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.

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.

Impact of Morbid Obesity and Obesity Phenotype on Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Background There is a paucity of outcome data on patients who are morbidly obese (MO) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to determine their periprocedural and midterm outcomes and investigate the impact of obesity phenotype. Methods and Results Consecutive patients who are MO (body mass index, ≥40 kg/m2, or ≥35 kg/m2 with obesity-related comorbidities; n=910) with severe aortic stenosis who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement in 18 tertiary hospitals were compared with a nonobese cohort (body mass index, 18.5-29.9 kg/m2, n=2264). Propensity-score matching resulted in 770 pairs. Pre-transcatheter aortic valve replacement computed tomography scans were centrally analyzed to assess adipose tissue distribution; epicardial, abdominal visceral and subcutaneous fat. Major vascular complications were more common (6.6% versus 4.3%; P=0.043) and device success was less frequent (84.4% versus 88.1%; P=0.038) in the MO group. Freedom from all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were similar at 2 years (79.4 versus 80.6%, P=0.731; and 88.7 versus 87.4%, P=0.699; MO and nonobese, respectively). Multivariable analysis identified baseline glomerular filtration rate and nontransfemoral access as independent predictors of 2-year mortality in the MO group. An adverse MO phenotype with an abdominal visceral adipose tissue:subcutaneous adipose tissue ratio ≥1 (VAT:SAT) was associated with increased 2-year all-cause (hazard ratio [HR], 3.06; 95% CI, 1.20-7.77; P=0.019) and cardiovascular (hazard ratio, 4.11; 95% CI, 1.06-15.90; P=0.041) mortality, and readmissions (HR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.07-3.07; P=0.027). After multivariable analysis, a (VAT:SAT) ratio ≥1 remained a strong predictor of 2-year mortality (hazard ratio, 2.78; P=0.035). Conclusions Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients who are MO has similar short- and midterm outcomes to nonobese patients, despite higher major vascular complications and lower device success. An abdominal VAT:SAT ratio ≥1 identifies an obesity phenotype at higher risk of adverse clinical outcomes.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Residual Lesion of the Aortic Valve Following "Healed" Infective Endocarditis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and mid-term efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the setting of aortic valve (AV) infective endocarditis (IE) with residual lesion despite successful antibiotic treatment. BACKGROUND: Patients with AV-IE presenting residual lesion despite successful antibiotic treatment are often rejected for cardiac surgery due to high-risk. The use of TAVR following IE is not recommended. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective study across 10 centers, gathering baseline, in-hospital, and 1-year follow-up characteristics of patients with healed AV-IE treated with TAVR. Matched comparison according to sex, EuroSCORE, chronic kidney disease, left ventricular function, prosthesis type, and valve-in-valve procedure was performed with a cohort of patients free of prior IE treated with TAVR (46 pairs). RESULTS: Among 2,920 patients treated with TAVR, 54 (1.8%) presented with prior AV-IE with residual valvular lesion and healed infection. They had a higher rate of multivalvular disease and greater surgical risk scores. A previous valvular prosthesis was more frequent than a native valve (50% vs. 7.5%; p < 0.001). The in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates were 5.6% and 11.1%, respectively, comparable to the control cohort. After matching, the 1-year III to IV aortic regurgitation rate was 27.9% (vs. 10%; p = 0.08) and was independently associated with higher mortality. There was only 1 case of IE relapse (1.8%); however, 18% of patients were complicated with sepsis, and 43% were readmitted due to heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR is a safe therapeutic alternative for residual valvular lesion after successfully healed AV-IE. At 1-year follow-up, the risk of IE relapse was low and mortality rate did not differ from TAVR patients free of prior IE, but one-fourth presented with significant aortic regurgitation and >50% required re-admission.

Third-Generation Balloon and Self-Expandable Valves for Aortic Stenosis in Large and Extra-Large Aortic Annuli From the TAVR-LARGE Registry.

