Insight Into the Optimal Timing of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Patients being considered for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are frequently diagnosed with coronary artery disease. In patients requiring revascularization, there is a paucity of data informing when to perform percutaneous coronary artery intervention (PCI). We evaluated the impact of PCI timing on clinical outcomes and readmissions after TAVR. From the National Readmissions Database 2016 to 2019, we stratified the duration between PCI and TAVR into 3 groups: same-day PCI and TAVR, TAVR ≤30 days after PCI, and TAVR >30 days after PCI. We then compared primary and secondary outcomes among them. A total of 5207 patients were included, 1413 (27.1%) of whom underwent PCI and TAVR on the same day, while 2161 (41.5%) underwent TAVR ≤30 days after PCI, and 1632 (31.3%) underwent TAVR >30 days after PCI. There was no significant difference for in-hospital mortality among the groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.49, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.16-1.48, p = 0.203 for same-day versus ≤30 days; aOR 2.07, 95% CI 0.68-6.30, p = 0.199 for same-day versus >30 days). Patients who underwent TAVR ≤30 days after PCI had higher odds of acute kidney injury (aOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.05-2.10, p = 0.024), nonhome discharge (aOR 1.53, 95% CI 1.20-1.96, p = 0.001), and 90-day readmission (aOR 1.35, 95% CI 1.04-1.76, p = 0.026) compared with those who underwent same-day PCI and TAVR. Concomitant PCI and TAVR was associated with lower rates of 90-day readmissions and acute kidney injury compared with TAVR shortly after PCI (<30 days) and should be considered in select patients.

Late Survival After Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Balloon- Versus Self-Expandable Valves: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-to-Event Data

Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with failed bioprostheses arose as an alternative to redo surgical aortic valve replacement. There is an increasing interest in exploring the differences between self-expanding valves (SEVs) and balloon-expandable valves (BEVs). Our study aimed to evaluate the all-cause mortality in ViV-TAVI with SEV versus BEV in patients with failed bioprostheses. We performed a study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from Kaplan-Meier curves of studies published by March 30, 2023. A total of 5 studies met our eligibility criteria and included 1,454 patients who underwent ViV-TAVI (862 with SEV and 592 with BEV). Almost all BEVs were iterations of the Edwards BEVs (SAPIEN, SAPIEN XT, and SAPIEN 3) and almost all SEVs were iterations of the Medtronic SEVs (CoreValve/Evolut). During the first year after ViV-TAVI, 67 deaths (11.8%) occurred in patients treated with BEV compared with 92 deaths (11.1%) in patients treated with SEV (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 1.27, p = 0.632). At 8 years of follow-up, the all-cause death was not statistically significantly different between the groups, with mortality rates of 65.4% in the group treated BEV and 58.8% in the group treated with SEV (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.75 to 1.09, p = 0.302). The restricted mean survival time was overall 0.25 years greater with SEV than BEV, but this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.278), which indicates no lifetime gain or loss with SEV in comparison with BEV. There seems to be no difference in terms of all-cause death in ViV-TAVI with SEV versus BEV. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our results.

Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes of Balloon-Expandable Mitral Valve-in-Valve Positioning and Asymmetric Deployment: The VIVID Registry

BACKGROUND

Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) is associated with suboptimal hemodynamics and rare left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to determine whether device position and asymmetry are associated with these outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing SAPIEN 3 (Edwards Lifesciences) mitral ViV included in the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data) Registry were studied. Clinical endpoints are reported according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions. Residual mitral valve stenosis was defined as mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Depth of implantation (percentage of transcatheter heart valve [THV] atrial to the bioprosthesis ring) and asymmetry (ratio of 2 measures of THV height) were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 222 patients meeting the criteria for optimal core lab evaluation were studied (age 74 ± 11.6 years; 61.9% female; STS score = 8.3 ± 7.1). Mean asymmetry was 6.2% ± 4.4%. Mean depth of implantation was 19.0% ± 10.3% atrial. Residual stenosis was common (50%; mean gradient 5.0 ± 2.6 mm Hg). LVOT obstruction occurred in 7 cases (3.2%). Implantation depth was not a predictor of residual stenosis (OR: 1.19 [95% CI: 0.92-1.55]; P = 0.184), but more atrial implantation was protective against LVOT obstruction (0.7% vs 7.1%; P = 0.009; per 10% atrial, OR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.24-0.98]; P = 0.044). Asymmetry was found to be an independent predictor of residual stenosis (per 10% increase, OR: 2.30 [95% CI: 1.10-4.82]; P = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Valve stenosis is common after mitral ViV. Asymmetry was associated with residual stenosis. Depth of implantation on its own was not associated with residual stenosis but was associated with LVOT obstruction. Technical considerations to reduce postdeployment THV asymmetry should be considered.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Transcatheter Mitral Therapies: Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVTR

