Mitral Valve Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair: 1-Year Outcomes From the MiCLASP Study.

BACKGROUND: Mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) is a guideline-recommended treatment option for patients with severe symptomatic mitral regurgitation (MR). Outcomes with the PASCAL system in a post-market setting have not been established. OBJECTIVES: The authors report 30-day and 1-year outcomes from the MiCLASP (Transcatheter Repair of Mitral Regurgitation with Edwards PASCAL Transcatheter Valve Repair System) European post-market clinical follow-up study. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic, clinically significant MR were prospectively enrolled. The primary safety endpoint was clinical events committee-adjudicated 30-day composite major adverse event rate and the primary effectiveness endpoint was echocardiographic core laboratory-assessed MR severity at discharge compared with baseline. Clinical, echocardiographic, functional, and quality-of-life outcomes were assessed at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 544 patients were enrolled (59% functional MR, 30% degenerative MR). The 30-day composite major adverse event rate was 6.8%. MR reduction was significant from baseline to discharge and sustained at 1 year with 98% of patients achieving MR ≤2+ and 82.6% MR ≤1+ (all P < 0.001 vs baseline). One-year Kaplan-Meier estimate for survival was 87.3%, and freedom from heart failure hospitalization was 84.3%. Significant functional and quality-of-life improvements were observed at 1 year, including 71.6% in NYHA functional class I/II, 14.4-point increase in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, and 24.2-m improvement in 6-minute walk distance (all P < 0.001 vs baseline). CONCLUSIONS: One-year outcomes of this large cohort from the MiCLASP study demonstrate continued safety and effectiveness of M-TEER with the PASCAL system in a post-market setting. Results demonstrate high survival and freedom from heart failure hospitalization, significant and sustained MR reduction, and improvements in symptoms, functional capacity, and quality of life.

Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable TAVR in Patients with a Small Aortic Annulus.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus are at risk for impaired valvular hemodynamic performance and associated adverse cardiovascular clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and an aortic-valve annulus area of 430 mm2 or less in a 1:1 ratio to undergo TAVR with either a self-expanding supraannular valve or a balloon-expandable valve. The coprimary end points, each assessed through 12 months, were a composite of death, disabling stroke, or rehospitalization for heart failure (tested for noninferiority) and a composite end point measuring bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction (tested for superiority). RESULTS: A total of 716 patients were treated at 83 sites in 13 countries (mean age, 80 years; 87% women; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 3.3%). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients who died, had a disabling stroke, or were rehospitalized for heart failure through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 10.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -1.2 percentage points; 90% confidence interval [CI], -4.9 to 2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the percentage of patients with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months was 9.4% with the self-expanding valve and 41.6% with the balloon-expandable valve (difference, -32.2 percentage points; 95% CI, -38.7 to -25.6; P<0.001 for superiority). The aortic-valve mean gradient at 12 months was 7.7 mm Hg with the self-expanding valve and 15.7 mm Hg with the balloon-expandable valve, and the corresponding values for additional secondary end points through 12 months were as follows: mean effective orifice area, 1.99 cm2 and 1.50 cm2; percentage of patients with hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, 3.5% and 32.8%; and percentage of women with bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction, 10.2% and 43.3% (all P<0.001). Moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch at 30 days was found in 11.2% of the patients in the self-expanding valve group and 35.3% of those in the balloon-expandable valve group (P<0.001). Major safety end points appeared to be similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus who underwent TAVR, a self-expanding supraannular valve was noninferior to a balloon-expandable valve with respect to clinical outcomes and was superior with respect to bioprosthetic-valve dysfunction through 12 months. (Funded by Medtronic; SMART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04722250.).

