Coronary Angiography and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;71:1360-1378. [PMID: 29566822 DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.01.057]

Evolving Indications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement—Where Are We Now, and Where Are We Going

Indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have steadily increased over the last decade since the first trials including inoperable or very high risk patients. Thus, TAVR is now the most common treatment of aortic valve stenosis in elderly patients (vs. surgical aortic valve replacement -SAVR-). In this review, we summarize the current indications of TAVR and explore future directions in which TAVR indications can expand.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Pre-TAVR: Current State of the Evidence

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review intends to give an up-to-date overview of the current state of evidence in the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), focusing on percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) pre-TAVR.

RECENT FINDINGS

The recently published ACTIVATION trial is the 1st randomized trial comparing coronary revascularization (PCI) versus medical treatment in patients with significant CAD undergoing TAVR. With the caveat of several major limitations of the trial, the results of this study raised the question about the appropriateness of the common practice to routinely revascularize coronary stenosis before TAVR. Aortic valve stenosis is the most common valvular heart disease among the elderly and it often co-occurs with CAD. TAVR is increasingly considered an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement not only in the elderly population but also in younger and lower-risk patients. The impact of co-existing CAD on clinical outcomes as well as the optimal timing of PCI in TAVR candidates is still unclear and the subject of ongoing randomized trials. Meanwhile, it is common practice in many centers to routinely perform invasive coronary angiography and PCI for significant coronary disease as part of the TAVR workup. While computed tomography angiography has emerged as a possible alternative to the invasive coronary angiography in patients with low pre-test probability for CAD, the value of functional invasive assessment of coronary lesions in the pre-TAVR setting has still to be clarified. Also, there is an increasing interest in the clinical relevance and optimal management of the potentially challenging coronary access post-TAVR, requiring further research.

The Technological Basis of a Balloon-Expandable TAVR System: Non-occlusive Deployment, Anchorage in the Absence of Calcification and Polymer Leaflets

Leaflet durability and costs restrict contemporary trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) largely to elderly patients in affluent countries. TAVR that are easily deployable, avoid secondary procedures and are also suitable for younger patients and non-calcific aortic regurgitation (AR) would significantly expand their global reach. Recognizing the reduced need for post-implantation pacemakers in balloon-expandable (BE) TAVR and the recent advances with potentially superior leaflet materials, a trans-catheter BE-system was developed that allows tactile, non-occlusive deployment without rapid pacing, direct attachment of both bioprosthetic and polymer leaflets onto a shape-stabilized scallop and anchorage achieved by plastic deformation even in the absence of calcification. Three sizes were developed from nickel-cobalt-chromium MP35N alloy tubes: Small/23 mm, Medium/26 mm and Large/29 mm. Crimp-diameters of valves with both bioprosthetic (sandwich-crosslinked decellularized pericardium) and polymer leaflets (triblock polyurethane combining siloxane and carbonate segments) match those of modern clinically used BE TAVR. Balloon expansion favors the wing-structures of the stent thereby creating supra-annular anchors whose diameter exceeds the outer diameter at the waist level by a quarter. In the pulse duplicator, polymer and bioprosthetic TAVR showed equivalent fluid dynamics with excellent EOA, pressure gradients and regurgitation volumes. Post-deployment fatigue resistance surpassed ISO requirements. The radial force of the helical deployment balloon at different filling pressures resulted in a fully developed anchorage profile of the valves from two thirds of their maximum deployment diameter onwards. By combining a unique balloon-expandable TAVR system that also caters for non-calcific AR with polymer leaflets, a powerful, potentially disruptive technology for heart valve disease has been incorporated into a TAVR that addresses global needs. While fulfilling key prerequisites for expanding the scope of TAVR to the vast number of patients of low- to middle income countries living with rheumatic heart disease the system may eventually also bring hope to patients of high-income countries presently excluded from TAVR for being too young.

Balloon-Expandable Valve for Treatment of Evolut Valve Failure: Implications on Neoskirt Height and Leaflet Overhang

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine the degree of Evolut (Medtronic) leaflet pinning, diameter expansion, leaflet overhang, and performance at different implant depths of the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 (S3, Edwards Lifesciences LLC) transcatheter heart valve (THV) within the Evolut THV.

BACKGROUND

Preservation of coronary access and flow is a major factor when considering the treatment of failed Evolut THVs.

METHODS

An in vitro study was performed with 20-, 23-, 26-, and 29-mm S3 THVs deployed within 23-, 26-, 29-, and 34-mm Evolut R THVs, respectively. The S3 outflow was positioned at various depths at node 4, 5, and 6 of the Evolut R. Neoskirt height, leaflet overhang, performance, and Evolut R valve housing diameter expansion were assessed under physiological conditions as per ISO 5840-3 standard.

RESULTS

The neoskirt height for the Evolut R was shorter when the S3 outflow was positioned at node 4 compared with node 6 (node 4 height for 23 mm = 16.3 mm, 26 mm = 17.1 mm, 29 mm = 18.3 mm, and 34 mm = 19.9 mm vs node 6 height for 23 mm = 23.9 mm, 26 mm = 23.4 mm, 29 mm = 24.7 mm, and 34 mm = 27 mm Evolut R). All configurations exhibited acceptable hydrodynamic performance irrespective of the degree of leaflet overhang, except the 29-mm S3 implanted in 34-mm Evolut R at node 4 (regurgitant fraction >20%). The valve housing radius of the index Evolut R increased when the S3 was implanted, with the increase ranging from 0 to 2.5 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of the S3 at a lower implant position within an index Evolut R reduces the neoskirt height with no significant compromise to S3 valve function despite a higher degree of leaflet overhang. Low S3 implantation may facilitate future coronary access after redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

En face view of the transcatheter heart valve from deep right-anterior-oblique cranial position for coronary access after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a case series

Background

Coronary access after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is challenging due to the changes in aortic geometry. The perpendicular (long-axis) view of the transcatheter heart valve (THV) is usually used as the primary fluoroscopic angle. However, it does not always provide sufficient information on the rotational axis needed for selective coronary ostia engagement. The en face (short-axis) view from the deep right-anterior-oblique cranial position gives us additional information about three-dimensional spatial relationship of the THV and coronary ostia.