BACKGROUND: Currently, 2 third-generation transcatheter valves, 29-mm Sapien-3 and 34-mm Evolut-R (ER), are indicated for large sized aortic annuli. We analyzed short and 1-year performance of these valves in patients with large (area ≥575 mm2 or perimeter ≥85 mm) and extra-large (≥683 mm2 or ≥94.2 mm) aortic annuli undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. METHODS: A total of 833 patients across 12 centers with symptomatic aortic stenosis and large aortic annuli underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with 29-mm Sapien-3 (n=640) or 34-mm ER (n=193). Clinical, anatomic, and procedural characteristics were collected, and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes were reported. RESULTS: Median aortic annulus area and perimeter were 617 mm2 (591-657) and 89.1 mm (87.0-92.1), respectively (704 mm2 [689-743] and 96.0 mm [94.5-97.9] in the subgroup of 124 patients with extra-large annuli). Overall device success was 94.3% (Sapien-3, 95.8% and ER, 89.3%; P=0.001), with a higher rate of significant paravalvular leak (P=0.004), second valve implantation (P=0.013), and valve embolization (P=0.009) in the ER group. Thirty-day and 1-year mortality was 2.4% and 9.2%, respectively, without differences between groups. Valve hemodynamics were excellent (mean gradient, 8.8±3.6 mm Hg; 3.3% rate of moderate-severe paravalvular leak) in the extra-large annulus, without differences compared with the large annulus group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with large and extra-large aortic annuli, transcatheter aortic valve replacement using 29-mm Sapien-3 and 34-mm ER is safe and feasible. Observed differences in clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance may guide valve choice in this cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Mitral Regurgitation in Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing TAVR: Insights From the TOPAS-TAVI Registry.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the incidence, clinical impact, and changes over time of mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG-AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: Few data exist on the clinical impact and changes in severity over time of MR in patients with LFLG-AS undergoing TAVR. METHODS: A total of 308 TAVR candidates with LFLG-AS were included. Patients were categorized according to MR severity at baseline, and presence of MR improvement at 12-month follow-up. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 1 and 12 months (+ echocardiography), and yearly thereafter. RESULTS: Baseline mild and moderate-to-severe MR were present in 118 (38.3%) and 115 (37.3%) patients, respectively. MR was of functional and mixed etiology in 77.2% and 22.7% of patients, respectively. A total of 131 patients (42.5%) died after a median follow-up of 2 (1 to 3) years. Baseline moderate-or-greater MR had no impact on mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 2.48) or heart failure hospitalization (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.49 to 2.10). At 1-year follow-up, MR improved in 44.3% of patients and remained unchanged/worsened in 55.7%. The lack of MR improvement was associated with a higher risk of all-cause and cardiac mortality (HR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.29 to 3.17; HR: 3.03; 95% CI: 1.27 to 7.23, respectively), rehospitalization for cardiac causes (HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.15), and an increased overall-mortality/heart failure rehospitalization (HR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.25 to 3.02). A higher baseline left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and a higher increase in left ventricular ejection fraction were found to be independent predictors of MR improvement at 1-year follow-up (odds ratio: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.94; and odds ratio: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.96, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Most TAVR candidates with LFLG-AS had some degree of MR, of functional origin in most cases. MR improved in about one-half of patients, with larger left ventricular size and a higher increase in left ventricular ejection fraction post-TAVR determining MR improvement over time. The lack of MR improvement at 1 year was associated with poorer outcomes.