ACURATE neo2 Versus SAPIEN 3 Ultra Transcatheter Heart Valve in Severe Aortic Valve Calcification: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Comparative data on transcatheter self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (NEO2) and balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra prostheses in technically challenging anatomy of severe aortic valve calcified aortic annuli are scarce. METHODS: A total of 1987 patients with severe native aortic stenosis treated with the self-expanding NEO2 (n=1457) or balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (n=530) from January 2017 to April 2023 were evaluated. The primary end point was procedural outcome according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 definitions. Propensity matching defined 219 pairs with severe calcification (calcium density cutoff, 758 AU/cm2) of the native aortic valve. RESULTS: Technical success (90.4% versus 91.8%; risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, -4.4 to -7.2]; P=0.737) and device success at 30 days (80.8% versus 75.8%; risk difference, -5.0% [95% CI, -13.2 to 3.1]; P=0.246) were comparable between NEO2 and SAPIEN 3 Ultra. The rate of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (1.1% versus 10.1%; risk difference, 10.0% [95% CI, 4.0-13.9]; P<0.001) and mean transvalvular gradient ≥20 mm Hg (2.8% versus 14.3%; risk difference, 11.5% [95% CI, 5.8-17.1]; P<0.001) was lower with NEO2. The rate of more-than-mild paravalvular leakage or valve-in-valve due to paravalvular leakage was significantly higher (6.2% versus 0.0%; risk difference, 6.2% [95% CI, -10.1 to -2.7]; P=0.002), and there was a tendency for a higher rate of device embolization or migration (1.8% versus 0.0%; risk difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -4.1 to 0.4]; P=0.123) with NEO2. Multivarate regression revealed no independent impact of transcatheter heart valve selection on device success (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.48-1.77]; P=0.817). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severely calcified annuli, supraannular implantation of NEO2 showed hemodynamic advantages. Nevertheless, NEO2 was associated with a higher incidence of relevant paravalvular leakage and a numerically higher rate of device embolization than SAPIEN 3 Ultra in this particular patient group.

Non-femoral focused transaxillary access in TAVI: GARY data analysis and future trends.

BACKGROUND: In patients not suitable for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), several access strategies can be chosen. AIM: To evaluate the use and patient outcomes of transaxillary (TAx), transapical (TA), and transaortic (TAo) as alternative access for TAVI in Germany; to further evaluate surgical cutdown vs. percutaneous TAx access. METHODS: All patients entered the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY) between 2011 and 2019 who underwent non-transfemoral TAVI were included in this analysis. Patients with TA, TAo, or TAx TAVI were compared using a weighted propensity score model. Furthermore, a subgroup analysis was performed for TAx regarding the percutaneous or surgical cutdown approach. RESULTS: Overall, 9686 patients received a non-transfemoral access. A total of 8918 patients (92.1%) underwent TA, 398 (4.1%) TAo, and 370 (3.8%) TAx approaches. Within the TAx subgroup, 141 patients (38.1%) received subclavian cutdown, while 200 (54.1%) underwent a percutaneous approach. The TA patients had a significantly lower 30-day survival than TAx patients (TA 90.92% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.006; TAo 92.22% vs. TAx 95.59%, p = 0.102). Comparing percutaneous and cutdown TAx approaches, no significant differences were seen. However, more vascular complications occurred (TA 1.8%, TAo 2.4%, TAx 12.2%; p < .001), and the hospital length of stay was shorter (TA 12.9 days, TAo 14.1 days, TAx 12 days; p < .001) after TAx access. CONCLUSION: It may be reasonable to consider TAx access first in patients not suitable for TF-TAVI, because the 30-day survival was higher compared with TA access and the 1-year survival was higher compared with TAo access. It remains important for the heart teams to offer alternative access modalities for patients not amenable to the standard TF-TAVI approaches.

Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of comparative data on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in degenerated surgical prostheses (valve-in-valve [ViV]). AIMS: We sought to compare outcomes of using two self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems for ViV. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre registry, we included consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral ViV using either the ACURATE neo/neo2 (ACURATE group) or the Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ (EVOLUT group). The primary outcome measure was technical success according to Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3. Secondary outcomes were 30-day all-cause mortality, device success (VARC-3), coronary obstruction (CO) requiring intervention, rates of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), and aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥moderate. Comparisons were made after 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 835 patients from 20 centres (ACURATE n=251; EVOLUT n=584). In the matched cohort (n=468), technical success (ACURATE 92.7% vs EVOLUT 88.9%; p=0.20) and device success (69.7% vs 73.9%; p=0.36) as well as 30-day mortality (2.8% vs 1.6%; p=0.392) were similar between the two groups. The mean gradients and rates of severe PPM, AR ≥moderate, or CO did not differ between the groups. Technical and device success were higher for the ACURATE platform among patients with a true inner diameter (ID) >19 mm, whereas a true ID ≤19 mm was associated with higher device success - but not technical success - among Evolut recipients. CONCLUSIONS: ViV TAVI using either ACURATE or Evolut THVs showed similar procedural outcomes. However, a true ID >19 mm was associated with higher device success among ACURATE recipients, whereas in patients with a true ID ≤19 mm, device success was higher when using Evolut.