Case summary

We present three cases of coronary access after TAVI. We were successful in the use of the ‘en face’ view along with the perpendicular view in these cases.

Discussion

The use of the en face view complements that of the perpendicular long-axis view since it allows the understanding of the three-dimensional spatial relationship of the THV and the coronary ostia during fluoroscopy and control of catheter manipulation in two directions (up/down for perpendicular and clockwise/counterclockwise for en face view). We believe that the en face view helps improve the technical success of coronary access after TAVI.

Coronary Access After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Commissural Alignment: The ALIGN-ACCESS Study

BACKGROUND

Coronary access (CA) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with supra-annular transcatheter heart valves (THV) can be challenging. Specific Evolut R/Pro and Acurate Neo THVs orientations are associated with reduced neo-commissure overlap with coronary ostia, while SAPIEN 3 THV cannot be oriented. With the ALIGN-ACCESS study (TAVR With Commissural Alignment Followed by Coronary Access), we investigated the impact of commissural alignment on the feasibility of CA after TAVR.

METHODS

We performed coronary angiography after TAVR with intra-annular SAPIEN 3, supra-annular Evolut R/Pro, and Acurate Neo THVs in 206 patients. Evolut THVs were implanted aiming for commissure alignment. Alignment of Acurate Neo was retrospectively assessed in 36, intentionally attempted in 26 cases. The primary end point was the rate of unfeasible and nonselective CA after TAVR.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight percent of patients received SAPIEN 3, 31.1% Evolut Pro/R, 30.1% Acurate Neo THV. Final valve orientation was favorable to commissural alignment in 85.9% of Evolut and 69.4% of Acurate Neo cases (with intentional alignment successful in 88.5%). Selective CA was higher for SAPIEN 3 than for aligned and misaligned supra-annular THVs (95% versus 71% versus 46%, P<0.001). Cannulation of at least one coronary was unfeasible with 11% misaligned supra-annular, 3% aligned supra-annular, and 0% SAPIEN 3 THVs. Independent predictors of unfeasible/nonselective CA were implantation of a misaligned supra-annular THV (odds ratio, 4.59 [95% CI, 1.81-11.61]; P<0.01), sinus of Valsalva height (odds ratio, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.7-0.98]; P=0.03), and THV-sinus of Valsalva relation (odds ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 1.02-1.1]; P<0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Commissural alignment improves the rate of selective CA after TAVR with supra-annular THVs. Nevertheless, aligned supra-annular THVs carry higher risk of unfeasible/nonselective CA than SAPIEN 3. Patients with a misaligned supra-annular THV, low sinus of Valsalva, and higher THV-sinus of Valsalva relation are at highest risk of impaired CA after TAVR.

Impact of blood pressure on coronary perfusion and valvular hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to evaluate the impact of various blood pressures (BPs) on coronary perfusion and valvular hemodynamics following aortic valve replacement (AVR).

BACKGROUND

Lower systolic and diastolic (SBP/DBP) pressures from the recommended optimal target range of SBP < 120-130 mmHg and DBP < 80 mmHg after AVR have been independently associated with increased cardiovascular and all-cause mortality.

METHODS

The hemodynamic assessment of a 26 mm SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve (TAV), 29 mm Evolut R TAV, and 25 mm Magna Ease surgical aortic valve (SAV) was performed in a pulsed left heart simulator with varying SBP, DBP, and heart rate (HR) conditions (60 and 120 bpm) at 5 L/min cardiac output (CO). Average coronary flow (CF), effective orifice areas (EOAs), and valvulo-arterial impedance (Zva) were calculated.

RESULTS

At HR of 60 bpm, at SBP < 120 mmHg and DBP < 60 mmHg, CF decreased below the physiological lower limit with several different valves. Zva and EOA were found to increase and decrease respectively with increasing SBP and DBP. The same results were found with an HR of 120 bpm. The trends of CF variation with BP were similar in all valves however the drop below the lower physiological CF limit was valve dependent.

CONCLUSION

In a controlled in vitro system, with different aortic valve prostheses in place, CF decreased below the physiologic minimum when SBP and DBP were in the range targeted by blood pressure guidelines. Combined with recent observations from patients treated with AVR, these findings underscore the need for additional studies to identify the optimal BP in patients treated with AVR for AS.

Surgical explantation of transcatheter aortic bioprosthesis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Despite the rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), aortic valve reintervention, particularly surgical TAVR valve explantation (TAVR explant), has not been well described.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched through July 2021 to identify observational studies and case series reporting clinical outcomes of TAVR explant. Data on the frequency of TAVR explant, patient demographic characteristics, clinical indications, operative data, and perioperative outcomes were extracted. Study-specific estimates were combined using one-group meta-analysis in a random-effects model.

Results

A total of 10 studies were identified that included 1690 patients undergoing a TAVR explant. The frequency of TAVR explant among TAVR recipients was 0.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2%-0.6%). The mean patient age was 73.7 years (95% CI, 72.9-74.6 years). The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality was 5.9% (95% CI, 2.9%-8.8%) at the index TAVR and 8.1% (95% CI, 5.4%-10.8%) at TAVR explant. The mean time from implant to explant was 345.0 days (95% CI, 196.7-493.3 days). Among patients with documented device type, 59.8% (95% CI, 43.5%-76.0%) had a balloon-expandable valve and 40.2% (95% CI, 24.0%-56.5%) had a self-expandable valve. Concomitant procedures during TAVR explant were performed in 52.9% of patients (95% CI, 33.8%-72.0%), and the most common concomitant procedure was aortic repair (28.5%; 95% CI, 14.0%-42.9%). The 30-day mortality after TAVR explant was 16.7% (95% CI, 12.2%-21.2%).

