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.).

Transcatheter Repair for Patients with Tricuspid Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Severe tricuspid regurgitation is a debilitating condition that is associated with substantial morbidity and often with poor quality of life. Decreasing tricuspid regurgitation may reduce symptoms and improve clinical outcomes in patients with this disease. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized trial of percutaneous tricuspid transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) for severe tricuspid regurgitation. Patients with symptomatic severe tricuspid regurgitation were enrolled at 65 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe and were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either TEER or medical therapy (control). The primary end point was a hierarchical composite that included death from any cause or tricuspid-valve surgery; hospitalization for heart failure; and an improvement in quality of life as measured with the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ), with an improvement defined as an increase of at least 15 points in the KCCQ score (range, 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) at the 1-year follow-up. The severity of tricuspid regurgitation and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 350 patients were enrolled; 175 were assigned to each group. The mean age of the patients was 78 years, and 54.9% were women. The results for the primary end point favored the TEER group (win ratio, 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.06 to 2.13; P = 0.02). The incidence of death or tricuspid-valve surgery and the rate of hospitalization for heart failure did not appear to differ between the groups. The KCCQ quality-of-life score changed by a mean (±SD) of 12.3±1.8 points in the TEER group, as compared with 0.6±1.8 points in the control group (P<0.001). At 30 days, 87.0% of the patients in the TEER group and 4.8% of those in the control group had tricuspid regurgitation of no greater than moderate severity (P<0.001). TEER was found to be safe; 98.3% of the patients who underwent the procedure were free from major adverse events at 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Tricuspid TEER was safe for patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation, reduced the severity of tricuspid regurgitation, and was associated with an improvement in quality of life. (Funded by Abbott; TRILUMINATE Pivotal ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03904147.).

Five-Year Follow-up after Transcatheter Repair of Secondary Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Data from a 5-year follow-up of outcomes after transcatheter edge-to-edge repair of severe mitral regurgitation, as compared with outcomes after maximal doses of guideline-directed medical therapy alone, in patients with heart failure are now available. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with heart failure and moderate-to-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite the use of maximal doses of guideline-directed medical therapy to undergo transcatheter edge-to-edge repair plus receive medical therapy (device group) or to receive medical therapy alone (control group) at 78 sites in the United States and Canada. The primary effectiveness end point was all hospitalizations for heart failure through 2 years of follow-up. The annualized rate of all hospitalizations for heart failure, all-cause mortality, the risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure, and safety, among other outcomes, were assessed through 5 years. RESULTS: Of the 614 patients enrolled in the trial, 302 were assigned to the device group and 312 to the control group. The annualized rate of hospitalization for heart failure through 5 years was 33.1% per year in the device group and 57.2% per year in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41 to 0.68). All-cause mortality through 5 years was 57.3% in the device group and 67.2% in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.89). Death or hospitalization for heart failure within 5 years occurred in 73.6% of the patients in the device group and in 91.5% of those in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.64). Device-specific safety events within 5 years occurred in 4 of 293 treated patients (1.4%), with all the events occurring within 30 days after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heart failure and moderate-to-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite guideline-directed medical therapy, transcatheter edge-to-edge repair of the mitral valve was safe and led to a lower rate of hospitalization for heart failure and lower all-cause mortality through 5 years of follow-up than medical therapy alone. (Funded by Abbott; COAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01626079.).