Mitral regurgitation is the most common valvular disease and is estimated to affect over 5 million Americans. Real-world data collection contributes to safety and effectiveness evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, and clinical best practice research. We aimed to establish a minimum core data set in mitral interventions to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection for all of these purposes. Two expert task forces separately evaluated and reconciled a list of candidate elements derived from: 1) 2 ongoing transcatheter mitral trials; and 2) a systemic literature review of high-impact mitral trials and U.S multicenter, multidevice registries. From 703 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 127 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core data set being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (41.2%), duplicative information (25.0%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (19.6%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established and implemented into the national Society of Thoracic Surgery/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry 127 interoperable, reusable core data elements to support more efficient, consistent, and informative transcatheter mitral device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice development, and hospital quality assessments.

Guideline-Directed Medical Therapy Tolerability in Patients With Heart Failure and Mitral Regurgitation: The COAPT Trial

BACKGROUND

In the COAPT (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation) trial, a central committee of heart failure (HF) specialists optimized guideline-directed medical therapies (GDMT) and documented medication and goal dose intolerances before patient enrollment.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to assess the rates, reasons, and predictors of GDMT intolerance in the COAPT trial.

METHODS

Baseline use, dose, and intolerances of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ARNIs), beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) were analyzed in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40%, in whom maximally tolerated doses of these agents as assessed by an independent HF specialist were required before enrollment.

RESULTS

A total of 464 patients had LVEF ≤40% and complete medication information. At baseline, 38.8%, 39.4%, and 19.8% of patients tolerated 3, 2, and 1 GDMT classes, respectively (any dose); only 1.9% could not tolerate any GDMT. Beta-blockers were the most frequently tolerated GDMT (93.1%), followed by ACEIs/ARBs/ARNIs (68.5%), and then MRAs (55.0%). Intolerances differed by GDMT class, but hypotension and kidney dysfunction were most common. Goal doses were uncommonly achieved for beta-blockers (32.3%) and ACEIs/ARBs/ARNIs (10.2%) due to intolerances limiting titration. Only 2.2% of patients tolerated goal doses of all 3 GDMT classes.

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary trial population with HF, severe mitral regurgitation, and systematic HF specialist-directed GDMT optimization, most patients had medical intolerances prohibiting 1 or more GDMT classes and achieving goal doses. The specific intolerances noted and methods used for GDMT optimization provide important lessons for the implementation of GDMT optimization in future clinical trials. (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation [The COAPT Trial] [COAPT]; NCT01626079).

Late outcomes of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus re-replacement: Meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

AIMS

To evaluate all-cause mortality in ViV-TAVI versus redo SAVR in patients with failed bioprostheses.

METHODS

Study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from Kaplan-Meier curves of non-randomized studies published by September 30, 2021.

RESULTS

Ten studies met our eligibility criteria and included a total of 3345 patients (1676 patients underwent ViV-TAVI and 1669 patients underwent redo SAVR). Pooling all the studies, ViV-TAVI showed a lower risk of all-cause mortality in the first 44 days [hazard ratio (HR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49-0.93, P = 0.017], with an HR reversal after 197 days favoring redo SAVR (HR 1.53; 95% CI 1.22-1.93; P < 0.001). Pooling only the matched populations (1143 pairs), ViV-TAVI showed a lower risk of all-cause mortality in the first 55 days [hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-0.89, P < 0.001], with a reversal HR after 212 days favoring redo SAVR (HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.22-2.03; P < 0.001). The Cox regression model showed a statistically significant association of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) with all-cause mortality during follow-up for ViV-TAVI (HR 1.03 per percentage increase in the study- and treatment arm-level proportion of PPM, 95% 1.02-1.05, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ViV-TAVI is associated with a strong protective effect immediately after the procedure in comparison with redo SAVR, however, this initial advantage reverses over time and redo SAVR seems to be a protective factor for all-cause mortality after 6 months. Considering that these results are the fruit of pooling data from observational studies, they should be interpreted with caution and trials are warranted.