Valve Hemodynamics by Valve Size and 1-Year Survival Following Implantation of the Portico Valve in the Multicenter CONFIDENCE Registry.

Background: The CONtrolled delivery For ImproveD outcomEs with cliNiCal Evidence registry was initiated to characterize the clinical safety and device performance from experienced transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) centers in Europe and Australia that use the Portico valve to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis. We herein report for the first time the valve performance at 30-day across all implanted valve sizes and the 1-year survival from this registry. Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm observational clinical investigation of patients clinically indicated for implantation of a Portico valve in experienced TAVI centers. Patients were treated with a commercially available valve (size 23, 25, 27, or 29 mm) using either the first-generation delivery system (DS) (n = 501) or the second-generation (FlexNav) DS (n = 500). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. Echocardiographic outcomes were assessed at 30 days by an independent core laboratory, and a survival check was performed at 1 year. Results: We enrolled 1001 patients (82.0 years, 62.5% female, 63.7% New York Heart Association functional class III/IV at baseline) from 27 clinical sites in 8 countries across Europe and one site in Australia. Implantation of a single valve was successful in 97.5% of subjects. Valve hemodynamics at 30 days were substantially improved relative to baseline, with large aortic valve areas and low mean gradients across all implanted valve sizes (aortic valve areas were 1.7 ± 0.4, 1.7 ± 0.5, 1.8 ± 0.5, and 2.0 ± 0.5 cm2, and mean gradients were 7.0 ± 2.7, 7.5 ± 4.7, 7.3 ± 3.3, and 6.4 ± 3.3 mmHg for 23, 25, 27, and 29 mm valve sizes, respectively). Across all implanted valve sizes, most patients (77.1%) had no patient-prosthesis mismatch. Death from any cause within 1 year occurred in 13.7% of the patients in the first-generation DS group as compared with 11.0% in the second-generation DS group (p = 0.2). Conclusions: The Portico valve demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance across all valve sizes in a large cohort of subjects implanted in experienced TAVI centers. One-year survival rates were favorable when using both the first-generation and second-generation (FlexNav) DSs in this high-risk cohort. ClinicalTrialsgov Identifier: NCT03752866.

Outcomes after TAVI in patients with atrial fibrillation and a history of recent PCI: Results from the ENVISAGE-TAVI AF trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and a recent (≤ 90 days) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are at high bleeding risk due to the addition of oral antiplatelet (OAP) agents on top of oral anticoagulants. Data on outcomes of these patients are needed to optimize antithrombotic treatment. METHODS: This analysis compared annualized clinical event rates in patients with and without a recent PCI enrolled in ENVISAGE-TAVI AF, a prospective, randomized, open-label, adjudicator-masked trial comparing edoxaban and vitamin K antagonists in AF patients after TAVI. The primary efficacy and safety outcomes were net adverse clinical events (NACE) and major bleeding. RESULTS: Overall, 132 (94.3%) patients with a recent PCI (n = 140) received OAP after TAVI, compared with 692 (55.9%) patients without a recent PCI (n = 1237). Among patients with a recent PCI on OAP agents, use of dual antiplatelet therapy decreased to 5.5%, and use of single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) increased to 78.0% over 3 months post-randomization. Conversely, use of SAPT predominated at all time points in patients without a recent PCI history. There were no significant differences in the incidence of NACE or other outcomes assessed, except for major bleeding events, which were more frequent in patients with vs without a recent PCI history (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]: 2.17 [1.27, 3.73]; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with AF undergoing TAVI with a recent PCI have a similar risk of ischemic events and mortality, but an increased risk of major bleeding compared with patients without a recent PCI.