Conclusions

TAVR explant in patients with a failing TAVR appears to be rare; however, the clinical impact of TAVR explant is substantial. Implanters must be mindful of the need for a lifetime management strategy in younger and lower-risk patients when choosing the valve type for the initial procedure.

Non-Aortic Valve Cardiac Surgery after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Despite the rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), the frequency and outcomes of non-aortic valve cardiac surgery after TAVR are unknown.

METHODS

Non-aortic valve surgery after TAVR from 2011 to 2019 was queried using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) Adult Cardiac Surgery Database. A total of 666 patients, including 47 (7.1%) unplanned TAVR-explant and 3 (0.5%) aborted procedures during non-aortic valve procedures, were identified.

RESULTS

These 666 procedures were performed by 459 surgeons (median 1.0 case per surgeon) from 308 centers (median 1.0 case per center), which represents 29% of Database participants. The case number increased over time from 4 in 2011 to 204 in 2019, largely attributable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n=283; 42.5%) and mitral (n=258; 38.7%) procedures. The median age was 75.0 and 51.4% had previous cardiac surgeries. The 30-day mortality of the entire cohort was 17.0%. Subgroups with particularly high mortality included patients with robot-assisted mitral surgery (n=5/12; 41.7%), unplanned TAVR-explant (n=19/47; 40.4%), open atrial transcatheter mitral valve replacement (n=10/33; 30.3%) and aortic repair (n=24/79; 29.8%). Among 390 patients with available STS predicted risk of mortality, the 30-day mortality with isolated CABG, isolated mitral repair/replacement and the entire group was 8.4% (n=19/225), 13.5% (n=21/155) and 10.8% (n=42/390) with corresponding observed-to-expected mortality (O/E) ratio of 1.8, 1.8 and 1.7, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-aortic valve operation after TAVR was associated with a high mortality and O/E ratio. Implanters must be mindful of "lifetime management" strategy including assessment of concurrent pathologies during TAVR candidate selection.

Coronary artery cannulation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionised the treatment of severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis and it is now a proven and effective alternative to surgery for patients regardless of preoperative risk stratification. Nevertheless, the consequent expansion towards younger patients with longer life expectancy focuses attention on long-term considerations. In particular, although the prevalence of coronary artery disease has been shown to decrease with the lowering of estimated risk stratification, the chance of requirement of future coronary interventions after TAVI increases dramatically as a function of patients' life expectancy. To date, however, only a few studies have investigated the feasibility and reproducibility of coronary artery cannulation after TAVI. Different conditions related mainly to aortic root anatomy and specific transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) designs and deployment have been associated with impaired coronary access after TAVI. In the present review, we will examine the conditions that may make coronary access after TAVI more challenging or even impossible.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR): Recent updates

Within the last two decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the management of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). Newer generations of transcatheter valve design, optimized imaging planning, growing operator experience, and technical refinements have driven enhancements in safety and reduction of procedural complications over time. These improvements have allowed expansion to lower risk patients, in which TAVR confirmed favorable outcomes compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Based on current evidence, the 2020 AHA/ACC guidelines provided updated recommendations on indications for TAVR, with several clinical indications remain with SAVR. As TAVR expands to younger, low-risk patients with longer life expectancies, different issues of utmost importance have emerged, such as long-term durability, bioprosthetic valve performance, coronary reaccess, prognostic impact of conduction disturbances and paravalvular leak, reintervention after TAVR, and optimal pharmacological management after the procedure. In this review, we provide an update of recent clinical guidelines and available data from clinical trials and registries, and highlight novel strategies to further reduce procedural complications.

Force distribution within the frame of self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve: Insights from in-vivo finite element analysis

We sought to assess the amount and distribution of force on the valve frame after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) via patient-specific computer simulation. Patients successfully treated with the self-expanding Venus A-Valve and multislice computed tomography (MSCT) pre- and post-TAVR were retrospectively included. Patient-specific finite element models of the aortic root and prosthesis were constructed. The force (in Newton) on the valve frame was derived at every 3 mm from the inflow and at every 22.5° on each level. Twenty patients of whom 10 had bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) were analyzed. The total force on the frame was 74.9 N in median (interquartile range 24.0). The maximal force was observed at level 5 that corresponds with the nadir of the bioprosthetic leaflets and was 9.9 (7.1) N in all patients, 10.3 (6.6) N in BAV and 9.7 (9.2) N for patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). The level of maximal force located higher from the native annulus in BAV and TAV patients (8.8 [4.8] vs. 1.8 [7.4] mm). The area of the valve frame at the level of maximal force decreased from 437.4 (239.7) mm² at the annulus to 377.6 (114.3) mm² in BAV, but increased from 397.5 (114.3) mm² at the annulus to 406.7 (108.9) mm² in TAV. The maximum force on the bioprosthetic valve frame is located at the plane of the nadir of the bioprosthetic leaflets. It remains to be elucidated whether this may be associated with bioprosthetic frame and leaflet integrity and/or function.

Diagnostic Work-Up of the Aortic Patient: An Integrated Approach toward the Best Therapeutic Option

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease. In the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become the standard of care for symptomatic patients at high surgical risk. Recently, indications to TAVI have also been extended to the low surgical risk and intermediate surgical risk populations. Consequently, in this setting, some aspects acquire greater relevance: surgical risk evaluation, clinical assessment, multimodality imaging of the valve, and management of coronary artery disease. Moreover, future issues such as coronary artery re-access and valve-in-valve interventions should be considered in the valve selection process. This review aims to summarize the principal aspects of a multidimensional (multidisciplinary) and comprehensive preprocedural work-up. The Heart Team is at the center of the decision-making process of the management of aortic valve disease and bears responsibility for offering each patient a tailored approach based on an individual evaluation of technical aspects together with the risks and benefits of each modality. Considering the progressive expansion in TAVI indication and technological progress, the role of a work-up and multidisciplinary Heart Team will be even more relevant.