Large multinational evaluation of time to reintervention in patients undergoing bioprosthetic valve implantation during open heart surgery

Introduction

Bioprosthetic valves are increasingly utilized during open heart surgery in favor of mechanical valves. These tissue valves are prone for structural valve degeneration and failure, especially in young patients. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an appealing approach in these patients.

Purpose

To describe independent correlates for early need for reintervention.

Method

We used a large multicenter registry of patients (&gt;45 years of age) with failed bioprosthetic surgical valves undergoing TAVI valve-in-valve (VinV) in either aortic or the mitral positions. Early reintervention was (&lt;5 years between open-heart surgery and VinV). Multi-variable properties that were included: patient gender, age at open-heart surgery, valve size, baseline renal failure, position of valve implantation, and bioprosthetic valve label size.

Results

A total of 3,324 patients were included in the study (age at the time of open heart surgery 68.9+7.9 years). Median time to TAVI was 9 years (IQR 6–13 years). A total of 632 (19%) patients experienced early valve degeneration with median time to TAVI of only 3 years [IQR 1–5]. Patients with early degeneration were older than those without early degeneration (mean age at surgery was 72.8±9 years vs. 68.9±8 years; p&lt;0.001). in addition, significant linear relation between older patient age and early valve degeneration (p for trend &lt;0.001). Re-intervention in the mitral position was more common in the group of patients with early degeneration (24.4% vs 18.2% without early degeneration; p&lt;0.001) Patient age and mitral valve position were independently associated with increased rate of early degeneration (OR 1.09 [1.08–1.11], p&lt;0.001; OR 1.62 [1.31–2.01]; p&lt;0.001 respectively).

Conclusions

In this large multicenter analysis of patients undergoing TAVR for failed bioprosthetic valves we identified old patient age and mitral valve (vs. aortic) as independent correlates for early intervention. A discrepancy with known association of young age and rapid bioprosthetic valve degeneration is to be determined.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

Maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy and barriers to optimization in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: the COAPT trial

Background

The COAPT trial of MitraClip therapy employed a central screening eligibility committee (CSEC) of heart failure (HF) experts to ensure the use of maximally tolerated guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) and systematically document intolerances in all potential patients prior to approval for randomization.

Purpose

To describe the percentage of GDMT classes, doses tolerated, predictors of intolerance, and specific intolerances limiting GDMT among patients approved for randomization by the CSEC.

Methods

We analyzed baseline use, dose, and intolerances of i) angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARB) or angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI); ii) beta-blockers (BB); and iii) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in the CSEC-approved COAPT population with HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF; LVEF ≤40%). We analyzed variables associated with GDMT tolerance.

Results

In COAPT, 464 patients had HFrEF and complete screening medication information. Any dose of all 3, 2 or 1 GDMT classes were tolerated in 39%, 39% and 20% of patients respectively; only 2% of patients (n=9) could not tolerate any GDMT (Figure 1). BB were prescribed in the most (93%) patients followed by ACEI/ARB/ARNI (69%) and MRA (55%). Intolerances limiting each GDMT class differed, but hypotension and kidney dysfunction were most common (Figure 2). No patients tolerated goal doses of all 3 GDMT classes. For BB, only 32% tolerated ≥50% of the goal dose; while for ACEI/ARB/ARNI, no patients achieved goal doses, and only 1% tolerated ≥50% of the goal dose. For MRA, 86% of patients tolerated 25mg/day or less. Patients intolerant of BB were less likely to tolerate an ACEI/ARB/ARNI (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20–0.76; p=0.004) but not a MRA (p=0.21) compared with patients tolerating a low dose BB. Patients intolerant of MRA were less likely to tolerate ACEI/ARB/ARNI therapy (OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.25–0.57; p&lt;0.0001) but not a BB (p=0.31) compared with patients tolerating MRA. Patients tolerating low dose ACEI/ARB/ARNI had a higher baseline mean eGFR (52±21 versus 40±21 ml/min/m2; p&lt;0.0001) compared with patients intolerant of ACEI/ARB/ARNI. Likewise, patients tolerating MRA had a higher baseline mean eGFR (52±21 versus 42±21 ml/min/m2; p&lt;0.0001) compared with patients intolerant of MRA.