Outcomes and performance of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in clinical practice: one-yearresults of the ACURATE neo2 PMCF Study.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an effective treatment for patients with aortic stenosis; however, complications related to paravalvular leakage (PVL) persist, including increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and rehospitalisation. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes and valve performance at 1 year in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the ACURATE neo2 valve in a post-market clinical setting. METHODS: Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 safety events were assessed up to 1 year. Independent core laboratories evaluated echocardiographic measures of valve performance and hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT; as measured by four-dimensional computed tomography). RESULTS: The study enrolled 250 patients (64% female; mean age: 81 years; baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 patients were implanted with ACURATE neo2. All-cause mortality was 0.8% at 30 days and 5.1% at 1 year. The 1-year rates for stroke and disabling stroke were 3.0% and 1.3%, respectively. Overall, HALT of >50% leaflet involvement of at least one leaflet was present in 9% of patients at 30 days and in 12% of patients at 1 year. No association was observed between the presence of HALT and 1-year clinical or haemodynamic outcomes. Early haemodynamic improvements were maintained up to 1 year (mean aortic valve gradient: 47.6±14.5 mmHg at baseline, 7.6±3.2 mmHg at 1 year; mean aortic valve area: 0.7±0.2 cm2 at baseline, 1.7±0.4 cm2 at 1 year). At 1 year, 99% of patients had mild or no/trace PVL (<1% had moderate PVL; no patient had severe PVL). CONCLUSIONS: The study outcomes confirm favourable performance and safety up to 1 year in patients treated with ACURATE neo2 in routine clinical practice. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04655248).

Comparison of contemporary transcatheter heart valve prostheses: data from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY).

BACKGROUND: Various second-generation transcatheter heart valve (THV) prostheses with high clinical efficacy and safety are available, but there is limited large-scale data available comparing their hemodynamic performance and clinical implications. OBJECTIVE: To compare the hemodynamic performance and short-term clinical outcome of four second-generation THV prostheses. METHODS: 24,124 patients out of the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (Evolut™ R n = 7028, Acurate neo™ n = 2922, Portico n = 878 and Sapien 3 n = 13,296) were included in this analysis. Propensity-score weighted analysis was performed to control for differences in age, left ventricular function, STS score and sex. Primary endpoint was survival at one-year, secondary endpoints were 30 days survival, pre-discharge transvalvular gradients, paravalvular leakage and peri-procedural complications. RESULTS: Thirty-day and one-year survival were not significantly different between the four patient groups. Transvalvular gradients in Evolut™ R and Acurate neo™ were significantly lower as compared to Portico and Sapien 3 at hospital discharge. This difference exists across all annulus sizes. Paravalvular leakage ≥ II occurred significantly less often in the Sapien 3 group (1.2%, p < 0.0001). Rate of severe procedural complications was low and comparable in all groups. Permanent pacemaker implantation rate at one year was lowest in the ACUARATE neo group (13.0%) and highest in the Evolut™ R group (21.9%). CONCLUSION: Albeit comparable short-term clinical outcomes there are certain differences regarding hemodynamic performance and permanent pacemaker implantation rate between currently available THV prostheses which should be considered for individual prosthesis selection.

Aortic Valve Repair Results in Better 1-Year Survival Than Replacement: Results From German Aortic Valve Registry.