Infective endocarditis following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: comparison of balloon- versus self-expandable valves

BACKGROUND: No data exist about the characteristics of infective endocarditis (IE) post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) according to transcatheter valve type. We aimed to determine the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients with IE post-TAVR treated with balloon-expandable valve (BEV) versus self-expanding valve (SEV) systems. METHODS: Data from the multicenter Infectious Endocarditis After TAVR International Registry was used to compare IE patients with BEV versus SEV. RESULTS: A total of 245 patients with IE post-TAVR were included (SEV, 47%; BEV, 53%). The timing between TAVR and IE was similar between groups (SEV, 5.5 [1.2-15] months versus BEV, 5.3 [1.7-11.4] months; P=0.89). Enterococcal IE was more frequent in the SEV group (36.5% versus 15.4%; P<0.01), and vegetation location differed according to valve type (stent frame, SEV, 18.6%; BEV, 6.9%; P=0.01; valve leaflet, SEV, 23.9%; BEV, 38.5%; P=0.01). BEV recipients had a higher rate of stroke/systemic embolism (20.0% versus 8.7%, adjusted OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.04-5.82, P=0.04). Surgical explant of the transcatheter valve (SEV, 8.7%; BEV, 13.8%; P=0.21), and in-hospital death at the time of IE episode (SEV, 35.6%; BEV, 37.7%; P=0.74) were similar between groups. After a mean follow-up of 13±12 months, 59.1% and 54.6% of the SEV and BEV recipients, respectively, had died (P=0.66). CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of IE post-TAVR, including microorganism type, vegetation location, and embolic complications but not early or late mortality, differed according to valve type. These results may help to guide the diagnosis and management of IE and inform future research studies in the field. (AU)

Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibition Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated the benefits of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with aortic stenosis, but the presence of persistent fibrosis and myocardial hypertrophy has been related to worse prognosis. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the potential benefits of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors on left ventricular remodeling and major clinical outcomes following successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: Patients from 10 institutions with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR between August 2007 and August 2017 were included. All baseline data were prospectively recorded, and pre-specified follow-up was performed. Doses and types of RAS inhibitors at discharge were recorded, and matched comparison according to their prescription at discharge was performed. RESULTS: A total of 2,785 patients were included. Patients treated with RAS inhibitors (n = 1,622) presented similar surgical risk scores but a higher rate of all cardiovascular risk factors, coronary disease, and myocardial infarction. After adjustment for these baseline differences, reduction of left ventricular volumes and hypertrophy was greater and cardiovascular mortality at 3-year follow-up was lower (odds ratio: 0.59; 95% confidence interval: 0.41 to 0.87; p = 0.007) in patients treated with RAS inhibitors. Moreover, RAS inhibitors demonstrated a global cardiovascular protective effect with significantly lower rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation, cerebrovascular events, and readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Post-TAVR RAS inhibitors are associated with lower cardiac mortality at 3-year follow-up and offer a global cardiovascular protective effect that might be partially explained by a positive left ventricular remodeling. An ongoing randomized trial will help confirm these hypothesis-generating findings. (Renin-Angiotensin System Blockade Benefits in Clinical Evolution and Ventricular Remodeling After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation [RASTAVI]; NCT03201185).

Impacto de la revascularización coronaria percutánea de lesiones coronarias graves en ramas secundarias / Impact of percutaneous coronary revascularization of severe coronary lesions on secondary branches

Introducción y objetivos: Comparar la estrategia de revascularización percutánea de lesiones graves en ramas coronarias secundarias (RS) (diámetro ≥ 2 mm) de arterias epicárdicas mayores frente al tratamiento conservador. Métodos: Estudio de cohortes retrospectivo en el que se compara a pacientes con lesiones graves en RS de arterias epicárdicas principales tratados con revascularización percutánea o con un tratamiento farmacológico a criterio del operador. Se analizó el porcentaje de eventos relacionados con la rama (muerte cardiovascular, infarto de miocardio atribuible a RS o necesidad de revascularización de la RS). Resultados: Se analizaron 679 lesiones en RS (662 pacientes). Tras un seguimiento medio de 22,2+/-10,5 meses, no hubo diferencias significativas entre ambos grupos de tratamiento en mortalidad de causa cardiovascular (el 1,7 frente al 0,4%; p=0,14), infarto agudo de miocardio (IAM) no fatal (el 1,7 frente al 1,7%; p=0,96) o necesidad de revascularización de la RS (el 4,1 frente al 5,4%; p=0,45) ni en el porcentaje total de eventos (el 5,1 frente al 6,3%; p=0,54). Las variables que mostraron asociación con la ocurrencia de eventos en el análisis multivariable fueron la diabetes (sHR=2,87; IC95%, 1,37-5,47; p=0,004), IAM previo (sHR=3,54; IC95%, 1,77-7,30; p < 0,0001), el diámetro de referencia de la RS (sHR=0,16; IC95%, 0,03-0,97; p=0,047) y la longitud de la lesión (sHR=3,77; IC95%, 1,03-1,13; p < 0,0001). Estos resultados se mantuvieron tras realizar análisis por puntuación de propensión. Conclusiones: En el seguimiento, el porcentaje de eventos relacionados con la RS fue bajo respecto al total de pacientes, sin diferencias significativas entre una y otra estrategia de tratamiento. Las variables que se asociaron con la ocurrencia de eventos en el análisis multivariable fueron la diabetes mellitus, el antecedente de IAM y la mayor longitud de la lesión