Conclusion

In a contemporary trial in which HF specialists ensured GDMT optimization, many patients had medical intolerances prohibiting use of one or more GDMT classes, and few patients tolerated target doses. These findings indicate medical intolerances are the primary cause of low GDMT prescription rates in patients with moderate to severe HFrEF. Yet, use of GDMT in this very ill population was much better than “real world” registries of HFrEF suggesting that mandating careful CSEC review prior to study enrollment is important for clinical trials having the objective of randomizing a maximally treated patient cohort.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.

Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR: A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.

Ambient temperature and infarct size, microvascular obstruction, left ventricular function and clinical outcomes after ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

Incidence and prognosis of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) vary according to ambient temperature and season. We sought to assess whether season and temperature on the day of STEMI are associated with infarct size, microvascular obstruction (MVO), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and clinical outcomes after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Individual patient data from 1598 patients undergoing primary PCI in six randomized clinical trials were pooled. Infarct size was evaluated by cardiac magnetic resonance within 30 days in all trials. Patients were categorized either by whether they presented on a day of temperature extremes (minimum temperature <0 °C or maximum temperature >25 °C) or according to season.

RESULTS

A total of 558/1598 (34.9%) patients presented with STEMI on a day of temperature extremes, and 395 (24.7%), 374 (23.4%), 481 (30.1%) and 348 (21.8%) presented in the spring, summer, fall and winter. After multivariable adjustment, temperature extremes were independently associated with larger infarct size (adjusted difference 2.8%; 95% CI, 1.3-4.3; P < 0.001) and smaller LVEF (adjusted difference -2.3%; 95% CI, -3.5 to -1.1; P = 0.0002) but not with MVO (adjusted P = 0.12). In contrast, infarct size, MVO and LVEF were unrelated to season (adjusted P = 0.67; P = 0.36 and P = 0.95, respectively). Neither temperature extremes nor season were independently associated with 1-year risk of death or heart failure hospitalization (adjusted P = 0.79 and P = 0.90, respectively).

CONCLUSION

STEMI presentation during temperature extremes was independently associated with larger infarct size and lower LVEF but not with MVO after primary PCI, whereas season was unrelated to infarct severity.

Consequences of Inaccurate Assumptions in Coronary Stent Noninferiority Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

The outcome and interpretation of noninferiority trials depend on the magnitude of the noninferiority margin and whether a relative or absolute noninferiority margin is used and may be affected by imprecision in event rate estimation.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the consequence of imprecise event rate estimations on interpretation of peer-reviewed randomized clinical trials.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed/MEDLINE was searched for articles published between January 1, 2015, and April 30, 2021.

STUDY SELECTION

Noninferiority randomized clinical trials of coronary stents published in selected journals with clinical events as the primary end point.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers (M.S. and F.V.) independently extracted data on trial characteristics, noninferiority assumptions, primary end point clinical outcomes, and study conclusions. Overestimation or underestimation of the control event rate was evaluated by dividing the assumed control event rate by the observed control event rate. For noninferiority end points with absolute margins, the assumed corresponding relative margin was defined as the ratio of the absolute margin and the assumed event rate, and the observed corresponding relative margin as the ratio between the absolute margin and the observed event rate in the control arm. Noninferiority comparisons with absolute margins were reanalyzed using the assumed corresponding relative margin and the Farrington-Manning score test for relative risk.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Overestimation or underestimation, assumed and observed corresponding relative margins, and relative reanalysis of the primary end points of trials with absolute margins.

RESULTS

A total of 106 989 patients from 58 trials were included. The event rate in the control arms was overestimated by a median (IQR) of 28% (2%-74%). Most noninferiority trials used absolute rather than relative margins (55 of 58 trials [94.8%]). Owing to overestimation, absolute noninferiority margins became more permissive than originally assumed (median [IQR] of observed relative noninferiority margin, 1.62 [1.50-1.80] vs assumed relative noninferiority margin, 1.47 [1.39-1.55]; P < .001). Among trial comparisons that met noninferiority with an absolute noninferiority margin, 17 of 50 trials (34.0%) would not have met noninferiority with a corresponding assumed relative noninferiority margin.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, assumed event rates were often overestimated in noninferiority coronary stent trials. Because most of these trials use absolute margins to define noninferiority, such overestimation results in excessively permissive relative noninferiority margins.

Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: An Updated Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate early results of valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for structural valve degeneration (SVD).

BACKGROUND

ViV TAVR has been increasingly used for SVD, but it remains unknown whether it produces better or at least comparable results as redo SAVR.