Concomitant Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Among Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and is associated with increased risk of bleeding and stroke. While left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) is approved as an alternative to anticoagulants for stroke prevention in patients with AF, placement of these devices in patients with severe aortic stenosis, or when performed at the same time as TAVR, has not been extensively studied. METHODS: WATCH-TAVR (WATCHMAN for Patients with AF Undergoing TAVR) was a multicenter, randomized trial evaluating the safety and effectiveness of concomitant TAVR and LAAO with WATCHMAN in AF patients. Patients were randomized 1:1 to TAVR + LAAO or TAVR + medical therapy. WATCHMAN patients received anticoagulation for 45 days followed by dual antiplatelet therapy until 6 months. Anticoagulation was per treating physician preference for patients randomized to TAVR + medical therapy. The primary noninferiority end point was all-cause mortality, stroke, and major bleeding at 2 years between the 2 strategies. RESULTS: The study enrolled 349 patients (177 TAVR + LAAO and 172 TAVR + medical therapy) between December 2017 and November 2020 at 34 US centers. The mean age of patients was 81 years, and the mean scores for CHA2DS2-VASc and HAS-BLED (Hypertension, Abnormal renal/liver function, Stroke, Bleeding history or predisposition, Labile INR, Elderly, Drugs/alcohol concomitantly) were 4.9 and 3.0, respectively. At baseline, 85.4% of patients were taking anticoagulants and 71.3% patients were on antiplatelet therapy. The cohorts were well-balanced for baseline characteristics. The incremental LAAO procedure time was 38 minutes, and the median contrast volume used for combined procedures was 119 mL versus 70 mL with TAVR alone. At the 24-month follow-up, 82.5% compared with 50.8% of patients were on any antiplatelet therapy, and 13.9% compared with 66.7% of patients were on any anticoagulation therapy in TAVR + LAAO compared with TAVR + medical therapy group, respectively. For the composite primary end point, TAVR + LAAO was noninferior to TAVR + medical therapy (22.7 versus 27.3 events per 100 patient-years for TAVR + LAAO and TAVR + medical therapy, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.60-1.22]; Pnoninferiority<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant WATCHMAN LAAO and TAVR is noninferior to TAVR with medical therapy in severe aortic stenosis patients with AF. The increased complexity and risks of the combined procedure should be considered when concomitant LAAO is viewed as an alternative to medical therapy for patients with AF undergoing TAVR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03173534.

Leaflet modification before transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients at risk for coronary obstruction: the ShortCut study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This trial sought to assess the safety and efficacy of ShortCut, the first dedicated leaflet modification device, prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients at risk for coronary artery obstruction. METHODS: This pivotal prospective study enrolled patients with failed bioprosthetic aortic valves scheduled to undergo TAVI and were at risk for coronary artery obstruction. The primary safety endpoint was procedure-related mortality or stroke at discharge or 7 days, and the primary efficacy endpoint was per-patient leaflet splitting success. Independent angiographic, echocardiographic, and computed tomography core laboratories assessed all images. Safety events were adjudicated by a clinical events committee and data safety monitoring board. RESULTS: Sixty eligible patients were treated (77.0 ± 9.6 years, 70% female, 96.7% failed surgical bioprosthetic valves, 63.3% single splitting and 36.7% dual splitting) at 22 clinical sites. Successful leaflet splitting was achieved in all (100%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 94-100.0%, p<0.001) patients. Procedure time, including imaging confirmation of leaflet splitting, was 30.6 ± 17.9 min. Freedom from the primary safety endpoint was achieved in 59 (98.3%; 95% CI [91.1-100%]) patients, with no mortality and one (1.7%) disabling stroke. At 30 days, freedom from coronary obstruction was 95% (95% CI 86.1-99.0%). Within 90 days, freedom from mortality was 95% (95% CI 86.1-99.0%]), without any cardiovascular deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Modification of failed bioprosthetic aortic valve leaflets using ShortCut was safe, achieved successful leaflet splitting in all patients, and was associated with favorable clinical outcomes in patients at risk for coronary obstruction undergoing TAVI.

Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: There are scant data on long-term clinical outcomes and bioprosthetic-valve function after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk. METHODS: We enrolled 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers. Patients were stratified according to intended transfemoral or transthoracic access (76.3% and 23.7%, respectively) and were randomly assigned to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were followed for 5 years. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke. RESULTS: At 5 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death from any cause or disabling stroke between the TAVR group and the surgery group (47.9% and 43.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.25; P = 0.21). Results were similar for the transfemoral-access cohort (44.5% and 42.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.20), but the incidence of death or disabling stroke was higher after TAVR than after surgery in the transthoracic-access cohort (59.3% vs. 48.3%; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.71). At 5 years, more patients in the TAVR group than in the surgery group had at least mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation (33.3% vs. 6.3%). Repeat hospitalizations were more frequent after TAVR than after surgery (33.3% vs. 25.2%), as were aortic-valve reinterventions (3.2% vs. 0.8%). Improvement in health status at 5 years was similar for TAVR and surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis who were at intermediate surgical risk, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death or disabling stroke at 5 years after TAVR as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

Impact of baseline renal dysfunction on cardiac outcomes and end-stage renal disease in heart failure patients with mitral regurgitation: the COAPT trial.

AIMS: Baseline renal dysfunction (RD) adversely impacts outcomes among patients with heart failure (HF) and severe secondary mitral regurgitation (MR). Heart failure and MR, in turn, accelerate progression to end-stage renal disease (ESRD), worsening prognosis. We sought to determine the impact of RD in HF patients with severe MR and the impact of transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) on new-onset ESRD and the need for renal replacement therapy (RRT). METHODS AND RESULTS: The COAPT trial randomized 614 patients with HF and severe MR to MitraClip plus guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) vs. GDMT alone. Patients were stratified into three RD subgroups based on baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m2): none (≥60), moderate (30-60), and severe (<30). End-stage renal disease was defined as eGFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m2 or RRT. The 2-year rates of all-cause death or HF hospitalization (HFH), new-onset ESRD, and RRT according to RD and treatment were assessed. Baseline RD was present in 77.0% of patients, including 23.8% severe RD, 6.0% ESRD, and 5.2% RRT. Worse RD was associated with greater 2-year risk of death or HFH (none 45.3%; moderate 53.9%; severe 69.2%; P < 0.0001). MitraClip vs. GDMT alone improved outcomes regardless of RD (Pinteraction = 0.62) and reduced new-onset ESRD [2.9 vs. 8.1%, hazard ratio (HR) 0.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15-0.76, P = 0.008] and the need for new RRT (2.5 vs. 7.4%, HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.14-0.78, P = 0.011). CONCLUSION: Baseline RD was common in the HF patients with severe MR enrolled in COAPT and strongly predicted 2-year death and HFH. MitraClip treatment reduced new-onset ESRD and the need for RRT, contributing to the improved prognosis after TMVr.

Relationship Between Residual Mitral Regurgitation and Clinical and Quality-of-Life Outcomes After Transcatheter and Medical Treatments in Heart Failure: COAPT Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation), among 614 patients with heart failure with 3+ or 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation (MR), transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with the MitraClip reduced MR, heart failure hospitalizations, and mortality and improved quality of life compared with guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) alone. We aimed to examine the prognostic relationship between MR reduction and outcomes after TMVr and GDMT alone. METHODS: Outcomes in COAPT between 30 days and 2 years were examined on the basis of the severity of residual MR at 30 days. RESULTS: TMVr-treated patients had less severe residual MR at 30 days than GDMT-treated patients (0/1+, 2+, and 3+/4+: 72.9%, 19.9%, and 7.2% versus 8.2%, 26.1%, and 65.8%, respectively [P<0.0001]). The rate of composite death or heart failure hospitalizations between 30 days and 2 years was lower in patients with 30-day residual MR of 0/1+ and 2+ compared with patients with 30-day residual MR of 3+/4+ (37.7% versus 49.5% versus 72.2%, respectively [P<0.0001]). This relationship was consistent in the TMVr and GDMT arms (Pinteraction=0.92). The improvement in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score from baseline to 30 days was maintained between 30 days and 2 years in patients with 30-day MR ≤2+ but deteriorated in those with 30-day MR 3+/4+ (-0.3±1.7 versus -9.4±4.6 [P=0.0008]) consistently in both groups (Pinteraction=0.95). CONCLUSIONS: In the COAPT trial, reduced MR at 30 days was associated with greater freedom from death or heart failure hospitalizations and improved quality of life through 2-year follow-up whether the MR reduction was achieved by TMVr or GDMT. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01626079.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement After Surgical Repair or Replacement: Comprehensive Midterm Evaluation of Valve-in-Valve and Valve-in-Ring Implantation From the VIVID Registry.

