices between August 2017 and December 2021 at 20 centres. In-hospital and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3 defined outcomes were evaluated. Propensity score (PS) matching and binary logistic regression were performed to adjust the treatment effect for PS quintiles. A subgroup analysis assessed the impact of aortic valve calcification. RESULTS: A total of 2,175 patients (NEO2: n=763; PRO: n=1,412) were included. The mean age was 82±6.2 years and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 4.2%. Periprocedural complications were low, and both groups achieved high rates of technical success (93.1% vs 94.1%; p=0.361) and predischarge intended valve performance (96.0% vs 94.1%; p=0.056), both in the unmatched and matched analysis (452 pairs). Device success at 30 days was comparable (84.3% vs 83.6%; p=0.688), regardless of aortic valve calcification severity (p>0.05 for interaction). A suggestion for higher VARC-3 early safety in the NEO2 group was mainly driven by reduced rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation (7.7% vs 15.6%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis reports a similar short-term performance of the ACURATE neo2 platform compared with the new-generation Evolut PRO/PRO+ devices. Randomised studies are needed to confirm our exploratory findings.

Definitions and Standardized Endpoints for Treatment of Coronary Bifurcations.

The Bifurcation Academic Research Consortium (Bif-ARC) project originated from the need to overcome the paucity of standardization and comparability between studies involving bifurcation coronary lesions. This document is the result of a collaborative effort between academic research organizations and the most renowned interventional cardiology societies focused on bifurcation lesions in Europe, the United States, and Asia. This consensus provides standardized definitions for bifurcation lesions; the criteria to judge the side branch relevance; the procedural, mechanistic, and clinical endpoints for every type of bifurcation study; and the follow-up methods. Considering the complexity of bifurcation lesions and their evaluation, detailed instructions and technical aspects for site and core laboratory analysis of bifurcation lesions are also reported. The recommendations included within this consensus will facilitate pooled analyses and the effective comparison of data in the future, improving the clinical relevance of trials in bifurcation lesions, and the quality of care in this subset of patients.

Impact of residual angina on long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass graft for complex coronary artery disease.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact on 10-year survival of patient-reported anginal status at 1 year following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) in patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) and/or three-vessel CAD (3VD). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this post hoc analysis of the randomized SYNTAX Extended Survival study, patients were classified as having residual angina (RA) if their self-reported Seattle Angina Questionnaire angina frequency (SAQ-AF) scale was ≤90 at the 1-year follow-up post-revascularization with PCI or CABG. The primary endpoint of all-cause death at 10 years was compared between the RA and no-RA groups. A sensitivity analysis was performed using a 6-month SAQ-AF.At 1 year, 373 (26.1%) out of 1428 patients reported RA. Whilst RA at 1 year was an independent correlate of repeat revascularization at 5 years [18.3 vs. 11.5%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.54; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.10-2.15], it was not associated with all-cause death at 10 years (22.1 vs. 21.6%; adjusted HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.83-1.47). These results were consistent when stratified by the modality of revascularization (PCI or CABG) or by anginal frequency. The sensitivity analysis replicating the analyses based on 6-month angina status resulted in similar findings. CONCLUSION: Among patients with LMCAD and/or 3VD, patient-reported RA at 1 year post-revascularization was independently associated with repeat revascularization at 5 years; however, it did not significantly increase 10-year mortality, irrespective of the primary modality of revascularization or severity of RA.

Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The best management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still unclear due to the marked inconsistency of the available evidence. METHODS: The REVASC-TAVI registry (Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Coronary Artery Disease) collected data from 30 centers worldwide on patients undergoing TAVI who had significant, stable CAD at preprocedural work-up. For the purposes of this analysis, patients with either complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were compared in a propensity score matched analysis, to take into account of baseline confounders. The primary and co-primary outcomes were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure, respectively, at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 2407 patients enrolled, 675 pairs of patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were matched. The primary (21.6% versus 18.2%, hazard ratio' 0.88 [95% CI, 0.66-1.18]; P=0.38) and co-primary composite (29.0% versus 27.1%, hazard ratio' 0.97 [95% CI, 0.76-1.24]; P=0.83) outcome did not differ between patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization, respectively. These results were consistent across different prespecified subgroups of patients (< or >75 years of age, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > or <4%, angina at baseline, diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction > or <40%, New York Heart Association class I/II or III/IV, renal failure, proximal CAD, multivessel CAD, and left main/proximal anterior descending artery CAD; all P values for interaction >0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of the REVASC-TAVI registry showed that, among TAVI patients with significant stable CAD found during the TAVI work-up, completeness of myocardial revascularization achieved either staged or concomitantly with TAVI was similar to a strategy of incomplete revascularization in reducing the risk of all cause death, as well as the risk of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure at 2 years, regardless of the clinical and anatomical situations.

Diabetes mellitus in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a propensity matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes Mellitus (DM) affects a third of patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). DM is a well-known risk factor for cardiac surgery, but its prognostic impact in TAVI patients remains controversial. This study aimed to evaluate outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing TAVI. METHODS: This multicentre registry includes data of > 12,000 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI. We assessed baseline patient characteristics and clinical outcomes in patients with DM and without DM. Clinical outcomes were defined by the second valve academic research consortium. Propensity score matching was applied to minimize potential confounding. RESULTS: Of the 11,440 patients included, 31% (n = 3550) had DM and 69% (n = 7890) did not have DM. Diabetic patients were younger but had an overall worse cardiovascular risk profile than non-diabetic patients. All-cause mortality rates were comparable at 30 days (4.5% vs. 4.9%, RR 0.9, 95%CI 0.8-1.1, p = 0.43) and at one year (17.5% vs. 17.4%, RR 1.0, 95%CI 0.9-1.1, p = 0.86) in the unmatched population. Propensity score matching obtained 3281 patient-pairs. Also in the matched population, mortality rates were comparable at 30 days (4.7% vs. 4.3%, RR 1.1, 95%CI 0.9-1.4, p = 0.38) and one year (17.3% vs. 16.2%, RR 1.1, 95%CI 0.9-1.2, p = 0.37). Other clinical outcomes including stroke, major bleeding, myocardial infarction and permanent pacemaker implantation, were comparable between patients with DM and without DM. Insulin treated diabetics (n = 314) showed a trend to higher mortality compared with non-insulin treated diabetics (n = 701, Hazard Ratio 1.5, 95%CI 0.9-2.3, p = 0.08). EuroSCORE II was the most accurate risk score and underestimated 30-day mortality with an observed-expected ratio of 1.15 in DM patients, STS-PROM overestimated actual mortality with a ratio of 0.77 and Logistic EuroSCORE with 0.35. CONCLUSION: DM was not associated with mortality during the first year after TAVI. DM patients undergoing TAVI had low rates of mortality and other adverse clinical outcomes, comparable to non-DM TAVI patients. Our results underscore the safety of TAVI treatment in DM patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03588247).