Lifetime management of aortic valve disease: Aligning surgical and transcatheter armamentarium to set the tone for the present and the future

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has already received the green light for high-, intermediate- and low-risk profiles and is an alternative for all patients regardless of age. It is clear that there has been a push towards the use of TAVR in younger and younger patients (<65 years), which has never been formally tested in randomized controlled trials but seems inevitable as TAVR technology makes steady progress. Lifetime management as a concept will set the tone in the field of the structural heart. Some subjects in this scenario arise, including the importance of optimized prosthetic hemodynamics for lifetime care; surgical procedures in the aortic root; management of structural valve degeneration with valve-in-valve procedures (TAVR-in-surgical aortic valve replacement [SAVR] and TAVR-in-TAVR) and redo SAVR; commissural alignment and cusp overlap for TAVR; the rise in the number of surgical procedures for TAVR explantation; and the renewed interest in the Ross procedure. This article reviews all these issues which will become commonplace during heart team meetings and preoperative conversations with patients in the coming years.

[Challenges of coronary catheterization after TAVR]

PURPOSE

Coronary catheterization after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVR) may be challenging. The main objective of the study is to assess the feasibility of coronary catheterization and angioplasty according to each type of valve.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

We retrospectively studied coronary angiography or percutaneous angioplasty procedures after TAVR in two different centers. The catheterization success of coronary artery was evaluated according to the quality of engagement in ostium and opacification of the artery. Other indicators were collected including catheters used, fluoroscopy and angiography times, DAP and the volume of the contrast agent.

RESULTS

Among 1512 TAVR procedures, 33 patients were included. The Sapien 3® valve was implanted in 22 patients and the Evolut® in 11 patients (7 Evolut-R® and 4 Evolut Pro®). Coronary angiography with selective or partially selective catheterization has been successfully performed in all patients with a Sapien 3® valve. In the Evolut® group we identified 3 cases of non-selective catheterization for the right coronary and 1 case for the left coronary. Standard Judkins catheters seem to be the most suitable for both types of valve with very good efficiency.

CONCLUSION

The results of our study is promising for the future of TAVR with a coronary catheterization success rate close to 100% with some difficulties for the Evolut® supra-annular valves. Special attention should be paid to the technique of implantation and orientation of cups in the aortic sinus.

Coronary Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis

Aortic stenosis (AS) and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist, with up to two thirds of patients with AS having significant CAD. Given the challenges when both disease states are present, these patients require a tailored approach diagnostically and therapeutically. In this review the authors address the impact of AS and aortic valve replacement (AVR) on coronary hemodynamic status and discuss the assessment of CAD and the role of revascularization in patients with concomitant AS and CAD. Remodeling in AS increases the susceptibility of myocardial ischemia, which can be compounded by concomitant CAD. AVR can improve coronary hemodynamic status and reduce ischemia. Assessment of the significance of coexisting CAD can be done using noninvasive and invasive metrics. Revascularization in patients undergoing AVR can benefit certain patients in whom CAD is either prognostically or symptomatically important. Identifying this cohort of patients is challenging and as yet incomplete. Patients with dual pathology present a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge; both AS and CAD affect coronary hemodynamic status, they provoke similar symptoms, and their respective treatments can have an impact on both diseases. Decisions regarding coronary revascularization should be based on understanding this complex relationship, using appropriate coronary assessment and consensus within a multidisciplinary team.

Conventional versus modified delivery system technique in commissural alignment from the Evolut low-risk CT substudy

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the impact of conventional delivery system (DS) insertion technique on "Hat-marker" orientation/commissural alignment in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the Evolut Low Risk Trial CT substudy versus a modified technique.

BACKGROUND

Unlike surgical aortic valve replacement, where alignment of the surgical valve commissures with native commissures can be achieved virtually 100% of the time, commissural alignment during TAVR is not achieved consistently. This may subsequently impact the feasibility of both coronary access and reintervention after TAVR.

METHODS

"Hat-marker" orientations during deployment were characterized as outer curve (OC), center front (CF), inner curve, and center back. Severe commissure-to-CA overlap was 0-20°. "Hat-marker" orientations and CA overlap were compared to 240 patients from a single center using the modified 3-o'clock flush port DS technique.

RESULTS

In the CT substudy in which conventional DS insertion was performed (flush port at 12 o'clock); 154/249 had both analyzable CT and procedural fluoroscopy to validate "Hat-marker" to C-tab/commissural orientation. On post-TAVR CT, Evolut valve commissural orientation and coronary artery (CA) ostia were identified. Compared to conventional DS technique in the CT substudy, the modified technique had higher rates of "Hat-marker" at OC/CF orientation, improved commissural alignment and reduced severe CA overlap; (left main, 14.2 vs. 27.9%; right coronary artery, 11.7 vs. 27.3% both, 5.0 vs. 13.6%; 1 or both CA, 20.8 vs. 41.6%, all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The modified technique improved initial "Hat-marker" orientation during Evolut deployment and resulted in better commissural alignment and reduced CA overlap.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Prosthesis

The self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (Medtronic Cardiovascular Corevalve and Evolut) is a supra-annular, trileafet porcine pericardial valves on a diamond lattice nickel-titanium alloy frame. The TAVR device has undergone significant improvements in design and procedural techniques to further increase safety, efficacy, and durability since they it was first released. Unique design characteristics, as well as patient and procedural factors, favor self-expanding over balloon-expandable prostheses in certain situations. The self-expanding transcatheter heart valve has proven to be an excellent option for severe aortic stenosis patients with any level of surgical risk and preliminary data suggest a comparable durability to surgical tissue valves.