BACKGROUND: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR. METHODS: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate. RESULTS: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76-996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510-1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR (P<0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients (P=0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; P<0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; P=0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; P=0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74-12.56; P=0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88-21.53; P<0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.

Rationale and design of the SMall Annuli Randomized To Evolut or SAPIEN Trial (SMART Trial).

BACKGROUND: The SMall Annuli Randomized To Evolut or SAPIEN (SMART) Trial was designed to compare the performance of the two most widely available commercial transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in patients with symptomatic severe native aortic stenosis with a small aortic valve annulus undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Patients with small aortic valve annuli are typically female and are often underrepresented in clinical trials. METHODS: The SMART Trial is an international, prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled, post-market trial. The trial will be conducted in approximately 700 subjects at approximately 90 sites globally. Inclusion criteria include severe aortic stenosis, aortic valve annulus area of ≤430 mm2 based on multi-detector computed tomography, and appropriate anatomy for both the Medtronic Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding and Edwards SAPIEN 3/3 Ultra balloon-expandable devices. The primary clinical outcome composite endpoint is defined as mortality, disabling stroke or heart failure rehospitalization at 12 months. The co-primary valve function composite endpoint is defined as bioprosthetic valve dysfunction at 12 months which includes hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, defined as a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg, non-structural valve dysfunction, defined as severe prothesis-patient mismatch or ≥moderate aortic regurgitation, thrombosis, endocarditis, and aortic valve re-intervention. Powered secondary endpoints will be assessed hierarchically. CONCLUSIONS: The SMART trial will be the largest head-to-head comparative trial of transfemoral TAVR using the two most widely available contemporary TAVR devices in the setting of small aortic annuli and the largest trial to enroll primarily women. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT04722250.

Transcatheter Mitral-Valve Repair in Patients with Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with heart failure who have mitral regurgitation due to left ventricular dysfunction, the prognosis is poor. Transcatheter mitral-valve repair may improve their clinical outcomes. METHODS: At 78 sites in the United States and Canada, we enrolled patients with heart failure and moderate-to-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite the use of maximal doses of guideline-directed medical therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to transcatheter mitral-valve repair plus medical therapy (device group) or medical therapy alone (control group). The primary effectiveness end point was all hospitalizations for heart failure within 24 months of follow-up. The primary safety end point was freedom from device-related complications at 12 months; the rate for this end point was compared with a prespecified objective performance goal of 88.0%. RESULTS: Of the 614 patients who were enrolled in the trial, 302 were assigned to the device group and 312 to the control group. The annualized rate of all hospitalizations for heart failure within 24 months was 35.8% per patient-year in the device group as compared with 67.9% per patient-year in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.70; P<0.001). The rate of freedom from device-related complications at 12 months was 96.6% (lower 95% confidence limit, 94.8%; P<0.001 for comparison with the performance goal). Death from any cause within 24 months occurred in 29.1% of the patients in the device group as compared with 46.1% in the control group (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.82; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heart failure and moderate-to-severe or severe secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite the use of maximal doses of guideline-directed medical therapy, transcatheter mitral-valve repair resulted in a lower rate of hospitalization for heart failure and lower all-cause mortality within 24 months of follow-up than medical therapy alone. The rate of freedom from device-related complications exceeded a prespecified safety threshold. (Funded by Abbott; COAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01626079 .).