Introduction and objectives: To analyze the percutaneous revascularization strategy for severe lesions in the secondary branches (SB) (diameter ≥ 2mm) of major epicardial arteries compared with conservative treatment. Methods: This study analyzed patients with severe SB lesions who underwent percutaneous revascularization treatment compared with patients who received pharmacological treatment. The study examined the percentage of branch-related events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction attributable to SB, or the need for revascularization of the SB). Results: We analyzed 679 SB lesions (662 patients). After a mean follow-up of 22.2+/-10.5 months, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups regarding the percentage of death from cardiovascular causes (1.7% vs 0.4%; P=.14), nonfatal acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (1.7% vs 1.7%; P=.96), the need for SB revascularization (4.1% vs 5.4%; P=.45) or in the total percentage of events (5.1% vs 6.3%; P=.54). The variables showing an association with event occurrence on multivariate analysis were diabetes (SHR, 2.87; 95%CI, 1.37-5.47; P=.004), prior AMI (SHR, 3.54; 95%CI, 1.77-7.30; P<.0001), SB reference diameter (SHR, 0.16; 95%CI, 0.03-0.97; P=.047), and lesion length (SHR, 3.77; 95%CI, 1.03-1.13; P<.0001). These results remained the same after the propensity score analysis. Conclusions: The percentage of SB-related events during follow-up is low, with no significant differences between the 2 treatment strategies. The variables associated with event occurrence in the multivariate analysis were the presence of diabetes mellitus, prior AMI, and greater lesion length

Comparison of balloon-expandable vs. self-expandable valves in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: from the CENTER-collaboration

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with balloon-expandable (BE) valves vs. self-expandable (SE) valves. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a minimally invasive and lifesaving treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis. Even though BE-valves and SE-valves are both commonly used on a large scale, adequately sized trials comparing clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: In this CENTER-collaboration, data from 10 registries or clinical trials, selected through a systematic search, were pooled and analyzed. Propensity score methodology was used to reduce treatment selection bias and potential confounding. The primary endpoints were mortality and stroke at 30 days follow-up in patients treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. Secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes, e.g. bleeding during hospital admission. All outcomes were split for early-generation BE-valves compared with early-generation SE-valves and new-generation BE-valves with new-generation SE-valves. The overall patient population (N = 12 381) included 6239 patients undergoing TAVI with BE-valves and 6142 patients with SE-valves. The propensity matched population had a mean age of 81 ± 7 years and a median STS-PROM score or 6.5% [interquartile range (IQR) 4.0-13.0%]. At 30-day follow-up, the mortality rate was not statistically different in patients undergoing TAVI with BE-valves compared with SE-valves [BE: 5.3% vs. SE: 6.2%, relative risk (RR) 0.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-1.0, P = 0.10]. Stroke occurred less frequently in patients treated with BE-valves (BE: 1.9% vs. SE: 2.6%, RR 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.0, P = 0.03). Also, patients treated with BE-valves had a three-fold lower risk of requiring pacemaker implantation (BE: 7.8% vs. SE: 20.3%, RR 0.4; 95% CI 0.3-0.4, P < 0.001). In contrast, patients treated with new-generation BE-valves more frequently experienced major and life-threatening bleedings compared with new-generation SE-valves (BE: 4.8% vs. SE: 2.1%, RR 2.3; 95% CI 1.6-3.3, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this study, which is the largest study to compare valve types in TAVI, we demonstrated that the incidence of stroke and pacemaker implantation was lower in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. In contrast, patients treated with new-generation BE-valves more often suffered from major or life-threatening bleedings than patients with new-generation SE-valves. Mortality at 30-days was not statistically different in patients treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. This study was a propensity-matched analysis generated from observational data, accordingly current outcomes will have to be confirmed in a large scale randomized controlled trial. (AU)