METHODS

Observational studies comparing ViV TAVR and redo SAVR were identified in a systematic search of published research. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, comparing clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

Twelve publications including a total of 16,207 patients (ViV TAVR, n = 8,048; redo SAVR, n = 8,159) were included from studies published from 2015 to 2020. In the pooled analysis, ViV TAVR was associated with lower rates of 30-day mortality overall (odds ratio [OR]: 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.87; p = 0.017) and for matched populations (OR: 0.419; 95% CI: 0.278 to 0.632; p = 0.003), stroke (OR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.76; p < 0.001), permanent pacemaker implantation (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.22 to 2.43; p = 0.536), and major bleeding (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.93; p = 0.034), as well as with shorter hospital stay (OR: -3.30; 95% CI: -4.52 to -2.08; p < 0.001). In contrast, ViV TAVR was associated with higher rates of myocardial infarction (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.01 to 2.23; p = 0.045) and severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR: 4.63; 95% CI: 3.05 to 7.03; p < 0.001). The search revealed an important lack of comparative studies with long-term results.

CONCLUSIONS

ViV TAVR is a valuable option in the treatment of patients with SVD because of its lower incidence of post-operative complications and better early survival compared with redo SAVR. However, ViV TAVR is associated with higher rates of myocardial infarction and severe patient-prosthesis mismatch.

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: VIVID Registry

BACKGROUND

Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains one of the main drawbacks of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but scarce data exist on PPI after valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR, particularly with the use of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs).

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, factors associated with, and clinical impact of PPI in a large series of ViV-TAVR procedures.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the multicenter VIVID Registry and included the main baseline and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and late (median follow-up: 13 months [interquartile range: 3 to 41 months]) outcomes analyzed according to the need of periprocedural PPI. All THVs except CoreValve, Cribier-Edwards, Sapien, and Sapien XT were considered to be new-generation THVs.

RESULTS

A total of 1,987 patients without prior PPI undergoing ViV-TAVR from 2007 to 2020 were included. Of these, 128 patients (6.4%) had PPI after TAVR, with a significant decrease in the incidence of PPI with the use of new-generation THVs (4.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.017), mainly related to a reduced PPI rate with the Evolut R/Pro versus CoreValve (3.7% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in PPI rates between newer-generation balloon- and self-expanding THVs (6.1% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.18). In the multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 for each increase of 1 year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.07; p = 0.001), larger THV size (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.20; p = 0.02), and previous right bundle branch block (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.17; p = 0.05) were associated with an increased risk of PPI. There were no differences in 30-day mortality between the PPI (4.7%) and no-PPI (2.7%) groups (p = 0.19), but PPI patients exhibited a trend toward higher mortality risk at follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.91; p = 0.04; p = 0.08 after adjusting for age differences between groups).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary large series of ViV-TAVR patients, the rate of periprocedural PPI was relatively low, and its incidence decreased with the use of new-generation THV systems. PPI following ViV-TAVR was associated with a trend toward increased mortality at follow-up.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

After 15 years of successive randomized, controlled trials, indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are rapidly expanding. In the coming years, this procedure could become the first line treatment for patients with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and a tricuspid aortic valve anatomy. However, randomized, controlled trials have excluded bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), which is the most frequent congenital heart disease occurring in 1% to 2% of the total population and representing at least 25% of patients 80 years of age or older referred for aortic valve replacement. The use of a less invasive transcatheter therapy in this elderly population became rapidly attractive, and approximately 10% of patients currently undergoing TAVR have a BAV. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the "European Conformity" have approved TAVR for low-risk patients regardless of the aortic valve anatomy whereas international guidelines recommend surgical replacement in BAV populations. Given this progressive expansion of TAVR toward younger and lower-risk patients, heart teams are encountering BAV patients more frequently, while the ability of this therapy to treat such a challenging anatomy remains uncertain. This review will address the singularity of BAV anatomy and associated technical challenges for the TAVR procedure. We will examine and summarize available clinical evidence and highlight critical knowledge gaps regarding TAVR utilization in BAV patients. We will provide a comprehensive overview of the role of computed tomography scans in the diagnosis, and classification of BAV and TAVR procedure planning. Overall, we will offer an integrated framework for understanding the current role of TAVR in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis and for guiding physicians in clinical decision-making.