BACKGROUND: Aortic valve (AV) repair is an evolving surgical strategy in the treatment of nonelderly adults with aortic regurgitation. We aimed to determine the 1-year outcome after AV repair vs surgical AV replacement (sAVR) using real-world data from the German Aortic Valve Registry. METHODS: A total of 8076 aortic regurgitation patients (mean age, 59.1 ± 15.0 years; 76% men; mean The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, 1.3 ± 1.1), who underwent AV surgical procedures between 2011 and 2015, were identified from German Aortic Valve Registry. The AV was repaired in 2327 patients (29%), and the remaining 5749 patients (71%) underwent sAVR. A weighted propensity score model, including the variables of age, sex, and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, was used to correct for baseline differences between AV repair and sAVR cohorts. The primary end point was 1-year survival after AV repair vs sAVR. Secondary end points were freedom from cardiac events and AV reinterventions. RESULTS: Survival at 1 year was 97.7% (95% CI, 97.0%-98.5%) in the AV repair cohort vs 96.4% (95% CI, 95.9%-96.9%) in the propensity score-weighted sAVR cohort (log-rank P < .001). Cox regression revealed a significant advantage of AV repair vs sAVR (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.51-0.90; P < .0001) on 1-year survival, which was independent of age. Cardiac event-free survival at 1 year was 85.7% (95% CI, 483.8%-87.7%) in the AV repair group vs 81.7% (95% CI, 80.7%-82.9%) in the sAVR group (log-rank P < .001). AV reintervention was required in 38 AV repair patients (1.6%) compared with 1.6% in the sAVR cohort (P = .59). CONCLUSIONS: AV repair surgery, whenever intraoperatively feasible, is associated with a significantly better 1-year survival and 1-year cardiac event-free survival compared with sAVR.

One-Year Outcomes According to Mitral Regurgitation Etiology Following Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair With the PASCAL System: Results From a Multicenter Registry.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported procedural and 30-day outcomes of a German early multicenter experience with the PASCAL system for severe mitral regurgitation (MR). This study reports 1-year outcomes of mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair with the PASCAL system according to MR etiology in a large all-comer cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes up to 1-year were investigated according to MR etiology (degenerative [DMR], functional [FMR], or mixed [MMR]) in the first 282 patients with symptomatic MR 3+/4+ treated with the PASCAL implant at 9 centers in 2019. A total of 282 patients were included (33% DMR, 50% FMR, 17% MMR). At discharge, MR reduction to ≤1+/2+ was achieved in 58%/87% of DMR, in 75%/97% of FMR, and in 78%/98% of patients with MMR (P=0.004). MR reduction to ≤1+/2+ was sustained at 30 days (50%/83% DMR, 67%/97% FMR, 74%/100% MMR) and at 1 year (53%/78% DMR, 75%/97% FMR, 67%/91% MMR) with significant differences between etiologies. DMR patients with residual MR 3+/4+ at 1-year had at least complex valve morphology in 91.7%. Valve-related reintervention was performed in 7.4% DMR, 0.7% FMR, and 0.0% MMR (P=0.010). At 1-year, New York Heart Association Functional Class was significantly improved irrespective of MR etiology (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large all-comer cohort, mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair with the PASCAL system was associated with an acute and sustained MR reduction at 1-year in all causes. However, in patients with DMR, MR reduction was less pronounced, reflecting the high incidence of complex or very complex anatomies being referred for mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair.

First randomised controlled trial comparing the sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with the zotarolimus-eluting drug-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: 12-month clinical and imaging data from the multi-centre, international, BIODAPTOR-RCT.

Background: The DynamX™ bioadaptor is the first coronary implant technology with a unique mechanism of unlocking the bioadaptor frame after polymer resorption over 6 months, uncaging the vessel while maintaining a dynamic support to the vessel. It aims to achieve the acute performance of drug-eluting stents (DES) with the advantages of restoration of vessel function. Methods: This international, single blinded, randomised controlled (1:1) trial compared a sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with a contemporary zotarolimus-eluting stent (DES) in 34 hospitals in Europe, Japan and New Zealand. Patients with de novo coronary lesions and absence of acute myocardial infarction were enrolled from January 2021 to Feburary 2022. The implantation of the bioadaptor followed the standards of DES. An imaging subset of 100 patients had angiographic and intravascular ultrasound assessments, and 20 patients additionally optical coherence tomography. Data collection will continue through 5 years, we herein report 12-month data based on an intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04192747). Findings: 445 patients were randomised between January 2021 and February 2022. Device, lesion and procedural success rates, and acute gain were similar amongst the groups. The primary endpoint, 12-month target lesion failure, was 1.8% [95% CI: 0.5; 4.6] (n = 4) versus 2.8% [95% CI: 1.0; 6.0] (n = 6), pnon-inferiority < 0.001 for the bioadaptor and the DES, respectively (Δ-1.0% [95% CI: -3.3; 1.4]). One definite or probable device thrombosis occurred in each group. The 12-month imaging endpoints showed superior effectiveness of the bioadaptor such as in-device late lumen loss (0.09 mm [SD 0.34] versus 0.25 mm [SD 0.39], p = 0.04), and restored compliance and cyclic pulsatility (%mid in-device lumen area change of 7.5% versus 2.7%, p < 0.001). Interpretation: This is the first randomised controlled trial comparing the novel bioadaptor technology against a contemporary DES. The bioadaptor demonstrated similar acute performance and 12-month clinical outcomes, and superior imaging endpoints including restoration of vessel function. Funding: The study was funded by Elixir Medical.

