Outcomes and predictors of left ventricle recovery in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Data on the likelihood of left ventricle (LV) recovery in patients with severe LV dysfunction and severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and its prognostic value are limited. AIMS: We aimed to assess the likelihood of LV recovery following TAVI, examine its association with midterm mortality, and identify independent predictors of LV function. METHODS: In our multicentre registry of 17 TAVI centres in Western Europe and Israel, patients were stratified by baseline LV function (ejection fraction [EF] >/≤30%) and LV response: no LV recovery, LV recovery (EF increase ≥10%), and LV normalisation (EF ≥50% post-TAVI). RESULTS: Our analysis included 10,872 patients; baseline EF was ≤30% in 914 (8.4%) patients and >30% in 9,958 (91.6%) patients. The LV recovered in 544 (59.5%) patients, including 244 (26.7%) patients whose LV function normalised completely (EF >50%). Three-year mortality for patients without severe LV dysfunction at baseline was 29.4%. Compared to this, no LV recovery was associated with a significant increase in mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.32; p<0.001). Patients with similar LV function post-TAVI had similar rates of 3-year mortality, regardless of their baseline LV function. Three variables were associated with a higher likelihood of LV recovery following TAVI: no previous myocardial infarction (MI), estimated glomerular filtration rate >60 mL/min, and mean aortic valve gradient (mAVG) (expressed either as a continuous variable or as a binary variable using the standard low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis [AS] definition). CONCLUSIONS: LV recovery following TAVI and the extent of this recovery are major determinants of midterm mortality in patients with severe AS and severe LV dysfunction undergoing TAVI. Patients with no previous MI and those with an mAVG >40 mmHg show the best results following TAVI, which are at least equivalent to those for patients without severe LV dysfunction. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04031274).

A streamlined pathway for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the BENCHMARK study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is significant potential to streamline the clinical pathway for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of implementing BENCHMARK best practices on the efficiency and safety of TAVI in 28 sites in 7 European countries. METHODS: This was a study of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI with balloon-expandable valves before and after implementation of BENCHMARK best practices. Principal objectives were to reduce hospital length of stay (LoS) and duration of intensive care stay. Secondary objective was to document patient safety. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and March 2023, 897 patients were documented prior to and 1491 patients after the implementation of BENCHMARK practices. Patient characteristics were consistent with a known older TAVI population and only minor differences. Mean LoS was reduced from 7.7 ± 7.0 to 5.8 ± 5.6 days (median 6 vs. 4 days; P < .001). Duration of intensive care was reduced from 1.8 to 1.3 days (median 1.1 vs. 0.9 days; P < .001). Adoption of peri-procedure best practices led to increased use of local anaesthesia (96.1% vs. 84.3%; P < .001) and decreased procedure (median 47 vs. 60 min; P < .001) and intervention times (85 vs. 95 min; P < .001). Thirty-day patient safety did not appear to be compromised with no differences in all-cause mortality (0.6% in both groups combined), stroke/transient ischaemic attack (1.4%), life-threatening bleeding (1.3%), stage 2/3 acute kidney injury (0.7%), and valve-related readmission (1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Broad implementation of BENCHMARK practices contributes to improving efficiency of TAVI pathway reducing LoS and costs without compromising patient safety.

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.

Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair in papillary muscle injury complicating acute myocardial infarction.

AIMS: Acute mitral regurgitation (MR) in the setting of myocardial infarction (MI) may be the result of papillary muscle rupture (PMR). This condition is associated with high morbidity and mortality. We aim to evaluate the feasibility of transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TEER) in this acute setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed data from the International Registry of MitraClip in Acute Mitral Regurgitation following acute Myocardial Infarction (IREMMI) of 30 centres in Europe, North America, and the middle east. We included patients with post-MI PMR treated with TEER as a salvage procedure, and we evaluated immediate and 30-day outcomes. Twenty-three patients were included in this analysis (9 patients suffered complete papillary muscle rupture, 9 partial and 5 chordal rupture). The patients' mean age was 68 ± 14 years. Patients were at high surgical risk with median EuroSCORE II 27% (IQR 16, 28) and 20 out of 23 (87% were in cardiogenic shock). All patients were treated with vasopressors, and 17 out of 23 patients required mechanical support. TEER procedure was performed on the median 6 days after the index MI date IQR (3, 11). Procedural success was achieved in 87% of patients. The grade of MR was significantly decreased after the procedure. MR reduction to 0 or 1 + was achieved in 13 patients (57%), to 2 + in 7 patients (30%), P < 0.01. V-Wave was reduced from 49 ± 8 mmHg to 26 ± 10 mmHg post-procedure, P < 0.01. Sixteen out of 23 patients (70%) were discharged from hospital and 5 of them required reintervention with surgical mitral valve replacement. No additional death at 1 year was documented. CONCLUSIONS: TEER is a feasible therapy in critically ill patients with PMR due to a recent MI. TEER may have a role as salvage treatment or bridge to surgery in this population.

