Interatrial shunt therapy in advanced heart failure: Outcomes from the open-label cohort of the RELIEVE-HF trial.

AIMS: Heart failure (HF) outcomes remain poor despite optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). We assessed safety, effectiveness, and transthoracic echocardiographic (TTE) outcomes during the 12 months after Ventura shunt implantation in the RELIEVE-HF open-label roll-in cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: Eligibility required symptomatic HF despite optimal GDMT with ≥1 HF hospitalization in the prior year or elevated natriuretic peptides. The safety endpoint was device-related major adverse cardiovascular or neurological events at 30 days, compared to a prespecified performance goal. Effectiveness evaluations included the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) at baseline, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months and TTE at baseline and 12 months. Overall, 97 patients were enrolled and implanted at 64 sites. Average age was 70 ± 11 years, 97% were in New York Heart Association class III, and half had left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%. The safety endpoint was achieved (event rate 0%, p < 0.001). KCCQ overall summary score was improved by 12-16 points at all follow-up timepoints (all p < 0.004), with similar outcomes in patients with reduced and preserved LVEF. At 12 months, left ventricular end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes were reduced (p = 0.020 and p = 0.038, respectively), LVEF improved (p = 0.009), right ventricular end-systolic and end-diastolic areas were reduced (p = 0.001 and p = 0.030, respectively), and right ventricular fractional area change (p < 0.001) and tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (p < 0.001) improved. CONCLUSION: Interatrial shunting with the Ventura device was safe and resulted in favourable clinical effects in patients with HF, regardless of LVEF. Improvements of left and right ventricular structure and function were consistent with reverse myocardial remodelling. These results would support the potential of this shunt device as a treatment for HF.

Hemodynamic performance of self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement systems during valve deployment.

OBJECTIVES: Little is known about valve hemodynamic performance during the Evolut and Neo deployment course. We aimed to evaluate transvalvular mean and peak-to-peak gradients over several intraprocedural timepoints during TAVR with Evolut PRO+ (Medtronic) and Neo (Boston Scientific) systems. METHODS: This was single-center pilot sub-study from the SavvyWire EFficacy and SafEty in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Procedures (SAFE-TAVI) trial. Participants received either the Evolut PRO+ or Neo for native valve severe aortic stenosis and the SavvyWire (OpSens Medical) was used for device delivery, pacing, and continuous left ventricular and aortic pressure measurements. For the Evolut, evaluation was done for baseline, two-thirds of valve deployment (still recapturable), 90% of valve deployment (no longer recapturable), and post-deployment hemodynamics. For the Neo, analysis was done at baseline, after the first step (top-crown deployment), and at final status. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were included (Evolut = 15; Neo = 4). There were no statistically significant changes in peak-to-peak gradients (44 mm Hg [IQR:33-69] vs 43 mm Hg [IQR:26-62], P = .41) between baseline and two-thirds of valve deployment in the Evolut patients. There was a significant decrease in mean (40 mm Hg [IQR:32-54] vs 14 mm Hg [IQR:10-18], P less than .001) and peak-to-peak (43 mmHg [IQRS:26-62] vs 9 mm Hg [IQR:8-13], P less than .001) transvalvular gradients between two-thirds and 90% of valve deployment for Evolut. Neo patients exhibited a decrease in transvalvular gradients after top-crown deployment (42.5 mm Hg baseline vs 13 mm Hg). CONCLUSIONS: Transvalvular gradients did not vary between the point of "no-recapture" compared to baseline values in patients receiving the Evolut, whereas a significant reduction in transvalvular gradients was observed when the valve was deployed at 90% and fully deployed. The Neo valve was slightly obstructive after the first step of deployment.

Optimal oversizing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding Evolut valve system.

OBJECTIVES: Valve oversizing has been associated with reduced paravalvular leaks (PVL) and valve migration risk. However, no optimal cut-off oversizing value has been defined for the Evolut system (Medtronic). The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between the degree of oversizing and moderate-to-severe PVL and determine the optimal oversizing cut-off value. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter study that included 740 consecutive patients with multidetector computed tomography (CT) data. Valve size was selected according to manufacturer recommendations, with oversizing ranging from 10% to 30%. The primary endpoint was moderate-to-severe PVL. RESULTS: The median age was 84 years (79-87 years), with 58.4% women, and a median EuroSCORE II of 4.1% (2.4-7.3%). Moderate-to-severe PVL was observed in 7.0% of the patients. An inverse relationship was found between oversizing and both PVL (11.3%, 8.6%, 5.4%, and 2.7% for quartiles Q1 to Q4; P = .007) and the need for post-dilation (P = .016). The multivariable analysis showed an association between oversizing and PVL (OR: 0.915 for each 1%-increase, P = .002). The optimal oversizing cut-off value to predict PVL was 20%, and PVL was significantly higher in patients with oversizing less than 20% (10.5% vs.4.2%, P less than .001). There were no differences in major clinical events according to the degree of oversizing, and a higher oversizing did not translate into an increased risk of permanent pacemaker (18.4% vs18.3%, P = .976). CONCLUSIONS: In TAVR with the Evolut valve, a higher oversizing was associated with lower rates of moderate-to-severe PVL and a lower need for post-dilation, with no negative impact on procedural and early clinical outcomes. A 20% oversizing threshold could be suggested to reduce PVLs. Further prospective studies are warranted to validate optimal oversizing for this valve system.