Edoxaban in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation after percutaneous coronary intervention: ENCOURAGE-AF design.

Approximately one fifth of patients diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergo a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Current guidelines recommend different combinations and durations of triple or dual antithrombotic therapy for these patients but data on the implementation of these recommendations in clinical routine are scarce. ENCOURAGE-AF is a prospective, non-interventional, non-comparative, multicentre study. Approximately 720 patients will be consecutively enrolled from 70 participating sites across Germany. Patients with non-valvular AF treated with edoxaban, who have undergone successful PCI, have no planned elective cardiac intervention during the study period, have capability, availability, and willingness for follow-up by telephone interview during the study, are aged ≥ 18 years with life expectancy ≥ 1 year, and provide written informed consent, will be included. Eligible patients will be enrolled between 4- and 72-h after completing a successful PCI. Duration of exposure to and dosing regimens of edoxaban, antiplatelet agents and other concomitant medications of interest will be monitored in line with the clinical practice. Physician- and patient-reported clinical events, adverse drug reactions, patient quality of life (EQ-5D-5L) and health resource utilisation (HRU) parameters will be evaluated at 30 days and 1-year post-PCI. The ENCOURAGE-AF non-interventional study will provide insights into the patterns of edoxaban usage in combination with antiplatelet treatment and other concomitant medications in AF patients with a successful PCI over a 1-year time period during routine clinical practice in Germany. The effectiveness and safety of edoxaban in this patient population, as well as patients' quality of life and HRU will be evaluated.Trial registration: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT04519944, registered on 20 August 2020.

Transcatheter interventions for left-sided valvular heart disease complicated by cardiogenic shock: a consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC) and the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery.

Valvular heart disease (VHD) is one of the most frequent causes of heart failure (HF) and is associated with poor prognosis, particularly among patients with conservative management. The development and improvement of catheter-based VHD interventions have broadened the indications for transcatheter valve interventions from inoperable/high-risk patients to younger/lower-risk patients. Cardiogenic shock (CS) associated with severe VHD is a clinical condition with a very high risk of mortality for which surgical treatment is often deemed a prohibitive risk. Transcatheter valve interventions might be a promising alternative in this setting given that they are less invasive. However, supportive scientific evidence is scarce and often limited to small case series. Current guidelines on VHD do not contain specific recommendations on how to manage patients with both VHD and CS. The purpose of this clinical consensus statement, developed by a group of international experts invited by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) Scientific Documents and Initiatives Committee, is to perform a review of the available scientific evidence on the management of CS associated with left-sided VHD and to provide a rationale and practical approach for the application of transcatheter valve interventions in this specific clinical setting.

Final 3-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial Comparing a Self-Expanding to a Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve.

BACKGROUND: In the SCOPE I trial (Safety and Efficacy of the Symetis ACURATE Neo/TF Compared to the Edwards SAPIEN 3 Bioprosthesis), transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding ACURATE neo (NEO) did not meet noninferiority compared with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) device regarding a composite end point at 30 days due to higher rates of prosthetic valve regurgitation and acute kidney injury. Data on long-term durability of NEO are scarce. Here, we report whether early differences between NEO and S3 translate into differences in clinical outcomes or bioprosthetic valve failure 3 years after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis were randomized to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation with NEO or S3 at 20 European centers. Clinical outcomes at 3 years are compared using Cox proportional or Fine-Gray subdistribution hazard models by intention-to-treat. Bioprosthetic valve failure is reported for the valve-implant cohort. RESULTS: Among 739 patients, 84 of 372 patients (24.3%) had died in the NEO and 85 of 367 (25%) in the S3 group at 3 years. Comparing NEO with S3, the 3-year rates of all-cause death (hazard ratio, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.73-1.33]), stroke (subhazard ratio, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.56-1.92]), and hospitalization for congestive heart failure (subhazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.51-1.07]) were similar between the groups. Aortic valve reinterventions were required in 4 NEO and 3 S3 patients (subhazard ratio, 1.32 [95% CI, 0.30-5.85]). New York Heart Association functional class ≤II was observed in 84% (NEO) and 85% (S3), respectively. Mean gradients remained lower after NEO at 3 years (8 versus 12 mm Hg; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Early differences between NEO and S3 did not translate into significant differences in clinical outcomes or bioprosthetic valve failure throughout 3 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT03011346.