Transcatheter mitral valve in ring, hazards of long anterior mitral leaflet and 3-dimensional rings.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to define anterior mitral leaflet (AML) length and mitral ring characteristics associated with LVOT obstruction and PVL following MViR. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Mitral Valve in Ring (MViR) procedural complications including parvalvular leak (PVL) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction are frequent. METHODS: Clinical records, computer tomographic scans (CTs) and echocardiograms of consecutive MViR patients were retrospectively reviewed for anterior mitral leaflet length, CT-simulated neoLVOT, and aortomitral angle among patients with and without MViR-induced LVOT obstruction. Acute and 1-year outcomes are described. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients underwent MViR. Technical success was achieved in 13/22 (57.1%) patients, limited by paravalvular regurgitation requiring second transcatheter heart valves (THVs) in seven patients. Second valves were needed in 6/11 (54.5%) patients with 3-dimensional rings but 1/11 (9.1%, p = .06) of patients with planar rings. Procedure success at 30 days was achieved in 20/22 (90.9%) patients. There were no procedural, in-hospital, or 30-day deaths. Two patients developed significant LVOT obstruction, one managed with urgent surgery and one with elective alcohol septal ablation. Anterior mitral leaflets were longer among the two patients with LVOT obstruction than the 20 patients who did not develop LVOT obstruction when measured by TEE (30 mm vs. 21 mm, p = .009) or by CT (29 mm vs. 22 mm, p = .026). CONCLUSIONS: AML >25 mm increases the risk of MViR induced LVOT obstruction. PVL is common, particularly in 3-dimensional rings which can be managed with a second THV.

Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves.

AIMS: Due to bioprosthetic valve degeneration, aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures are increasingly performed. There are no data on long-term outcomes after aortic ViV. Our aim was to perform a large-scale assessment of long-term survival and reintervention after aortic ViV. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1006 aortic ViV procedures performed more than 5 years ago [mean age 77.7 ± 9.7 years; 58.8% male; median STS-PROM score 7.3% (4.2-12.0)] were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with Medtronic self-expandable valves (CoreValve/Evolut, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) (n = 523, 52.0%), Edwards balloon-expandable valves (EBEV, SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) (n = 435, 43.2%), and other devices (n = 48, 4.8%). Survival was lower at 8 years in patients with small-failed bioprostheses [internal diameter (ID) ≤ 20 mm] compared with those with large-failed bioprostheses (ID > 20 mm) (33.2% vs. 40.5%, P = 0.01). Independent correlates for mortality included smaller-failed bioprosthetic valves [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13)], age [HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01-1.45)], and non-transfemoral access [HR 1.43 (95% CI 1.11-1.84)]. There were 40 reinterventions after ViV. Independent correlates for all-cause reintervention included pre-existing severe prosthesis-patient mismatch [subhazard ratio (SHR) 4.34 (95% CI 1.31-14.39)], device malposition [SHR 3.75 (95% CI 1.36-10.35)], EBEV [SHR 3.34 (95% CI 1.26-8.85)], and age [SHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.44-0.78)]. CONCLUSIONS: The size of the original failed valve may influence long-term mortality, and the type of the transcatheter valve may influence the need for reintervention after aortic ViV.

Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair Versus Medical Therapy in Patients With Heart Failure and Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Results From the COAPT Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COAPT trial (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation) demonstrated that edge-to-edge transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) with the MitraClip resulted in reduced mortality and heart failure hospitalizations and improved quality of life compared with maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) in patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation. Whether TMVr is cost-effective compared with GDMT in this population is unknown. METHODS: We used data from the COAPT trial to perform a formal patient-level economic analysis of TMVr+GDMT versus GDMT alone for patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation from the perspective of the US healthcare system. Costs for the index TMVr hospitalization were assessed using a combination of resource-based accounting and hospital billing data (when available). Follow-up medical care costs were estimated on the basis of medical resource use collected during the COAPT trial. Health utilities were estimated for all patients at baseline and 1, 6, 12, and 24 months with the Short Form Six-Dimension Health Survey. RESULTS: Initial costs for the TMVr procedure and index hospitalization were $35 755 and $48 198, respectively. Although follow-up costs were significantly lower with TMVr compared with GDMT ($26 654 versus $38 345; P=0.018), cumulative 2-year costs remained higher with TMVr because of the upfront cost of the index procedure ($73 416 versus $38 345; P<0.001). When in-trial survival, health utilities, and costs were modeled over a lifetime horizon, TMVr was projected to increase life expectancy by 1.13 years and quality-adjusted life-years by 0.82 years at a cost of $45 648, yielding a lifetime incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $40 361 per life-year gained and $55 600 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. CONCLUSIONS: For symptomatic patients with heart failure and 3 to 4+ secondary mitral regurgitation, TMVr increases life expectancy and quality-adjusted life expectancy compared with GDMT at an incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained that represents acceptable economic value according to current US thresholds. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01626079.