Leaflet Mechanical Stress in Different Designs and Generations of Transcatheter Aortic Valves: An in Vitro Study.

Background: It is unknown whether bioprostheses used for transcatheter aortic valve implantation will have similar long-term durability as those used for surgical aortic valve replacement. Repetitive mechanical stress applied to the valve leaflets, particularly during diastole, is the main determinant of structural valve deterioration. Leaflet mechanical stress cannot be measured in vivo. The objective of this in vitro/in silico study was thus to compare the magnitude and regional distribution of leaflet mechanical stress in old vs new generations of self-expanding (SE) vs balloon expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs). Methods: A double activation simulator was used for in vitro testing of two generations of SE THV (Medtronic CoreValve 26 mm and EVOLUT PRO 26 mm) and two generations of BE THV (Edwards SAPIEN 23 mm vs SAPIEN-3 23 mm). These THVs were implanted within a 21-mm aortic annulus. A noncontact system based on stereophotogammetry and digital image correlation with high spatial and temporal resolution (2000 img/sec) was used to visualize the valve leaflet motion and perform the three-dimensional analysis. A finite element model of the valve was developed, and the leaflet deformation obtained from the digital image correlation analysis was applied to the finite element model to calculate local leaflet mechanical stress during diastole. Results: The maximum von Mises leaflet stress was higher in early vs new THV generation (p < 0.05) and in BE vs SE THV (p < 0.05): early generation BE: 2.48 vs SE: 1.40 MPa; new generation BE: 1.68 vs SE: 1.07 MPa. For both types of THV, the highest values of leaflet stress were primarily observed in the upper leaflet edge near the commissures and to a lesser extent in the mid-portion of the leaflet body, which is the area where structural leaflet deterioration most often occurs in vivo. Conclusions: The results of this in vitro/in silico study suggest that: i) Newer generations of THVs have ∼30% lower leaflet mechanical stress than the early generations; ii) For a given generation, SE THVs have lower leaflet mechanical stress than BE THVs. Further studies are needed to determine if these differences between new vs early THV generations and between SE vs BE THVs will translate into significant differences in long-term valve durability in vivo.

Sensor-guided transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

OBJECTIVES: The SavvyWire(OpSens Medical) is a support wire for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures that, in addition to its dedicated left ventricle (LV) pacing capabilities, has a distal pressure sensor that measures live transvalvular hemodynamics during the procedure. We aimed to determine the safety, efficacy, and functionality of the SavvyWire during TAVR procedures in an all-comer population. METHODS: We performed a multicentric, prospective, observational, single-arm, all-comers registry of patients with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR in 3 Canadian centers. Data were collected in a dedicated database, and pre-specified questionnaires were fulfilled by the heart team implanters after each procedure. RESULTS: A total of 60 patients were included (mean age: 78.6 ± 7.2 years; 51% women; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score: 2.2 ± 1.6%). TAVR was performed through a transfemoral approach in 90% of cases, and balloon- and self-expandable valves were used in 73% and 27% of patients, respectively. There were no cases of LV perforation, guidewire deformation, significant loss of capture, or major software malfunction. The rate of successful delivery of the TAVR system was 100%, and effective LV pacing was achieved in 98% of patients. The pre-TAVR mean gradient was 39 ± 14 mm Hg while the final post-TAVR gradient was 8 ± 5 mm Hg; the mean aortic systolic pressure during rapid pacing was 54 ± 12 mm Hg. In 97% of the TAVR procedures, SavvyWire's functionality was reported to be better or similar to other TAVR workhorse support wires. CONCLUSIONS: SavvyWire was safe, effective, and functional for live transvalvular hemodynamic evaluation and rapid pacing during TAVR procedures. More studies with larger sample sizes and comparison against different wires and gradient measurement methods are warranted.

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.

Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease: Classifications, Treatments, and Emerging Transcatheter Paradigms.

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is a common congenital valvular malformation, which may lead to early aortic valve disease and bicuspid-associated aortopathy. A novel BAV classification system was recently proposed to coincide with transcatheter aortic valve replacement being increasingly considered in younger patients with symptomatic BAV, with good clinical results, yet without randomized trial evidence. Procedural technique, along with clinical outcomes, have considerably improved in BAV patients compared with tricuspid aortic stenosis patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. The present review summarizes the novel BAV classification systems and examines contemporary surgical and transcatheter approaches.

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.

Aortic Stenosis With Coronary Artery Disease: SAVR or TAVR-When and How?

The growing number of candidates for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has increased the interest in the concomitant presence of coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), prompting the need to define the appropriate revascularization strategy for each case. The reported prevalence of concurrent AS and CAD has varied over the years on the basis of the CAD definition and the population evaluated. Revascularization for treating CAD in patients with severe AS involves additional interventions that could impact outcomes. The addition of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has demonstrated favourable effects on long-term prognosis, while the impact of adding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to TAVR may depend on the CAD complexity and the feasibility of achieving complete or reasonably incomplete revascularization. Furthermore, the comparison between SAVR+CABG and TAVR+PCI in low-intermediate surgical risk and low-intermediate complex CAD patients did not reveal differences in all-cause mortality or stroke between the groups. However, there is some evidence showing a lower incidence of major cardiovascular events with the SAVR+CABG strategy for patients with complex CAD. Thus, SAVR+CABG seems to be the best option for patients with low-intermediate surgical risk and complex CAD, and TAVR+PCI for high surgical risk patients seeking complete and/or reasonable incomplete revascularization. After deciding between TAVR+PCI or SAVR+CABG, factors such as timing for PCI, low ejection fraction, coronary reaccess, and valve durability must be considered. Finally, alternative methods for assessing CAD severity are currently under evaluation to ascertain their real value for guiding revascularization in patients with severe AS with CAD.

Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Scarce data are available comparing infective endocarditis (IE) following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This study aimed to compare the clinical presentation, microbiological profile, management, and outcomes of IE after SAVR versus TAVR. METHODS: Data were collected from the "Infectious Endocarditis after TAVR International" (enrollment from 2005 to 2020) and the "International Collaboration on Endocarditis" (enrollment from 2000 to 2012) registries. Only patients with an IE affecting the aortic valve prosthesis were included. A 1:1 paired matching approach was used to compare patients with TAVR and SAVR. RESULTS: A total of 1688 patients were included. Of them, 602 (35.7%) had a surgical bioprosthesis (SB), 666 (39.5%) a mechanical prosthesis, 70 (4.2%) a homograft, and 350 (20.7%) a transcatheter heart valve. In the SAVR versus TAVR matched population, the rate of new moderate or severe aortic regurgitation was higher in the SB group (43.4% vs 13.5%; P < .001), and fewer vegetations were diagnosed in the SB group (62.5% vs 82%; P < .001). Patients with an SB had a higher rate of perivalvular extension (47.9% vs 27%; P < .001) and Staphylococcus aureus was less common in this group (13.4% vs 22%; P = .033). Despite a higher rate of surgery in patients with SB (44.4% vs 27.3%; P < .001), 1-year mortality was similar (SB: 46.5%; TAVR: 44.8%; log-rank P = .697). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical presentation, type of causative microorganism, and treatment differed between patients with an IE located on SB compared with TAVR. Despite these differences, both groups exhibited high and similar mortality at 1-year follow-up.

Long-Term Survival and Quality of Life Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Nonagenarians.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a successful treatment option for severe aortic stenosis. However, the long-term outcomes of TAVR in nonagenarians is lacking. We aimed to examine the long-term mortality and quality of life in nonagenarians after TAVR. This is a multicenter, retrospective analysis on patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR. Patients were divided into 2 groups: nonagenarians (age ≥90 years) and age <90 years. The Kansas City cardiomyopathy questionnaire (KCCQ) and New York Heart Association (NYHA) scores were compared before and after TAVR. All-cause mortality was compared between both groups at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years after TAVR using the Cox proportional hazard model. A total of 6,896 patients were included, of whom 591 were nonagenarians. Nonagenarians had a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons perioperative risk of mortality (8.1 ± 4.6% vs 5.4 ± 4.2%, p <0.001) before TAVR. Both groups were similar in KCCQ and NYHA scores at baseline. At 1 year after TAVR, there was no significant difference in improvement in the KCCQ overall score between those aged <90 years and nonagenarians (-4.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] -11.4 to 1.9, p = 0.161). Similarly, there was no statistically significant difference in improvement in NYHA class between the 2 groups at 1 year (odds ratio 1.07, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25), p = 0.526). The unadjusted 30-day (3.2% vs 2.7%, hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.80, p = 0.667) and 5-year (28.0% vs 26.6%, hazard ratio 1.05, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.24, p = 0.60) all-cause mortality were similar between the 2 groups. In conclusion, this study demonstrates an excellent long-term mortality rate at 5 years after TAVR in nonagenarians, comparable to patients younger than 90 years. There is a significant and enduring improvement in functional status in nonagenarians, observed up to 1 year after TAVR.