Comparison of balloon-expandable vs. self-expandable valves in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: from the CENTER-collaboration.

Aims: The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with balloon-expandable (BE) valves vs. self-expandable (SE) valves. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a minimally invasive and lifesaving treatment in patients with aortic valve stenosis. Even though BE-valves and SE-valves are both commonly used on a large scale, adequately sized trials comparing clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves are lacking. Methods and results: In this CENTER-collaboration, data from 10 registries or clinical trials, selected through a systematic search, were pooled and analysed. Propensity score methodology was used to reduce treatment selection bias and potential confounding. The primary endpoints were mortality and stroke at 30 days follow-up in patients treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. Secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes, e.g. bleeding during hospital admission. All outcomes were split for early-generation BE-valves compared with early-generation SE-valves and new-generation BE-valves with new-generation SE-valves. The overall patient population (N = 12 381) included 6239 patients undergoing TAVI with BE-valves and 6142 patients with SE-valves. The propensity matched population had a mean age of 81 ± 7 years and a median STS-PROM score or 6.5% [interquartile range (IQR) 4.0-13.0%]. At 30-day follow-up, the mortality rate was not statistically different in patients undergoing TAVI with BE-valves compared with SE-valves [BE: 5.3% vs. SE: 6.2%, relative risk (RR) 0.9; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-1.0, P = 0.10]. Stroke occurred less frequently in patients treated with BE-valves (BE: 1.9% vs. SE: 2.6%, RR 0.7; 95% CI 0.5-1.0, P = 0.03). Also, patients treated with BE-valves had a three-fold lower risk of requiring pacemaker implantation (BE: 7.8% vs. SE: 20.3%, RR 0.4; 95% CI 0.3-0.4, P < 0.001). In contrast, patients treated with new-generation BE-valves more frequently experienced major and life-threatening bleedings compared with new-generation SE-valves (BE: 4.8% vs. SE: 2.1%, RR 2.3; 95% CI 1.6-3.3, P < 0.001). Conclusion: In this study, which is the largest study to compare valve types in TAVI, we demonstrated that the incidence of stroke and pacemaker implantation was lower in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. In contrast, patients treated with new-generation BE-valves more often suffered from major or life-threatening bleedings than patients with new-generation SE-valves. Mortality at 30-days was not statistically different in patients treated with BE-valves compared with SE-valves. This study was a propensity-matched analysis generated from observational data, accordingly current outcomes will have to be confirmed in a large scale randomized controlled trial.

