5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial

Structural Valve Deterioration After Self-Expanding Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients at Intermediate or High Risk

Importance

The frequency and clinical importance of structural valve deterioration (SVD) in patients undergoing self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgery is poorly understood.

Objective

To evaluate the 5-year incidence, clinical outcomes, and predictors of hemodynamic SVD in patients undergoing self-expanding TAVI or surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This post hoc analysis pooled data from the CoreValve US High Risk Pivotal (n = 615) and SURTAVI (n = 1484) randomized clinical trials (RCTs); it was supplemented by the CoreValve Extreme Risk Pivotal trial (n = 485) and CoreValve Continued Access Study (n = 2178). Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate or increased risk of 30-day surgical mortality were included. Data were collected from December 2010 to June 2016, and data were analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.

Interventions

Patients were randomized to self-expanding TAVI or surgery in the RCTs or underwent self-expanding TAVI for clinical indications in the nonrandomized studies.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary end point was the incidence of SVD through 5 years (from the RCTs). Factors associated with SVD and its association with clinical outcomes were evaluated for the pooled RCT and non-RCT population. SVD was defined as (1) an increase in mean gradient of 10 mm Hg or greater from discharge or at 30 days to last echocardiography with a final mean gradient of 20 mm Hg or greater or (2) new-onset moderate or severe intraprosthetic aortic regurgitation or an increase of 1 grade or more.

Results

Of 4762 included patients, 2605 (54.7%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 82.1 (7.4) years. A total of 2099 RCT patients, including 1128 who received TAVI and 971 who received surgery, and 2663 non-RCT patients who received TAVI were included. The cumulative incidence of SVD treating death as a competing risk was lower in patients undergoing TAVI than surgery (TAVI, 2.20%; surgery, 4.38%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.78; P = .004). This lower risk was most pronounced in patients with smaller annuli (23 mm diameter or smaller; TAVI, 1.32%; surgery, 5.84%; HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.73; P = .02). SVD was associated with increased 5-year all-cause mortality (HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.46-2.82; P < .001), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.20-2.90; P = .006), and valve disease or worsening heart failure hospitalizations (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.23-3.84; P = .008). Predictors of SVD were developed from multivariate analysis.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study found a lower rate of SVD in patients undergoing self-expanding TAVI vs surgery at 5 years. Doppler echocardiography was a valuable tool to detect SVD, which was associated with worse clinical outcomes.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01240902, NCT01586910, and NCT01531374.

A new trend to reduce adverse events in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: cusp overlap technique: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is currently the treatment of choice for the majority of patients at moderate or high surgical risk. However, some complications occur frequently with this procedure. In this study, we aimed to assess whether the cusp-overlap view (COP) technique may be associated with a reduced incidence of some of these complications compared with the classical three-cusp view (TCV) technique.

METHODS

In this single-center, retrospective study we investigated; technical success, postprocedural permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI), new-onset stroke, pericardial tamponade, arrhythmia development, acute renal failure, major bleeding, major vascular complications, procedure-related coronary obstruction, new-onset left bundle branch block (LBBB), paravalvular leak, peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI), day of hospitalization, death, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) were determined as the clinical endpoints.

RESULTS

A total of 281 consecutive patients who met the study criteria and underwent elective or emergency transfemoral TAVI using the self-expandable CoreValve Evolut valve were included. 176 consecutive patients implanted with the classical TCV technique and 105 consecutive patients implanted with the COP technique were compared. Compared with the TCV group, patients in the COP group had lower PPMI (3.8% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.039), in-hospital mortality (1.9% vs. 8.5%, p = 0.018), and 1-year death (4.8% versus 18.8%, p = 0.001), and MACCE rates (12.4% vs 31.3%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The COP technique may help to reduce the conduction disturbances, PPMI requirement and complication rates that may develop following TAVI. In addition, it is an interesting result that it reduces mortality and MACCE rates in long-term follow-ups.