Direct oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonist after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

OBJECTIVE: After transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), the optimal regimen of anticoagulant therapy in patients with an additional indication for oral anticoagulation remains a matter of debate. This study investigates the efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients after TAVI in a real-world population. METHODS: The German Aortic Valve RegistrY (GARY) is a prospective, multicentre registry enrolling patients undergoing invasive treatment for aortic valve disease. From January 2011 to December 2019, 1 41 790 patients from 92 hospitals in Germany were enrolled. Anticoagulatory treatment regimens were assessed at hospital discharge for patients after TAVI procedures. All-cause mortality and the combined endpoint 'cardiac and cerebrovascular events' containing myocardial infarction, stroke, transient ischaemic attack, aortic prosthesis reintervention and all-cause mortality in the first year after TAVI were examined by treatment regimen. RESULTS: Of 45 598 patients (mean age 80.7±5.7 years, 49.3% males) undergoing TAVI, 16 974 patients (37.2%) received an anticoagulant regimen that included VKA or DOAC. Hereof, the majority of patients were prescribed VKA (n=11 333, 66.8%) compared with DOAC (n=5641, 33.2%) with an increase of DOAC use from 9.4% in 2011 to 69.9% in 2019. During the 1-year follow-up, the absolute event rates per 100 person-years for all-cause mortality and the combined endpoint cardiac and cerebrovascular events were 1.9 and 1.3 for VKA-treated and 1.7 and 1.2 for DOAC-treated patients, respectively. After adjustment for baseline confounders, all-cause mortality (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, p=0.114) and cardiac and cerebrovascular event-free survival (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01, p=0.071) did not differ significantly between VKA and DOAC groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports evidence of the efficacy of DOAC use after TAVI in patients with an indication for oral anticoagulation.

Development and validation of explainable machine learning models for risk of mortality in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: TAVI risk machine scores.

Aims: Identification of high-risk patients and individualized decision support based on objective criteria for rapid discharge after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are key requirements in the context of contemporary TAVI treatment. This study aimed to predict 30-day mortality following TAVI based on machine learning (ML) using data from the German Aortic Valve Registry. Methods and results: Mortality risk was determined using a random forest ML model that was condensed in the newly developed TAVI Risk Machine (TRIM) scores, designed to represent clinically meaningful risk modelling before (TRIMpre) and in particular after (TRIMpost) TAVI. Algorithm was trained and cross-validated on data of 22 283 patients (729 died within 30 days post-TAVI) and generalisation was examined on data of 5864 patients (146 died). TRIMpost demonstrated significantly better performance than traditional scores [C-statistics value, 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI)] [0.74; 0.83] compared to Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) with C-statistics value 0.69; 95%-CI [0.65; 0.74]). An abridged (aTRIMpost) score comprising 25 features (calculated using a web interface) exhibited significantly higher performance than traditional scores (C-statistics value, 0.74; 95%-CI [0.70; 0.78]). Validation on external data of 6693 patients (205 died within 30 days post-TAVI) of the Swiss TAVI Registry confirmed significantly better performance for the TRIMpost (C-statistics value 0.75, 95%-CI [0.72; 0.79]) compared to STS (C-statistics value 0.67, CI [0.63; 0.70]). Conclusion: TRIM scores demonstrate good performance for risk estimation before and after TAVI. Together with clinical judgement, they may support standardised and objective decision-making before and after TAVI.