Nutritional risk index predicts survival in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND: Among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), prognosis is impacted by nutritional status, but the influence of the nutritional risk index (NRI) is unknown. Here we calculated the NRI to determine the prevalence and prognostic impact in terms of mortality of malnutrition in TAVR patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective multicenter study included 941 patients who underwent TAVR between 2008 and 2016 (mean age, 80.7 ±â€¯6.5 years; 57% female). The NRI was calculated as 1.519 × albumin (g/L) + 41.7 × (real weight [kg] / ideal weight [kg]). The mean NRI was 98.1 ±â€¯7.0%. The patients were stratified into the following groups based on malnutrition risk: severe (NRI < 83.5; n = 83; 8.82%), moderate (83.5 ≥ NRI < 97.5; n = 370; 39.32%), mild (97.5 ≥ NRI < 100; n = 102; 10.84%), and no risk (NRI ≥ 100; n = 386; 41.02%). During the follow-up period (2.1 ±â€¯1.1 years), 186 patients died, representing 19.8% of the total cohort. Cox regression models were used to analyze the relationship between NRI and mortality during follow-up. Compared to patients with no or mild nutritional risk, those with moderate or severe nutritional risk had a 45% greater risk of mortality during follow-up (adjusted HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.05-1.99; P = 0.021). CONCLUSION: Malnutrition is common among TAVR patients. Our present data indicated that the NRI was independently associated with increased risk of death during long-term follow-up after TAVR. Based on its potential to improve risk prediction, NRI appears to be a promising tool for the clinical assessment of patients who are candidates for TAVR.

Impact of Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization of Severe Coronary Lesions on Secondary Branches.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze the percutaneous revascularization strategy for severe lesions in the secondary branches (SB) (diameter ≥ 2mm) of major epicardial arteries compared with conservative treatment. METHODS: This study analyzed patients with severe SB lesions who underwent percutaneous revascularization treatment compared with patients who received pharmacological treatment. The study examined the percentage of branch-related events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction attributable to SB, or the need for revascularization of the SB). RESULTS: We analyzed 679 SB lesions (662 patients). After a mean follow-up of 22.2±10.5 months, there were no significant differences between the 2 treatment groups regarding the percentage of death from cardiovascular causes (1.7% vs 0.4%; P=.14), nonfatal acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (1.7% vs 1.7%; P=.96), the need for SB revascularization (4.1% vs 5.4%; P=.45) or in the total percentage of events (5.1% vs 6.3%; P=.54). The variables showing an association with event occurrence on multivariate analysis were diabetes (SHR, 2.87; 95%CI, 1.37-5.47; P=.004), prior AMI (SHR, 3.54; 95%CI, 1.77-7.30; P<.0001), SB reference diameter (SHR, 0.16; 95%CI, 0.03-0.97; P=.047), and lesion length (SHR, 3.77; 95%CI, 1.03-1.13; P<.0001). These results remained the same after the propensity score analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of SB-related events during follow-up is low, with no significant differences between the 2 treatment strategies. The variables associated with event occurrence in the multivariate analysis were the presence of diabetes mellitus, prior AMI, and greater lesion length.

Outcomes From Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Low-Flow, Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis and Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Less Than 30%: A Substudy From the TOPAS-TAVI Registry.

Importance: In low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG AS), the severity of left ventricular dysfunction remains a key factor in the evaluation of aortic valve replacement. Objective: To evaluate the clinical outcomes and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with LFLG AS and severe left ventricular dysfunction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter registry is a substudy of the True or Pseudo-Severe Aortic Stenosis-TAVI registry that included patients with classic LFLG AS, defined as a mean transvalvular gradient less than 35 mm Hg, an effective orifice area less than 1.0 cm2, and an LVEF of 40% or less. Patients were divided in groups with very low (<30%) LVEF and low (30%-40%) LVEF. Dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) was performed before TAVR in a subset with very low LVEF, and presence of contractile reserve was defined as an increase of 20% or more in stroke volume. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 1 and 12 months and yearly thereafter, and echocardiography was performed at 1-year follow-up. Retrospective data were collected from 2007 to 2013 and prospective data from January 2013 to March 2018. Data were analyzed from March to October 2018. Exposures: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with LFLG AS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Changes in LVEF over time; periprocedural and late mortality. Results: A total of 293 patients were included, including 128 (43.7%) with very low LVEF and 165 with low LVEF (56.3%). Their mean (SD) age was 80 (7) years, and most (214 [73.0%]) were men. The mean (SD) LVEF in the very low LVEF group was 22% (5%), compared with 37% (7%) in the low LVEF group (P < .001). There were no differences between groups in rates of periprocedural mortality and late mortality (median [interquartile range], 23 [6-38] months). Patients with very low LVEF displayed a greater increase in LVEF at the 1-year follow-up examination (mean absolute increase, 11.9% [95% CI, 8.8%-15.1%]), than the low LVEF group (3.6% [95% CI, 1.1%-6.1%]; P < .001). In 92 patients with very low LVEF who had preprocedural DSE, results showed a lack of contractile reserve in 45 (49%), but this had no effect on clinical outcomes or changes in LVEF over time. Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with LFLG AS and severe left ventricular dysfunction, TAVR was associated with similar clinical outcomes as in counterparts with milder left ventricular dysfunction. The TAVR procedure was associated with a significant increase in LVEF, irrespective of contractile reserve. These results support TAVR for LFLG AS, irrespective of the severity of left ventricular dysfunction and DSE results.