Percutaneous Left Atrial Appendage Closure in Patients with Non-Valvular Atrial Fibrillation and End-Stage Renal Disease on Hemodialysis: A Case Series.

Non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in the general population, and its prevalence increases among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing hemodialysis. This population presents high risk of both hemorrhagic and thrombotic events, with little evidence regarding the use of oral anticoagulation treatment (OAT) and multiple complications arising from it; however, stroke prevention with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) is an alternative to be considered. We retrospectively describe the safety and efficacy of percutaneous LAAC in eight patients with NVAF and CKD on hemodialysis during a 12-month follow-up. The mean age was 78.8 years (range 64-86; SD ± 6.7), and seven patients were male. The mean CHA2DS2-VASC and HAS-BLED scores were high, 4.8 (SD ± 1.5) and 3.8 (SD ± 1.3), respectively. Seventy-five percent of the patients were referred for this intervention due to a history of major bleeding, with gastrointestinal bleeding being the most common type, while the remaining twenty-five percent of the patients were referred because of a high risk of bleeding. The percutaneous LAAC procedure was successfully completed in 100% of the patients, with complete exclusion of the appendage without complications or leaks exceeding 5 mm. There was one death not related to the procedure four days after the intervention. Among the other seven patients, no deaths, cardioembolic events or major bleeding were reported during the follow-up period. In our sample, percutaneous LAAC appears to be a safe and effective alternative to anticoagulation in patients with NVAF and CKD on hemodialysis.

TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multivessel or advanced coronary disease: The transcatheter valve and vessels trial (TCW trial): Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently present with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). In those, current guidelines recommend combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the preferred treatment option, although this surgical approach is associated with a high rate of clinical events. Combined transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with or without FFR have evolved as a valid alternative for cardiac surgery in patients with AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. To date, no dedicated trial has prospectively evaluated the outcomes of a percutaneous versus surgical treatment for patients with both severe AS and CAD. AIMS: To investigate whether fractional-flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI and TAVI is noninferior to combined CABG and SAVR for the treatment of severe AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. METHODS: The Transcatheter Valve and Vessels (TCW) trial (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03424941) is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, international trial. Patients ≥ 70 years with severe AS and multivessel (≥ 2 vessels) or advanced CAD, deemed feasible by the heart team for both; a full percutaneous or surgical treatment, will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either FFR-guided PCI followed by TAVI (intervention arm) vs. CABG and SAVR (control arm). The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, unscheduled clinically-driven target vessel revascularization, valve reintervention, and life threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year. The TCW trial is powered for noninferiority, and if met, superiority will be tested. Assuming a primary endpoint rate of 30% in the CABG-SAVR arm, with a significance level α of 5%, a noninferiority limit delta of 15% and a loss to follow-up of 2%, a total of 328 patients are needed to obtain a power of 90%. The primary endpoint analysis is performed on an intention-to-treat basis. SUMMARY: The TCW Trial is the first prospective randomized trial that will study if a less invasive percutaneous treatment for severe AS and concomitant advanced CAD (i.e., FFR-guided PCI-TAVI) is noninferior to the guidelines recommended approach (CABG-SAVR).