The initial U.S. experience with the Tempo active fixation temporary pacing lead in structural heart interventions.

OBJECTIVES: This multicenter retrospective study of the initial U.S. experience evaluated the safety and efficacy of temporary cardiac pacing with the Tempo® Temporary Pacing Lead. BACKGROUND: Despite increasing use of temporary cardiac pacing with the rapid growth of structural heart procedures, temporary pacing leads have not significantly improved. The Tempo lead is a new temporary pacing lead with a soft tip intended to minimize the risk of perforation and a novel active fixation mechanism designed to enhance lead stability. METHODS: Data from 269 consecutive structural heart procedures were collected. Outcomes included device safety (absence of clinically significant cardiac perforation, new pericardial effusion, or sustained ventricular arrhythmia) and efficacy (clinically acceptable pacing thresholds with successful pace capture throughout the index procedure). Postprocedure practices and sustained lead performance were also analyzed. RESULTS: The Tempo lead was successfully positioned in the right ventricle and achieved pacing in 264 of 269 patients (98.1%). Two patients (0.8%) experienced loss of pace capture. Procedural mean pace capture threshold (PCT) was 0.7 ± 0.8 mA. There were no clinically significant perforations, pericardial effusions, or sustained device-related arrhythmias. The Tempo lead was left in place postprocedure in 189 patients (71.6%) for mean duration of 43.3 ± 0.7 hr (range 2.5-221.3 hr) with final PCT of 0.84 ± 1.04 mA (n = 80). Of these patients, 84.1% mobilized out of bed with no lead dislodgment. CONCLUSION: The Tempo lead is safe and effective for temporary cardiac pacing for structural heart procedures, provides stable peri and postprocedural pacing and allows mobilization of patients who require temporary pacing leads.

Outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated bioprostheses, failed annuloplasty rings, and mitral annular calcification.

Aims: We sought to evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with degenerated bioprostheses [valve-in-valve (ViV)], failed annuloplasty rings [valve-in-ring (ViR)], and severe mitral annular calcification [valve-in-mitral annular calcification (ViMAC)]. Methods and results: From the TMVR multicentre registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of ViV, ViR, and ViMAC were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) criteria. A total of 521 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.0% underwent TMVR (322 patients with ViV, 141 with ViR, and 58 with ViMAC). Trans-septal access and the Sapien valves were used in 39.5% and 90.0%, respectively. Overall technical success was excellent at 87.1%. However, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction occurred more frequently after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV (39.7% vs. 5.0% vs. 2.2%; P < 0.001), whereas second valve implantation was more frequent in ViR compared with ViMAC and ViV (12.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 2.5%; P < 0.001). Accordingly, technical success rate was higher after ViV compared with ViR and ViMAC (94.4% vs. 80.9% vs. 62.1%; P < 0.001). Compared with ViMAC and ViV groups, ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation ≥moderate (18.4% vs. 13.8% vs. 5.6%; P < 0.001) and subsequent paravalvular leak closure (7.8% vs. 0.0% vs. 2.2%; P = 0.006). All-cause mortality was higher after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV at 30 days (34.5% vs. 9.9% vs. 6.2%; log-rank P < 0.001) and 1 year (62.8% vs. 30.6% vs. 14.0%; log-rank P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with failed annuloplasty rings and severe MAC were at increased risk of mortality after TMVR [ViR vs. ViV, hazard ratio (HR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.12; P = 0.003; ViMAC vs. ViV, HR 5.29, 95% CI 3.29-8.51; P < 0.001]. Conclusion: The TMVR provided excellent outcomes for patients with degenerated bioprostheses despite high surgical risk. However, ViR and ViMAC were associated with higher rates of adverse events and mid-term mortality compared with ViV.

Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND: Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. We evaluated the two procedures in a randomized trial involving intermediate-risk patients. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, at 57 centers, to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke at 2 years. The primary hypothesis was that TAVR would not be inferior to surgical replacement. Before randomization, patients were entered into one of two cohorts on the basis of clinical and imaging findings; 76.3% of the patients were included in the transfemoral-access cohort and 23.7% in the transthoracic-access cohort. RESULTS: The rate of death from any cause or disabling stroke was similar in the TAVR group and the surgery group (P=0.001 for noninferiority). At 2 years, the Kaplan-Meier event rates were 19.3% in the TAVR group and 21.1% in the surgery group (hazard ratio in the TAVR group, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.09; P=0.25). In the transfemoral-access cohort, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of death or disabling stroke than surgery (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P=0.05), whereas in the transthoracic-access cohort, outcomes were similar in the two groups. TAVR resulted in larger aortic-valve areas than did surgery and also resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury, severe bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation; surgery resulted in fewer major vascular complications and less paravalvular aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk patients, TAVR was similar to surgical aortic-valve replacement with respect to the primary end point of death or disabling stroke. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

Incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes of coronary obstruction following transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerative bioprosthetic surgical valves: insights from the VIVID registry.

Aims: There are limited data on coronary obstruction following transcatheter valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation inside failed aortic bioprostheses. The objectives of this study were to determine the incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes of coronary obstruction in transcatheter ViV procedures. Methods and results: A total of 1612 aortic procedures from the Valve-in-Valve International Data (VIVID) Registry were evaluated. Data were subject to centralized blinded corelab computed tomography (CT) analysis in a subset of patients. The virtual transcatheter valve to coronary ostium distance (VTC) was determined. A total of 37 patients (2.3%) had clinically evident coronary obstruction. Baseline clinical characteristics in the coronary obstruction patients were similar to controls. Coronary obstruction was more common in stented bioprostheses with externally mounted leaflets or stentless bioprostheses than in stented with internally mounted leaflets bioprostheses (6.1% vs. 3.7% vs. 0.8%, respectively; P < 0.001). CT measurements were obtained in 20 (54%) and 90 (5.4%) of patients with and without coronary obstruction, respectively. VTC distance was shorter in coronary obstruction patients in relation to controls (3.24 ± 2.22 vs. 6.30 ± 2.34, respectively; P < 0.001). Using multivariable analysis, the use of a stentless or stented bioprosthesis with externally mounted leaflets [odds ratio (OR): 7.67; 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.14-18.7; P < 0.001] associated with coronary obstruction for the global population. In a second model with CT data, a shorter VTC distance predicted this complication (OR: 0.22 per 1 mm increase; 95% CI: 0.09-0.51; P < 0.001), with an optimal cut-off level of 4 mm (area under the curve: 0.943; P < 0.001). Coronary obstruction was associated with a high 30-day mortality (52.9% vs. 3.9% in the controls, respectively; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Coronary obstruction following aortic ViV procedures is a life-threatening complication that occurred more frequently in patients with prior stentless or stented bioprostheses with externally mounted leaflets and in those with a short VTC.