Balloon versus self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: A meta-analysis of observational studies

BACKGROUND

There is a rising trend for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in bicuspid aortic stenosis patients. Data on the use of self-expandable (SEV) vs. balloon-expandable (BEV) valves in these patients are scarce. Therefore, we systematically compared clinical outcomes in bicuspid aortic stenosis patients treated with SEV and BEV.

METHODS

Data were extracted from PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, ClinicalTrials.gov, SciELO, LILACS, Google Scholar and reference lists of relevant articles. Eight studies published from 2013 to 2020 including a total of 1,080 patients (BEV: n = 620; SEV: n = 460) were selected. Primary endpoints were procedural, 30-day and 1-year mortality. Secondary endpoints were new pacemaker implantation, annular rupture, coronary obstruction, moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak, need of second valve, stroke and acute kidney injury.

RESULTS

We found no statistically significant difference in mortality between patients treated with BEV vs. SEV during index procedure, at 30 days and at 1 year. BEVs showed a statistically significant higher risk of annulus rupture (2.5%) in comparison with SEV (0%) (OR 5.81 [95% CI, 3.78-8.92], p < .001). New generation BEVs were also associated with significantly less paravalvular leak when compared to new generation SEVs (OR 0.08 [95% CI, 0.02-0.35], p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of observational studies of TAVI for bicuspid valves, showed no difference in short- and mid-term TAVI mortality with BEVs and SEVs. BEVs presented a higher risk of annular rupture in comparison with SEV.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement After Surgical Repair or Replacement

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.

Predictive Role of Selvester QRS Score in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Introduction

Few data exist regarding the late clinical impact of the Selvester score prediction of myocardial fibrosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). This study evaluated the predictive power of the Selvester score on survival in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVR.

Methods and results

Patients with severe AS who had preoperative electrocardiograms were included. Clinical follow-up was obtained retrospectively. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were cardiovascular death and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Two hundred twenty-eight patients were included (mean age, 81.5±7.4 years; women, 58.3%). Deceased patients had a higher mean score (4.6±3.2 vs. 1.4±1.3; p&lt;0.001). At a mean follow-up of 36.2±21.2 months, the Selvester score was independently associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.48–1.84; p&lt;0.001), cardiovascular death (HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.38–1.74; p&lt;0.001), and MACE (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.30–1.68; p&lt;0.001). After 5 years, the mortality risk was incrementally related to the Selvester score. The involvement of the inferior wall of the left ventricle was a lower mortality risk (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.98; p=0.046). For a Selvester score of 3, the area under the curve showed 0.92, 0.94, and 0.86 (p&lt;0.001), respectively, for 1, 2, and 3 years.

Conclusions

Elevated Selvester scores increase the risk of poor outcomes in patients with AS undergoing TAVR. The involvement of the anterior or lateral wall presents worse prognosis.

Kaplain Meier and ROC Curve

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: None

Long-term analysis of pulmonary hypertension and tricuspid regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Introduction

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly utilized in treatment of aortic stenosis (AS). AS is commonly associated to pulmonary hypertension (PH) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR). We aimed to evaluate the long-term post-TAVR course of PH and TR.

Methods

Patients undergoing TAVR were screened for 24-month echocardiographic data on PH and TR. All echocardiograms were performed by a single team. Patients were divided in groups according to TR and PH (pulmonary systolic pressure ≥ or &lt;45 mmHg) grading at 24 months with follow-up of up to 96 months. Standardized clinical outcomes and survival were compared.

Results

156 and 151 patients were selected for PH and TR follow-up, respectively. Mean follow-up was 42.23±17.53 months and 42.60±17.67 months for PH and TR groups. Maximum follow-up was 96 months. PH was reduced post-TAVR (32.7% pre-TAVR vs. 20.5% post-TAVR, p&lt;0.001), but no significant difference in TR was found (11.9% pre-TAVR vs. 10.6% post-TAVR). Increased left atrial (LA) diameter (p=0.002) was associated to maintenance PH. Moreover, increased LA diameter (p=0.015) and increased EuroSCORE II (p=0.041) were correlated to new onset PH. On a multivariable Cox regression model, new onset PH (HR 6.17, 95% CI 1.71–22.29, p=0.005), diastolic dysfunction type II or III (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.06–1.11, p=0.036) and LA diameter (HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.21, p=0.02) were independent predictors of long-term mortality.

Conclusions

TAVR was able to reduce the severity of PH, but not TR, in this cohort. Additionally, long-term survival was affected by PH, diastolic dysfunction and LA sizing.

Kaplan-Meier survival curve

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: None