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Global TAVR Activity: The COVID-TAVI Study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic adversely affected health care systems. Patients in need of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are especially susceptible to treatment delays. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global TAVR activity. METHODS: This international registry reported monthly TAVR case volume in participating institutions prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic (January 2018 to December 2021). Hospital-level information on public vs private, urban vs rural, and TAVR volume was collected, as was country-level information on socioeconomic status, COVID-19 incidence, and governmental public health responses. RESULTS: We included 130 centers from 61 countries, including 65,980 TAVR procedures. The first and second pandemic waves were associated with a significant reduction of 15% (P < 0.001) and 7% (P < 0.001) in monthly TAVR case volume, respectively, compared with the prepandemic period. The third pandemic wave was not associated with reduced TAVR activity. A greater reduction in TAVR activity was observed in Africa (-52%; P = 0.001), Central-South America (-33%; P < 0.001), and Asia (-29%; P < 0.001). Private hospitals (P = 0.005), urban areas (P = 0.011), low-volume centers (P = 0.002), countries with lower development (P < 0.001) and economic status (P < 0.001), higher COVID-19 incidence (P < 0.001), and more stringent public health restrictions (P < 0.001) experienced a greater reduction in TAVR activity. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR procedural volume declined substantially during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in Africa, Central-South America, and Asia. National socioeconomic status, COVID-19 incidence, and public health responses were associated with treatment delays. This information should inform public health policy in case of future global health crises.

Comparison of Mid-Term Prognosis in Intermediate-to-Low-Risk Contemporary Population with Guidelines-Oriented Age Cutoff.

BACKGROUND: Current European guidelines support transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in intermediate-to-low-risk patients ≥75 years-old, but its prognostic relevance is unknown. METHODS: Intermediate-to-low-risk (The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score <8%) patients enrolled in the HORSE registry were included. We compared the populations aged under 75 with those over 75. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 2685 patients were included: 280 (8.6%) < 75 and 2405 ≥ 75 years. Through a mean follow-up of 437 ± 381 days, 198 (8.2%) and 23 (8.2%) patients died in the two arms without statistically significant differences (log-rank p = 0.925). At Cox regression analysis, age did not predict the occurrence of all-cause death, neither as a continuous variable (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.99-1.04, p = 0.294) nor dichotomizing according to the prespecified cutoff of 75 years (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.63-1.51, p = 0.924). Time-to-event ROC curves showed low accuracy of age to predict all-cause mortality (area under the curve of 0.54 for both 1-year and 2-year outcomes). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI has comparable benefits across age strata for intermediate-to-low-risk patients. The age cutoff suggested by the current guidelines is not predictive of the risk of adverse events during hospital stays or of all-cause mortality through a mid-term follow-up.

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.

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.

Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Small Aortic Annulus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus (SAA) remains to be determined. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic and clinical outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with a SAA. METHODS: This prospective multicenter international randomized trial was performed in 15 university hospitals. Participants were 151 patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (mean diameter <23 mm) randomized (1:1) to TAVR (n=77) versus SAVR (n=74). The primary outcome was impaired valve hemodynamics (ie, severe prosthesis patient mismatch or moderate-severe aortic regurgitation) at 60 days as evaluated by Doppler echocardiography and analyzed in a central echocardiography core laboratory. Clinical events were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 75.5±5.1 years, with 140 (93%) women, a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality of 2.50% (interquartile range, 1.67%-3.28%), and a median annulus diameter of 21.1 mm (interquartile range, 20.4-22.0 mm). There were no differences between groups in the rate of severe prosthesis patient mismatch (TAVR, 4 [5.6%]; SAVR, 7 [10.3%]; P=0.30) and moderate-severe aortic regurgitation (none in both groups). No differences were found between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 1 [1.3%]; SAVR, 1 [1.4%]; P=1.00) and stroke (TAVR, 0; SAVR, 2 [2.7%]; P=0.24) at 30 days. After a median follow-up of 2 (interquartile range, 1-4) years, there were no differences between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 7 [9.1%]; SAVR, 6 [8.1%]; P=0.89), stroke (TAVR, 3 [3.9%]; SAVR, 3 [4.1%]; P=0.95), and cardiac hospitalization (TAVR, 15 [19.5%]; SAVR, 15 [20.3%]; P=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (women in the majority), there was no evidence of superiority of contemporary TAVR versus SAVR in valve hemodynamic results. After a median follow-up of 2 years, there were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. These findings suggest that the 2 therapies represent a valid alternative for treating patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA, and treatment selection should likely be individualized according to baseline characteristics, additional anatomical risk factors, and patient preference. However, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the limited sample size leading to an underpowered study, and need to be confirmed in future larger studies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03383445.