Aortic valve morphology and paravalvular leak regression after a self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Aims: The study aimed to compare paravalvular leak (PVL) changes after a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expandable prosthesis between different aortic valve morphologies and evaluate the impact of paravalvular leak regression on clinical prognosis. Methods: Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) successfully treated with a self-expandable TAVR who were followed up for at least 1 year at our centre were consecutively enrolled from January 2016 to August 2019. Paired serial changes in paravalvular leak and other haemodynamic parameters by echocardiography were collected and compared between the bicuspid valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). A logistic regression model was used to explore the predictors of paravalvular leak regression (<1 grade) 1 year after transcatheter aortic valve replacement, while its impact on subsequent clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality and rehospitalisation for heart failure (HF)) was further evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A total of 153 bicuspid valve and 114 tricuspid aortic valve patients were finally enrolled; haemodynamic parameters and paravalvular leak severity were comparable before the discharge between the two groups. The peak transaortic velocity, mean transvalvular gradient, and effective orifice area all significantly improved (p < 0.05) without intergroup differences at all follow-up timepoints. Significant paravalvular leak reduction was observed only in the TAV group (1.75% vs. 4.39%, p = 0.029), while moderate paravalular leak was still more prevalent in BAV (7.19% vs. 1.75%, p = 0.041) at the 1-year follow-up. Multivariable analyses identified the bicuspid valve, asymmetric calcification, and undersizing as independent predictors of failure of the 1-year paravalvular leak reduction in patients with mild or moderate paravalvular leak after discharge. Patients without a paravalvular leak reduction within 1 year showed a relatively higher 2-year all-cause mortality and HF (HR: 5.994, 95% CI: 1.691-21.240, and p = 0.053) rates thereafter. Conclusion: In AS patients after self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement, paravalvular leak regression within 1 year was less prevalent in bicuspid valve morphology. The failure of paravalvular leak reduction might lead to an increased risk of poorer prognosis in the long run.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Two Decades of Evolution - TAVI From Current Perspective

Background

In the treatment of valvular heart diseases, transcatheter therapies have changed the rules of the game, especially in the case of aortic stenosis and mitral regurgitation. Since the first in man transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) performed by Dr. Alain Cribier in 2002 in a non-operable aortic stenosis (AS) patient, TAVI has changed the lives of so many patients for whom medical treatment was, up to then, the only option.

Objective

This article outlines patient selection and pre-procedure evaluation, current perspectives, recent advances, current and future devices, current guidelines informing the use of TAVI, expanding indications for TAVI, ongoing challenges and the future of TAVI.

Methods

The use of these percutaneous techniques has also increased significantly in the past few years with its first application in 2002, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis and has become the standard of care for patients with AS at prohibitively high surgical risks, as well as a preferred treatment for elderly patients with intermediate and high-risk AS.

Results

Since the first pioneering procedure was performed 22 years ago, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved into a routine procedure increasingly performed under conscious sedation via transfemoral access. On a global market worth $2 billion per year, over 300 000 patients have received a transcatheter aortic valve, demonstrating its clinical and market impact. TAVI may be used in lower risk, younger, asymptomatic populations with ongoing studies using an expanding portfolio of devices. Also, for patients deemed unsuitable for cardiac surgery, mitral transcatheter therapies represent the treatment of choice. Percutaneous repair techniques have had the most clinical experience to date.

Conclusion

During this 20-year period, the increased knowledge on pre-procedural planning, the important technological improvements in transcatheter valves, the increased experience and the numerous studies that have been carried out have permitted an expansion of the indications for TAVI, from inoperable patients to high- and intermediate-risk patients. This article outlines patient selection and pre-procedure evaluation, current perspectives, recent advances, current and future devices, current guidelines informing the use of TAVI, expanding indications for TAVI, ongoing challenges and the future of TAVI.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Evolut PRO/PRO+ Self-Expanding Valves: Insights From the NEOPRO/NEOPRO-2 Registries

BACKGROUND

In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) techniques and technology have continuously improved. Data regarding the impact of these advancements on outcomes in large real-world settings are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate temporal trends and assess contemporary outcomes after TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ supra-annular self-expanding valves.

METHODS

This study included patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Procedural dates (August 2017 through November 2021) were stratified in quartiles (Q) and used to investigate temporal trends in TAVR outcomes. Predischarge, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 defined, and 1-year outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 1616 patients from 28 centers were included. Over time, patients had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score (Q1-4, 4.1% [2.8-6.3%], 3.7% [2.6-5.3%], 3.3% [2.4-4.9%], 2.9% [2.2-4.3%]; P<0.001) and more moderate or heavy valve calcification (Q1-4, 80%, 80%, 82%, 88%; P=0.038). Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 technical success was 94.1%, with 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality of 2.4% and 10%, respectively. Throughout the study period, procedures were associated with higher rates of 30-day device success (Q1-4, 81.2%, 82.2%, 82.0%, 88.0%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and early safety (Q1-4, 66.8%, 67.5%, 74.0%, 77.6%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001), with fewer permanent pacemaker implantations (Q1-4: 15.3%, 20.0%, 12.1%, 11.6%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and residual mild or greater paravalvular leaks (Q1-4, 50.4%, 42.1%, 36.5%, 35.8%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding valve is safe and effective. Despite the treatment of heavier calcified anatomies, procedural outcomes are improving over time with less need for pacemaker implantation and less significant paravalvular leaks.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with different self-expanding devices-a propensity score-matched multicenter comparison

OBJECTIVE

Several supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter systems are commercially available for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Comparative data in large-scale multicenter studies are scant.