Impact of Preexisting Left Bundle Branch Block in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Recipients.

BACKGROUND: The impact of preexisting left bundle branch block (LBBB) in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) recipients is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preexisting LBBB on clinical outcomes after TAVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicenter study evaluated 3404 TAVR candidates according to the presence or absence of LBBB on baseline ECG. TAVR complications and causes of death were defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions. Follow-up outpatient visits or telephone interviews were conducted at 30 days, 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Echocardiography examinations were performed at baseline, at hospital discharge, and at 1-year follow-up. Preexisting LBBB was present in 398 patients (11.7%) and was associated with an increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI; 21.1% versus 14.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.12-2.04) but not death (7.3% versus 5.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.84-2.12) at 30 days. At a mean follow-up of 22±21 months, there were no differences between patients with and without preexisting LBBB in overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.18) and cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.68-1.21). In a subanalysis of 2421 patients without PPI at 30 days and with complete follow-up about the PPI, preexisting LBBB was not associated with an increased risk of PPI or sudden cardiac death. Patients with preexisting LBBB had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline and at 1-year follow-up ( P <0.001 for both), but those with low LVEF exhibited a similar increase in LVEF over time after TAVR compared with patients with no preexisting LBBB ( P=0.327). CONCLUSIONS: Preexisting LBBB significantly increased the risk of early (but not late) PPI after TAVR, without any significant effect on overall mortality or cardiovascular mortality. Preexisting LBBB was associated with lower LVEF pre-TAVR but did not prevent an increase in LVEF post-TAVR similar to patients without LBBB.

Impact of Preexisting Left Bundle Branch Block in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Recipients

BACKGROUND: The impact of preexisting left bundle branch block (LBBB) in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) recipients is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preexisting LBBB on clinical outcomes after TAVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: This multicenter study evaluated 3404 TAVR candidates according to the presence or absence of LBBB on baseline ECG. TAVR complications and causes of death were defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions. Follow-up outpatient visits or telephone interviews were conducted at 30 days, 12 months, and yearly thereafter. Echocardiography examinations were performed at baseline, at hospital discharge, and at 1-year follow-up. Preexisting LBBB was present in 398 patients (11.7%) and was associated with an increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI; 21.1% versus 14.8%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.12­2.04) but not death (7.3% versus 5.5%; adjusted odds ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.84­2.12) at 30 days. At a mean follow-up of 22±21 months, there were no differences between patients with and without preexisting LBBB in overall mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75­1.18) and cardiovascular mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.68­1.21). In a subanalysis of 2421 patients without PPI at 30 days and with complete follow-up about the PPI, preexisting LBBB was not associated with an increased risk of PPI or sudden cardiac death. Patients with preexisting LBBB had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) at baseline and at 1-year follow-up (P <0.001 for both), but those with low LVEF exhibited a similar increase in LVEF over time after TAVR compared with patients with no preexisting LBBB (P=0.327). CONCLUSIONS: Preexisting LBBB significantly increased the risk of early (but not late) PPI after TAVR, without any significant effect on overall mortality or cardiovascular mortality. Preexisting LBBB was associated with lower LVEF pre-TAVR but did not prevent an increase in LVEF post-TAVR similar to patients without LBBB.