TRI-SCORE and benefit of intervention in patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Benefit of tricuspid regurgitation (TR) correction and timing of intervention are unclear. This study aimed to compare survival rates after surgical or transcatheter intervention to conservative management according to a TR clinical stage as assessed using the TRI-SCORE. METHODS: A total of 2,413 patients with severe isolated functional TR were enrolled in TRIGISTRY (1217 conservatively managed, 551 isolated tricuspid valve surgery, and 645 transcatheter valve repair). The primary endpoint was survival at 2 years. RESULTS: The TRI-SCORE was low (≤3) in 32%, intermediate (4-5) in 33%, and high (≥6) in 35%. A successful correction was achieved in 97% and 65% of patients in the surgical and transcatheter groups, respectively. Survival rates decreased with the TRI-SCORE in the three treatment groups (all P < .0001). In the low TRI-SCORE category, survival rates were higher in the surgical and transcatheter groups than in the conservative management group (93%, 87%, and 79%, respectively, P = .0002). In the intermediate category, no significant difference between groups was observed overall (80%, 71%, and 71%, respectively, P = .13) but benefit of the intervention became significant when the analysis was restricted to patients with successful correction (80%, 81%, and 71%, respectively, P = .009). In the high TRI-SCORE category, survival was not different to conservative management in the surgical and successful repair group (61% and 68% vs 58%, P = .26 and P = .18 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Survival progressively decreased with the TRI-SCORE irrespective of treatment modality. Compared to conservative management, an early and successful surgical or transcatheter intervention improved 2-year survival in patients at low and, to a lower extent, intermediate TRI-SCORE, while no benefit was observed in the high TRI-SCORE category.

Catheter-directed therapy for acute pulmonary embolism: results of a multicenter national registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Catheter-directed therapy (CDT) for acute pulmonary embolism (PE) is an emerging therapy that combines heterogeneous techniques. The aim of the study was to provide a nationwide contemporary snapshot of clinical practice and CDT-related outcomes. METHODS: This Investigator-initiated multicenter registry aimed to include consecutive patients with intermediate-high risk (IHR) or high-risk (HR), acute PE eligible for CDT. The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital all-cause death. RESULTS: A total of 253 patients were included, of whom 93 (36.8%) had HR-PE, and 160 (63.2%) had IHR-PE with a mean age of 62.3±15.1 years. Local thrombolysis was performed in 70.8% and aspiration thrombectomy in 51.8%, with 23.3% of patients receiving both. However, aspiration thrombectomy was favored in the HR-PE cohort (80.6% vs 35%; P<.001). Only 51 patients (20.2%) underwent CDT with specific PE devices. The success rate for CDT was 90.9% (98.1% of IHR-PE patients vs 78.5% of HR-PE patients, P<.001). In-hospital mortality was 15.5%, and was highly concentrated in the HR-PE patients (37.6%) and significantly lower in IHR-PE patients (2.5%), P<.001. Long-term (24-month) mortality was 40.2% in HR-PE patients vs 8.2% in IHR-PE patients (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high success rate for CDT, in-hospital mortality in HR-PE is still high (37.6%) compared with very low IHR-PE mortality (2.5%).