One-Year Clinical Outcomes With SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in High-Risk and Inoperable Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: In the initial PARTNER trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for high-risk (HR) and inoperable patients, mortality at 1 year was 24% in HR and 31% in inoperable patients. A recent report of the 30-day outcomes with the low-profile SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve replacement system demonstrated very low rates of adverse events, but little is known about the longer-term outcomes with this device. METHODS: Between October 2013 and September 2014, 583 HR (65%) or inoperable (35%) patients were treated via the transfemoral (84%) or transapical/transaortic (16%) access route at 29 US sites. Major clinical events at 1 year were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee, and echocardiographic results were analyzed by a core laboratory. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics included age of 83 years, 42% female, and median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 8.4%. At the 1-year follow-up, survival (all-cause) was 85.6% for all patients, 87.3% in the HR subgroup, and 82.3% in the inoperable subgroup. Survival free of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in the transfemoral patients from the HR cohort was 87.7% and 93.3%, respectively. There was no severe paravalvular leak. Moderate paravalvular leak (2.7%) was associated with an increase in mortality at 1 year, whereas mild paravalvular leak had no significant association with mortality. Symptomatic improvement as assessed by the percentage of patients in New York Heart Association class III and IV (90.1% to 7.7% at 1 year; P<0.0001) and by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score (improved from 46.9 to 72.4; P<0.0001) was marked. Multivariable predictors of 1-year mortality included alternative access, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, and disabling stroke. CONCLUSIONS: In this large, adjudicated registry of SAPIEN 3 HR and inoperable patients, the very low rates of important complications resulted in a strikingly low mortality rate at 1 year. Between 30 and 365 days, the incidence of moderate paravalvular aortic regurgitation did not increase, and no association between mild paravalvular leak and 1-year mortality was observed, although a small increase in disabling stroke occurred. These results, which likely reflect device iteration and procedural evolution, support the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement as the preferred therapy in HR and inoperable patients with aortic stenosis. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01314313.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve demonstrates good 30 day clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at intermediate risk of surgical mortality. Here we report longer-term data in intermediate-risk patients given SAPIEN 3 TAVR and compare outcomes to those of intermediate-risk patients given surgical aortic valve replacement. METHODS: In the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 1077 intermediate-risk patients at 51 sites in the USA and Canada were assigned to receive TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve [952 [88%] via transfemoral access) between Feb 17, 2014, and Sept 3, 2014. In this population we assessed all-cause mortality and incidence of strokes, re-intervention, and aortic valve regurgitation at 1 year after implantation. Then we compared 1 year outcomes in this population with those for intermediate-risk patients treated with surgical valve replacement in the PARTNER 2A trial between Dec 23, 2011, and Nov 6, 2013, using a prespecified propensity score analysis to account for between-trial differences in baseline characteristics. The clinical events committee and echocardiographic core laboratory methods were the same for both studies. The primary endpoint was the composite of death from any cause, all strokes, and incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. We did non-inferiority (margin 7·5%) and superiority analyses in propensity score quintiles to calculate pooled weighted proportion differences for outcomes. FINDINGS: At 1 year follow-up of the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 79 of 1077 patients who initiated the TAVR procedure had died (all-cause mortality 7·4%; 6·5% in the transfemoral access subgroup), and disabling strokes had occurred in 24 (2%), aortic valve re-intervention in six (1%), and moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation in 13 (2%). In the propensity-score analysis we included 963 patients treated with SAPIEN 3 TAVR and 747 with surgical valve replacement. For the primary composite endpoint of mortality, strokes, and moderate or severe aortic regurgitation, TAVR was both non-inferior (pooled weighted proportion difference of -9·2%; 90% CI -12·4 to -6; p<0·0001) and superior (-9·2%, 95% CI -13·0 to -5·4; p<0·0001) to surgical valve replacement. INTERPRETATION: TAVR with SAPIEN 3 in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis is associated with low mortality, strokes, and regurgitation at 1 year. The propensity score analysis indicates a significant superiority for our composite outcome with TAVR compared with surgery, suggesting that TAVR might be the preferred treatment alternative in intermediate-risk patients. FUNDING: None.