The Learning Curve and Annual Procedure Volume Standards for Optimum Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Findings From an International Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to determine the procedural learning curve and minimum annual institutional volumes associated with optimum clinical outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a complex procedure requiring significant training and experience for successful outcome. Despite increasing use of TAVR across institutions, limited information is available for its learning curve characteristics and minimum annual volumes required to optimize clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study collected data for patients at 16 centers participating in the international TAVR registry since initiation of the respective TAVR program. All cases were chronologically ordered into initial (1 to 75), early (76 to 150), intermediate (151 to 225), high (226 to 300), and very high (>300) experience operators for TAVR learning curve characterization. In addition, participating institutions were stratified by annual TAVR case volume into low-volume (<50), moderate-volume (50 to 100), and high-volume (>100) groups for comparative analysis. Procedural and 30-day clinical outcomes were collected and multivariate regression analysis performed for 30-day mortality and the early safety endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 3,403 patients comprised the study population. On multivariate analysis, all-cause mortality was significantly higher for initial (odds ratio [OR]: 3.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.93 to 7.60), early (OR: 2.41; 95% CI: 1.51 to 5.03), and intermediate (OR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.19 to 5.40) experience groups compared with the very high experience operators. In addition, the early safety endpoint was significantly worse for all experience groups compared with the very high experience operators. Low annual volume (<50) TAVR institutions had significantly higher all-cause 30-day mortality (OR: 2.70; 95% CI: 1.44 to 5.07) and worse early safety endpoint (OR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.17 to 2.17) compared with the moderate- and high-volume groups. There was no difference in patient outcomes between intermediate and high annual volume groups. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR procedures display important learning curve characteristics with both greater procedural safety and a lower mortality when performed by experienced operators. In addition, TAVR performed at low annual volume (<50 procedures) institutions is associated with decreased procedural safety and higher patient mortality. These findings have important implications for operator training and patient care at centers performing TAVR.

The Learning Curve and Annual Procedure Volume Standards for Optimum Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Findings From an International Registry

OBJECTIVES: The authors aimed to determine the procedural learning curve and minimum annual institutional volumes associated with optimum clinical outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a complex procedure requiring significant training and experience for successful outcome. Despite increasing use of TAVR across institutions, limited information is available for its learning curve characteristics and minimum annual volumes required to optimize clinical outcomes. METHODS: The study collected data for patients at 16 centers participating in the international TAVR registry since initiation of the respective TAVR program. All cases were chronologically ordered into initial (1 to 75), early (76 to 150), intermediate (151 to 225), high (226 to 300), and very high (>300) experience operators for TAVR learning curve characterization. In addition, participating institutions were stratified by annual TAVR case volume into low-volume (<50), moderate-volume (50 to 100), and high-volume (>100) groups for comparative analysis. Procedural and 30-day clinical outcomes were collected and multivariate regression analysis performed for 30-day mortality and the early safety endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 3,403 patients comprised the study population. On multivariate analysis, all-cause mortality was significantly higher for initial (odds ratio [OR]: 3.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.93 to 7.60), early (OR: 2.41; 95%CI: 1.51 to 5.03), and intermediate (OR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.19 to 5.40) experience groups compared with the very high experience operators. In addition, the early safety endpoint was significantly worse for all experience groups compared with the very high experience operators. Low annual volume (<50) TAVR institutions had significantly higher all-cause30-day mortality (OR: 2.70; 95% CI: 1.44 to 5.07) and worse early safety endpoint (OR: 1.60; 95% CI: 1.17 to 2.17) compared with the moderate- and high-volume groups. There was no difference in patient outcomes between intermediate and high annual volume groups. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR procedures display important learning curve characteristics with both greater procedural safety and a lower mortality when performed by experienced operators. In addition, TAVR performed at low annual volume (<50 procedures) institutions is associated with decreased procedural safety and higher patient mortality. These findings have important implications for operator training and patient care at centers performing TAVR.