Bicaval TricValve Implantation in Patients With Severe Symptomatic Tricuspid Regurgitation: 1-Year Follow-Up Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Several orthotopic transcatheter strategies have been developed to treat severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR); however, many patients are deemed unsuitable. Caval valve implantation with the TricValve system addresses this unmet need. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the impact of TricValve on systemic congestion and quality of life (QOL) at 1 year. METHODS: The TRICUS (Safety and Efficacy of the TricValve® Transcatheter Bicaval Valves System in the Superior and Inferior Vena Cava in Patients With Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation) and TRICUS EURO studies were prospective, nonblinded, nonrandomized, single-arm trials representing the early-in-man experience of the TricValve system in NYHA functional class III or IV severe TR patients, optimally medicated and ineligible for open heart surgery, with significant caval backflow. The primary endpoint was QOL metrics and functional status. The 1-year results of the combined cohort are described here. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were included. Mean age was 76.2 ± 7.5 years, 81.0% were women, and the TRISCORE (risk score model for isolated tricuspid valve surgery) was 5.3 ± 1.3. Clinical improvement at 1 year was achieved in 42 (95.5%) patients, measured by (at least 1 of) an increase in ≥15 points from baseline in 12-item Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score, improvement to NYHA functional class to I or II, or an increase ≥40 m in the 6-minute walk test. There were 3 (6.8%) deaths at 1-year follow-up (1 cardiovascular), and the heart failure rehospitalization rate was 29.5%. Stent fracture, conduction system disturbances, or clinically significant leaflet thrombosis were not detected. Abolished hepatic vein backflow was achieved and persisted in 63.8% of the patients, contributing towards a reduction in congestive symptoms, N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide levels (P = 0.032), and diuretic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Caval valve implantation with the TricValve system associated with meaningful 1-year clinical improvements in terms of QOL along with relatively low mortality rates. (TRICUS Study - Safety and Efficacy of the TricValve® Device; NCT03723239).

The Incidence, Impact, and Techniques of Commissural Alignment in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Review.

In current clinical practice, commissural alignment of the transcatheter heart valve (THV) during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is seldom achieved. Orientation of the THV within the aortic root and the subsequent influence upon leaflet haemodynamic function, coronary blood flow, and ease of access to the coronary ostia are gaining significant interest. Herein, we review the incidence and clinical implications of commissural misalignment in TAVI and offer thorough descriptions of how optimal alignment can be achieved with several different contemporary THV devices.

Current Usefulness of Transesophageal Echocardiography in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

This review article describes in depth the current usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography in patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Pre-intervention, 3D-transesophageal echocardiography allows us to accurately evaluate the aortic valve morphology and to measure the valve annulus, helping us to choose the appropriate size of the prosthesis, especially useful in cases where the computed tomography is not of adequate quality. Although it is not currently used routinely during the intervention, it remains essential in those cases of greater complexity, such as for patients with greater calcification and bicuspid valve, mechanical mitral prosthesis, and "valve in valve" procedures. Three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography is the best technique to detect and quantify paravalvular regurgitation, a fundamental aspect to decide whether immediate valve postdilation is needed. It also allows to detect early any immediate complications such as cardiac tamponade, aortic hematoma or dissection, migration of the prosthesis, malfunction of the prosthetic leaflets, or the appearance of segmental contractility disorders due to compromise of the coronary arteries ostium. Transesophageal echocardiography is also very useful in follow-up, to check the proper functioning of the prosthesis and to rule out complications such as thrombosis of the leaflets, endocarditis, or prosthetic degeneration.

Safety and Efficacy of TAVR With a Pressure Sensor and Pacing Guidewire: SAFE-TAVI Trial.

BACKGROUND: The SavvyWire (OpSens Inc) is a 0.035-inch preshaped guidewire with dedicated pacing properties and a distal pressure sensor allowing for continuous hemodynamic pressure monitoring. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the efficacy and safety of the guidewire during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter clinical study included patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR in 8 European centers. The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as effective left ventricular rapid pacing runs with the guidewire translating into a significant systemic pressure drop (below 60 mm Hg). The safety outcome included the absence of major procedural complications related to the guidewire. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients (mean age: 82.2 ± 5.9 years, 50% women) were included in the study, and 119 (98.3%) patients were finally treated with the study device. A balloon-expandable valve was implanted in 45 (37.8%) patients. Predilatation and postdilatation were performed in 89 (74.8%) and 14 (11.8%) patients, respectively. The primary efficacy endpoint was achieved in 116 (98.3%) patients, and the mean aortic systolic arterial pressure achieved during rapid pacing was 46.6 ± 11.3 mm Hg. Hemodynamic assessment with the use of the OptoMonitor 3 (OpSens Inc) without additional catheter exchange was achieved in 117 (99.2%) patients. The safety endpoint was achieved in 117 (99.2%) patients. No procedural mortality, stroke, or ventricular perforation was reported. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the guidewire during TAVR procedures appeared to be efficacious and safe. This device could help minimize interventions during the procedure and improve the clinical decision making after transcatheter heart valve deployment. (SavvyWire Efficacy and Safety in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedures [SAFE-TAVI]; NCT05492383).