Revascularization in the Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Population

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a standard treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Management of concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) in these patients remains controversial with no randomized clinical trials to guide decision making in this cohort. The role of CAD in TAVR has been difficult to evaluate given the current heterogeneity in defining CAD, and the used methods to assess CAD. Subsequently, the role of coronary revascularization remains individualized and assessed on a case-by-case basis by the heart team. In this article, the authors discuss the rationale and prognostic role of CAD in patients undergoing TAVR.

Role of coronary angiogram before transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Coexistent coronary artery disease is commonly seen in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Previous studies showed that pre-TAVI coronary revascularisation was not associated with improved outcomes, challenging the clinical value of routine coronary angiogram (CA).

AIM

To assess whether a selective approach to perform pre-TAVI CA is safe and feasible.

METHODS

This was a retrospective non-randomised single-centre analysis of consecutive patients undergoing TAVI. A selective approach for performing CA tailored to patient clinical need was developed. Clinical outcomes were compared based on whether patients underwent CA. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infraction, repeat CA, and re-admission with heart failure.

RESULTS

Of 348 patients (average age 81 ± 7 and 57% male) were included with a median follow up of 19 (9-31) mo. One hundred and fifty-four (44%) patients, underwent CA before TAVI procedure. Patients who underwent CA were more likely to have previous myocardial infarction (MI) and previous percutaneous revascularisation. The primary endpoint was comparable between the two group (22.6% vs 22.2%; hazard ratio 1.05, 95%CI: 0.67-1.64, P = 0.82). Patients who had CA were less likely to be readmitted with heart failure (P = 0.022), but more likely to have repeat CA (P = 0.002) and MI (P = 0.007). In those who underwent CA, the presence of flow limiting lesions did not affect the incidence of primary endpoint, or its components, except for increased rate of repeat CA.

CONCLUSION

Selective CA is a feasible and safe approach. The clinical value of routine CA should be challenged in future randomised trials

Unplanned Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization After TAVR: A Multicenter International Registry

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to evaluate the incidence and causes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) at different time periods following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic stenosis frequently coexist, but the optimal management of CAD following TAVR remains incompletely elucidated.

METHODS

Patients undergoing unplanned PCI after TAVR were retrospectively included in an international multicenter registry.

RESULTS

Between July 2008 and March 2019, a total of 133 patients (0.9%; from a total cohort of 15,325) underwent unplanned PCI after TAVR (36.1% after balloon-expandable bioprosthesis, 63.9% after self-expandable bioprosthesis). The median time to PCI was 191 days (interquartile range: 59 to 480 days). The daily incidence of PCI was highest during the first week after TAVR and then declined over time. Overall, the majority of patients underwent PCI due to an acute coronary syndrome, and specifically 32.3% had non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, 15.4% had unstable angina, 9.8% had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and 2.2% had cardiac arrest. However, chronic coronary syndromes are the main indication beyond 2 years. PCI success was reported in almost all cases (96.6%), with no significant differences between patients treated with balloon-expandable and self-expandable bioprostheses (100% vs. 94.9%; p = 0.150).

CONCLUSIONS

Unplanned PCI after TAVR is rare, with an incidence declining over time after TAVR. The main indication to PCI is acute coronary syndrome in the first 2 years after TAVR, and thereafter chronic coronary syndromes become prevalent. Unplanned PCIs are frequently successfully performed after TAVR, with no apparent differences between balloon-expandable and self-expandable bioprostheses. (Revascularization After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation [REVIVAL]; NCT03283501).

Incidence, treatment, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction following transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the incidence, treatment, and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) following transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement (TAVR or SAVR).

BACKGROUND

Coronary artery disease is common in patients who undergo aortic valve replacement. However, little is known about differences in clinical features of post-TAVR or post-SAVR AMI.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified post-TAVR or post-SAVR (including isolated and complex SAVR) patients admitted with AMI using the Nationwide Readmissions Database 2012-2017. Incidence, invasive strategy (coronary angiography or revascularization), and in-hospital outcomes were compared between post-TAVR and post-SAVR AMIs.

RESULTS

The incidence of 180-day AMI was higher post-TAVR than post-SAVR (1.59% vs. 0.72%; p < 0.001). Post-TAVR AMI patients (n = 1315), compared with post-SAVR AMI patients (n = 1344), were older, had more comorbidities and more frequent non-ST-elevation AMI (NSTEMI: 86.6% vs. 78.0%; p < 0.001). After propensity-score matching, there was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between post-TAVR and post-SAVR AMIs (14.7% vs. 16.1%; p = 0.531), but the mortality was high in both groups, particularly in ST-elevation AMI (STEMI: 38.8% vs. 29.2%; p = 0.153). Invasive strategy was used less frequently for post-TAVR AMI than post-SAVR AMI (25.6% vs. 38.3%; p < 0.001). Invasive strategy was associated with lower mortality in both post-TAVR (adjusted odds ratio = 0.40; 95% confidence interval = [0.24-0.66]) and post-SAVR groups (0.60 [0.41-0.88]).

CONCLUSIONS

AMI, albeit uncommon, was more frequent post-TAVR than post-SAVR. Patients commonly presented with NSTEMI, but the mortality of STEMI was markedly high. Further studies are needed to understand why a substantial percentage of patients do not receive invasive coronary treatment, particularly after TAVR, despite seemingly better outcomes with invasive strategy.

The need for future coronary access following surgical or transcatheter aortic valve replacement

The aim of the study was to estimate the percentage of Medicare patients needing coronary access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary angiography following aortic valve replacement (AVR). Indications for TAVR have expanded to include younger and low-risk patients, raising the question of coronary access for future procedures. Medicare patients <80 years old with an AVR between 2011 and 2018 were included. Time-to-event analyses were conducted using Cox hazard models to estimate risk of coronary access up to 7 years after AVR. Model adjustments included age, sex, race, region, comorbidity, concomitant CABG, and smoking. A total of 13,469 Medicare patients (mean age 70.6) met inclusion criteria. Models estimated that 2.5% of patients at 1-year post-index and 17% at over 7 years would need coronary access. For patients who had SAVR (with or without CABG), estimates for coronary access were similar and over 15% after 6.5 years. For TAVR patients, with a previous PCI, 28% at 4.5 years required coronary access, which was higher than TAVR patients without a previous PCI. SAVR patients with and without CAD at baseline were similar; however, TAVR patients with CAD had a 22% rate of coronary access versus 7% for those without at 3 years. Approximately half of patients who needed coronary access returned to the same hospital as their initial AVR. Coronary access is required in a substantial portion of AVR patients especially those with PCI or a history of CAD undergoing TAVR. The need for coronary access may increase as transcatheter AVR becomes accessible to younger patients with a longer life expectancy.