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.

Impact of periprocedural myocardial injury after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on long-term mortality: a meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier derived individual patient data.

Background: Periprocedural myocardial injury (PPMI) frequently occurs after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), although its impact on long-term mortality is uncertain. Methods: We performed a pooled analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data to compare survival in patients with and without PPMI after TAVI. Flexible parametric models with B-splines and landmark analyses were used to determine PPMI prognostic value. Subgroup analyses for VARC-2, troponin, and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB)-defined PPMI were also performed. Results: Eighteen observational studies comprising 10,094 subjects were included. PPMI was associated with lower overall survival (OS) after two years (HR = 1.46, 95% CI 1.30-1.65, p < 0.01). This was also observed when restricting the analysis to overall VARC-2-defined PPMI (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.07-1.40, p < 0.01). For VARC-2 PPMI criteria and VARC-2 troponin-only, higher mortality was restricted to the first 2 months after TAVI (HR = 1.64, 95% CI 1.31-2.07, p < 0.01; and HR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.05-1.67, p = 0.02, respectively), while for VARC-2 defined CK-MB-only the increase in mortality was confined to the first 30 days (HR = 7.44, 95% CI 4.76-11.66, p < 0.01). Conclusion: PPMI following TAVI was associated with lower overall survival compared with patients without PPMI. PPMI prognostic impact is restricted to the initial months after the procedure. The analyses were consistent for VARC-2 criteria and for both biomarkers, yet CK-MB was a stronger prognostic marker of mortality than troponin.

Transfemoral tricuspid valve replacement and one-year outcomes: the TRISCEND study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: For patients with symptomatic, severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR), early results of transcatheter tricuspid valve (TV) intervention studies have shown significant improvements in functional status and quality of life associated with right-heart reverse remodelling. Longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm sustained improvements in these outcomes. METHODS: The prospective, single-arm, multicentre TRISCEND study enrolled 176 patients to evaluate the safety and performance of transcatheter TV replacement in patients with ≥moderate, symptomatic TR despite medical therapy. Major adverse events, reduction in TR grade and haemodynamic outcomes by echocardiography, and clinical, functional, and quality-of-life parameters are reported to one year. RESULTS: Enrolled patients were 71.0% female, mean age 78.7 years, 88.0% ≥ severe TR, and 75.4% New York Heart Association classes III-IV. Tricuspid regurgitation was reduced to ≤mild in 97.6% (P < .001), with increases in stroke volume (10.5 ± 16.8 mL, P < .001) and cardiac output (0.6 ± 1.2 L/min, P < .001). New York Heart Association class I or II was achieved in 93.3% (P < .001), Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score increased by 25.7 points (P < .001), and six-minute walk distance increased by 56.2 m (P < .001). All-cause mortality was 9.1%, and 10.2% of patients were hospitalized for heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: In an elderly, highly comorbid population with ≥moderate TR, patients receiving transfemoral EVOQUE transcatheter TV replacement had sustained TR reduction, significant increases in stroke volume and cardiac output, and high survival and low hospitalization rates with improved clinical, functional, and quality-of-life outcomes to one year. Funded by Edwards Lifesciences, TRISCEND ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04221490.

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).

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

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

Managing the challenge of a small aortic annulus in patients with severe aortic stenosis.

INTRODUCTION: Small aortic annulus (SAA) poses a challenge in the management of patients with severe aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve replacement - both surgical and transcatheter - since it has been associated with worse clinical outcomes. AREAS COVERED: This review aims to comprehensively summarize the available evidence regarding the management of aortic stenosis in patients with SAA and discuss the current controversies as well as future perspectives in this field. EXPERT OPINION: It is paramount to agree in a common definition for diagnosing and properly treating SAA patients, and for that purpose, multidetector computer tomography is essential. The results of recent trials led to the expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement among patients of all the surgical-risk spectrum, and the choice of treatment (transcatheter, surgical) should be based on patient comorbidities, anatomical characteristics, and patient preferences.