A case report of open-aorta, direct transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation: an innovative approach to manage the hazard of coronary flow compromise in transcatheter aortic valve re-interventions

Background

Coronary flow compromise is a significant risk of transcatheter aortic valve therapy. Warranting preservation of coronary flow is even more challenging with transcatheter aortic valve re-intervention since the implantation of a transcatheter valve within a degenerated bioprosthetic or transcatheter valve increases significantly this hazard.

Case summary

We present a case of heart failure secondary to transcatheter aortic valve degeneration requiring a transcatheter aortic valve re-intervention. Pre-operative imaging studies demonstrated a high risk for iatrogenic coronary flow impairment. The patient underwent a successful surgical removal of the prosthetic valve leaflets followed by direct transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Conclusion

We reviewed the literature on the approach to difficult coronaries in transcatheter aortic valve therapy, and we describe an innovative hybrid approach that may represent a viable alternative in cases where catheter techniques of coronary flow preservation are not applicable.

Real world coronary artery ostia full accessibility after last generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AIM

We evaluate, performing a pooled meta-analysis, the current coronary artery accessibility rate in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients during the follow-up. Full coronary artery accessibility after TAVI has not been adequately addressed by the current literature.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, data on coronary artery access were obtained from the ratio between in the full coronary engagement (n) and the number of coronary angiography and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (N). Data were synthesized using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Out of 7048 TAVI patients, 276 (3.9%) (mean age 76.8 years, 111 (40.2%) females) were analysed. Full coronary artery accessibility for coronary angiographies and percutaneous coronary interventions were obtained in 83.0% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.66-0.92, p = 0.001, I²: 88.2%) and 96.0% (95% CI: 0.90-0.98, p < 0.0001, I²: 0) of cases (p for difference  < .0.001). Left coronary artery (n = 219) was easily fully engaged compared to the right one (90.9% (95% CI: 0.80-0.96, p < 0.0001, I²: 58.4% and 82.0% (95% CI: 0.60-0.93, p = 0.006, I²: 83.2%), respectively, (p for difference  < 0.001). Using age as moderator variable, meta-regression revealed a positive and negative correlation with coronary artery accessibility in patients treated with Sapien-Edwards (p = 0.008) and CoreValve (p = 0.010) platforms, respectively. Conversely, a negative correlation (p = 0.01) was found between coronary artery accessibility and mean time after Sapien-Edwards platform implantation (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Full coronary artery accessibility during coronary angiographies and/or percutaneous coronary interventions results suboptimal for both coronary artery ostia and worse for right compared to left coronary artery after TAVI.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Patients: Overview and Practical Management

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is present in 40-75% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Currently, the indication for TAVI is expanding toward younger patients at lower surgical risk. Given the progressive nature of CAD, the necessity for coronary angiography (CA), including percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), will subsequently increase as in the future TAVI patients will be younger and have a longer life expectancy. Data on the impact of PCI in patients with severe CAD scheduled for TAVI are controversial, and although European and US guidelines recommend PCI before TAVI, the optimal timing for PCI remains unclear due to a lack of evidence. Depending on the valve type, position, and axial alignment of the implanted device, CA and/or PCI after TAVI can be challenging. Hence, every interventionalist should be familiar with the different types of transcatheter heart valves and their characteristics and technical issues that can arise during invasive coronary procedures. This review provides an overview of current data regarding the prevalence and clinical implications of CAD and PCI in TAVI patients and includes useful guidance for practical management in the clinical routine.

ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Among patients with acute coronary syndrome following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are at highest risk.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of STEMI after TAVR.

METHODS

This was a multicenter study including 118 patients presenting with STEMI at a median of 255 days (interquartile range: 9 to 680 days) after TAVR. Procedural features of STEMI after TAVR managed with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were compared with all-comer STEMI: 439 non-TAVR patients who had primary PCI within the 2 weeks before and after each post-TAVR STEMI case in 5 participating centers from different countries.

RESULTS

Median door-to-balloon time was higher in TAVR patients (40 min [interquartile range: 25 to 57 min] vs. 30 min [interquartile range: 25 to 35 min]; p = 0.003). Procedural time, fluoroscopy time, dose-area product, and contrast volume were also higher in TAVR patients (p < 0.01 for all). PCI failure occurred more frequently in patients with previous TAVR (16.5% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001), including 5 patients in whom the culprit lesion was not revascularized owing to coronary ostia cannulation failure. In-hospital and late (median of 7 months [interquartile range: 1 to 21 months]) mortality rates were 25.4% and 42.4%, respectively (20.6% and 38.2% in primary PCI patients), and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42 to 6.43; p = 0.004), Killip class ≥2 (HR: 2.74; 95% CI: 1.37 to 5.49; p = 0.004), and PCI failure (HR: 3.23; 95% CI: 1.42 to 7.31; p = 0.005) determined an increased risk.

CONCLUSIONS

STEMI after TAVR was associated with very high in-hospital and mid-term mortality. Longer door-to-balloon times and a higher PCI failure rate were observed in TAVR patients, partially due to coronary access issues specific to the TAVR population, and this was associated with poorer outcomes.

Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: updated endpoint definitions for aortic valve clinical research

Aims 

The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC), founded in 2010, was intended to (i) identify appropriate clinical endpoints and (ii) standardize definitions of these endpoints for transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical trials. Rapid evolution of the field, including the emergence of new complications, expanding clinical indications, and novel therapy strategies have mandated further refinement and expansion of these definitions to ensure clinical relevance. This document provides an update of the most appropriate clinical endpoint definitions to be used in the conduct of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical research.

Methods and results 

Several years after the publication of the VARC-2 manuscript, an in-person meeting was held involving over 50 independent clinical experts representing several professional societies, academic research organizations, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives to (i) evaluate utilization of VARC endpoint definitions in clinical research, (ii) discuss the scope of this focused update, and (iii) review and revise specific clinical endpoint definitions. A writing committee of independent experts was convened and subsequently met to further address outstanding issues. There were ongoing discussions with FDA and many experts to develop a new classification schema for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure. Overall, this multi-disciplinary process has resulted in important recommendations for data reporting, clinical research methods, and updated endpoint definitions. New definitions or modifications of existing definitions are being proposed for repeat hospitalizations, access site-related complications, bleeding events, conduction disturbances, cardiac structural complications, and bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure (including valve leaflet thickening and thrombosis). A more granular 5-class grading scheme for paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) is being proposed to help refine the assessment of PVR. Finally, more specific recommendations on quality-of-life assessments have been included, which have been targeted to specific clinical study designs.

Conclusions 

Acknowledging the dynamic and evolving nature of less-invasive aortic valve therapies, further refinements of clinical research processes are required. The adoption of these updated and newly proposed VARC-3 endpoints and definitions will ensure homogenous event reporting, accurate adjudication, and appropriate comparisons of clinical research studies involving devices and new therapeutic strategies.

Valve Academic Research Consortium 3: Updated Endpoint Definitions for Aortic Valve Clinical Research

AIMS

The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC), founded in 2010, was intended to (i) identify appropriate clinical endpoints and (ii) standardize definitions of these endpoints for transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical trials. Rapid evolution of the field, including the emergence of new complications, expanding clinical indications, and novel therapy strategies have mandated further refinement and expansion of these definitions to ensure clinical relevance. This document provides an update of the most appropriate clinical endpoint definitions to be used in the conduct of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical research.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Several years after the publication of the VARC-2 manuscript, an in-person meeting was held involving over 50 independent clinical experts representing several professional societies, academic research organizations, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives to (i) evaluate utilization of VARC endpoint definitions in clinical research, (ii) discuss the scope of this focused update, and (iii) review and revise specific clinical endpoint definitions. A writing committee of independent experts was convened and subsequently met to further address outstanding issues. There were ongoing discussions with FDA and many experts to develop a new classification schema for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure. Overall, this multi-disciplinary process has resulted in important recommendations for data reporting, clinical research methods, and updated endpoint definitions. New definitions or modifications of existing definitions are being proposed for repeat hospitalizations, access site-related complications, bleeding events, conduction disturbances, cardiac structural complications, and bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure (including valve leaflet thickening and thrombosis). A more granular 5-class grading scheme for paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) is being proposed to help refine the assessment of PVR. Finally, more specific recommendations on quality-of-life assessments have been included, which have been targeted to specific clinical study designs.

CONCLUSIONS

Acknowledging the dynamic and evolving nature of less-invasive aortic valve therapies, further refinements of clinical research processes are required. The adoption of these updated and newly proposed VARC-3 endpoints and definitions will ensure homogenous event reporting, accurate adjudication, and appropriate comparisons of clinical research studies involving devices and new therapeutic strategies.

Challenging Anatomies for TAVR-Bicuspid and Beyond

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as the standard treatment for the majority of patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. As transcatheter aortic valve replacement expands to patients across all risk groups, optimal patient selection strategies and device implantation techniques become increasingly important. A significant number of patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve replacement present with challenging anatomies and clinical indications that had been historically considered a contraindication for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. This article aims to highlight and discuss some of the potential obstacles that are encountered in clinical practice with a particular emphasis on bicuspid aortic valve disease.

Narrative review of the contemporary surgical treatment of unicuspid aortic valve disease

Unicuspid aortic valve disease (UAVD) is a frequent and long-lasting challenge for adult congenital heart disease centers. UAVD patients become usually symptomatic in their twenties or thirties and require a surgical treatment plan which should respect their complete lifespan combined with an adequate quality of life. Unfortunately, all current surgical strategies of congenital aortic valve disease bear some important limitations: (I) Aortic valve replacement using bioprosthetic valves is associated with early structural degeneration and leads frequently to re-operations. (II) Mechanical valves are commonly associated with lifelong risk of severe bleeding due to oral anticoagulation. (III) Using a pulmonary autograft (i.e., Ross procedure) for aortic valve replacement is associated with excellent long-term results in non-elderly patients. However, failure of pulmonary autograft or pulmonary homograft may require re-operations. (IV) Aortic valve repair or Ozaki procedure is only performed in a few heart centers worldwide and is associated with a limited reproducibility and early patch degeneration, suture dehiscence or increased risk of endocarditis. In contrast to degenerative tricuspid aortic valve disease, UAVD remains relatively understudied and reports on UAVD treatment are rare and usually limited to retrospective single-center observations. For this review, we searched PubMed for papers in the English language by using the search words unicuspid aortic valve, congenital aortic valve, Ross procedure, Ozaki procedure, aortic valve repair, mechanical/bioprosthetic aortic replacement, homograft. We read the abstracts of relevant titles to confirm their relevance, and the full papers were then extracted. References from extracted papers were checked for additional relevant reports. This review summarizes current surgical treatment strategies for UAVD including aortic valve replacement using bioprosthetic or mechanical valves, homografts, pulmonary autografts (i.e., Ross procedure) and aortic valve repair techniques for UAV. Furthermore, Ozaki procedure will be discussed.

Assessing the Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation on Cardiac Catheterisation: A Multicentric Study

BACKGROUND

The success rate of coronary angiography (CA) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is variable. Our aim was to investigate CA difficulty, outcomes, and predictors of difficult CA after TAVI.

METHOD

This was an international multicentric retrospective cohort study that included patients with TAVI and subsequent CA between January 2010 and December 2019. Difficulty with CA was graded as 1 (normal), 2 (partial engagement, complete vessel opacification), 3 (partial engagement, incomplete vessel opacification), and 4 (unsuccessful angiography). Patients were grouped as (a) "easy" (grade 1 for left and right) or (b) "difficult" (grade >1 for either). We compared baseline characteristics and outcomes, and performed multivariate logistic regression for predictors of difficult CA.

RESULTS

Of 96 patients included (mean age 77.4±8.7 years, 48 [50%] male), 88 (92%) had successful CA. Right CA was successful in 80 (83%) patients and left CA in 91 (95%) (p<0.0001). The "difficult" group (n=41 [43%]) had higher Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) scores (7.6±4.9 vs 5.4±4.0; p=0.022), smaller annulus perimeters (72.4±5.4 mm vs 76.2±9.4 mm; p=0.049), greater use of self-expanding valves (83% vs 18%; p<0.0001), increased valve size (26.8±2.1 mm vs 25.6±3.0 mm; p=0.032), and increased oversizing for area (44.3%±17.4% vs 23.6%±22.0%; p=0.0002) and perimeter (17.5%±8.2% vs 7.1%±10.8%; p<0.0001). There was no difference in outcomes except for increased major bleeding (7.3% vs 0.0%; p=0.042). The strongest predictor for "difficult" CA was self-expanding valves when compared to balloon-expandable valves (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 15.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.27-102.40). Society of Thoracic Surgery score was borderline predictive (aOR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.04-1.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results show that after TAVI, CA success rate is high, right CA is more difficult than left, self-expanding valves predispose to difficult CA, and STS score weakly predicts difficult CA. This study is hypothesis-generating and more research is required to confirm these findings.

Accurate commissural alignment during ACURATE neo TAVI procedure. Proof of concept

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Final position of the neo-commissures is uncontrolled during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), potentially hindering coronary access and future procedures. We aimed to develop a standard method to achieve commissural alignment with the ACURATE neo valve.

METHODS

The relationship between native and TAVI neo-commissures was analyzed in 11 severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing TAVI. Based on computed tomography analysis, an in silico model was developed to predict final TAVI commissural posts position. A modified implantation technique, accurate commissural alignment (ACA) and a dedicated delivery system were developed. TAVI implants were tested in 3-dimensional (3D) printed models and in vivo. Commissural misalignment and coronary overlap (CO) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The in silico model accurately predicted final position of commissural posts irrespective of the implantation technique performed (correlation coefficient, 0.994; 95%CI, 0.989-0.998; P<.001). TAVI implant with patient-specific rotation was simulated in 3D printed models and in 9 patients. ACA-oriented TAVI implants presented adequate commissural alignment in vivo (mean commissural misalignment of 7.7 ±3.9°). None of the ACA oriented implants showed CO, whereas in silico conventional implants predicted CO in 6 of the 9 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate commissural alignment of the ACURATE neo device is feasible by inserting the delivery system with a patient-specific rotation based on computed tomography analysis. This is a simple and reproducible method for commissural alignment that can be potentially used for all kinds of TAVI devices.

Computed tomography analysis of coronary ostia location following valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the ACURATE neo valve: Implications for coronary access

BACKGROUND

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) is an emerging alternative to re-do surgery. However, the challenge of coronary access (CA) following ViV-TAVR is a potential limitation as TAVR expands to younger lower-risk populations.

OBJECTIVES

Using post-implantation computed tomography (CT) scans to evaluate the geometrical relationship between coronary ostia and valve frame in patients undergoing ViV-TAVR with the ACURATE neo valve.

METHODS

Post-implant CT scans of 18 out of 20 consecutive patients treated with the ACURATE neo valve were analyzed. Coronary ostia location in relation to the highest plane (HP) (highest point of the ACURATE neo or surgical valve) was determined. Ostia located below the highest plan were further subclassified according to the gap available between the transcatheter heart valve frame and ostium (transcatheter-to-coronary [TTC] distance). The impact implantation depth has on these geometrical relationships was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 21 out of 36 coronary ostia (58%) were located below the level of the HP with the left coronary artery (36%) more likely to be affected than the right (22%). Further sub-classification of these ostia revealed a large (>6 mm), moderate (4-6 mm), and small (<4 mm) TTC distance in 57% (12/21), 38% (8/21), and in 6% (1/18) of cases, respectively. At an implantation depth <4 mm compared to >4 mm, all ostia were located below the HP with no difference in post-procedural mean gradients (14.5 mmHg ± 4.7 vs. 12.6 mmHg ± 5.8; p = .5, 95%CI 3.8-7.5).

CONCLUSIONS

CA following ACURATE neo implantation for ViV-TAVR could potentially be challenging in a significant proportion of patients and specific consideration should be given to the implantation depth.

Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Aortic Stenosis and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Implications for Management

Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease among elderly patients. Since the pathophysiology of degenerative AS shares common pathways with atherosclerotic disease, the severity of AS in the elderly population is often concurrent to the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD). Although surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard treatment for severe AS, the high operative morbidity and mortality in complex and fragile patients was the trigger to develop less invasive techniques. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been posed as the standard of care for elderly patients with severe AS with various risk profiles, which has meant that the concomitant management of CAD has become a crucial issue in such patients. Given the lack of randomised controlled trials evaluating the management of CAD in TAVI patients, most of the recommendations are based on retrospective cohort studies so that the Heart Team approach - together with an assessment of multiple parameters including symptoms and clinical characteristics, invasive and non-invasive ischaemic burden and anatomy - are crucial for the proper management of these patients. This article provides a review of current knowledge about assessment and therapeutic approaches for CAD and severe AS in patients undergoing TAVI.