METHODS

This study included a total of 5175 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI with the ACURATE neo (n = 1095), Evolut R (n = 3365), or Evolut PRO (n = 715) by a transfemoral approach at five high-volume centers. Propensity score matching resulted in 654 triplets. Outcomes are reported according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) consensus.

RESULTS

Moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) occurred significantly more often in the ACURATE neo group (5.2%) than in the Evolut R (1.8%) and Evolut PRO (3.3%) groups (p = 0.003). The rates of major vascular-/access-related complications (4.6%, 3.8%, and 5.0%; p = 0.56), type 3 or 4 bleeding (3.2%, 2.1%, and 4.1%; p = 0.12), and 30-day mortality (2.4%, 2.6%, and 3.7%; p = 0.40) were comparable. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) was significantly lower in the ACURATE neo group (9.5%, 17.6%, and 16.8%; p < 0.001). Independent predictors for 2-year survival were a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score ≥5%, diabetes mellitus, a glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min, baseline mean transvalvular gradient ≤ 30 mm Hg, treating center, and relevant PVR.

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter study, TAVI with the ACURATE neo, Evolut R, or Evolut PRO was feasible and safe. The rate of relevant PVR was more frequent after the ACURATE neo implantation, with, however, lower rates of PPI. Two-year survival was mainly driven by baseline comorbidities.

Long-term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Lotus Valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR: A Secondary Analysis of the REPRISE III Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Long-term follow-up after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is of interest given that longitudinal data on mortality and durability of transcatheter heart valves are limited. The REPRISE III (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System-Randomized Clinical Evaluation) randomized clinical trial compared the mechanically expanded Lotus valve with the self-expanding CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the final 5-year outcomes of the REPRISE III trial.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This prespecified secondary analysis assessed the final 5-year clinical, functional, and echocardiographic outcomes of 912 patients from the REPRISE III trial, which was conducted at 55 centers in North America, Europe, and Australia between September 22, 2014, and December 24, 2015. Patients had high risk for aortic stenosis or severe or symptomatic aortic stenosis. Data were analyzed from September 22, 2014, to May 21, 2021.

INTERVENTION

Lotus valve or CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 end points, hemodynamic measures, functional status, and health status were examined through the 5-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 912 patients (mean [SD] age, 82.8 [7.3] years; 463 women [50.8%]) were randomized to either the Lotus valve group (n = 607) or CoreValve/EvolutR group (n = 305), with a baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score of 6.8%. Clinical follow-up data from the REPRISE III trial were available for 581 patients (95.7%) in the Lotus valve group and 285 patients (93.4%) in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. At 5 years, the cumulative event rate for all-cause mortality was 50.9% in the Lotus valve group vs 52.8% in the CoreValve/EvolutR group (P = .59). Disabling stroke was less frequent with the Lotus valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR (cumulative event rates, 8.3% vs 12.2%; P = .04), whereas the cumulative event rates for overall stroke were similar in both groups (14.1% vs 15.3%; P = .38). Insertion of a new permanent pacemaker (38.9% vs 27.3%; P < .001) and detection of prosthetic aortic valve thrombosis (5.8% vs 1.8%; P = .007) were more common in the Lotus valve group than in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. A smaller proportion of patients who received the Lotus valve experienced valve malpositioning (0% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and required the use of a second valve (1.0% vs 3.8%; P < .001) during the procedure compared with those who received the CoreValve/EvolutR. Compared with the Lotus valve group, the CoreValve/EvolutR group had a significantly lower mean (SD) aortic gradient (7.8 [4.2] mm Hg vs 12.6 [6.7] mm Hg; P < .001) and larger valve areas (1.57 [0.56] cm2 vs 1.42 [0.42] cm2; P = .10). After 5 years, the proportion of patients with moderate or greater paravalvular leak was not significantly higher with the CoreValve/EvolutR than with the Lotus valve (1.9% vs 0%; P = .31); however, the proportion of patients with mild paravalvular leak was higher in the CoreValve/EvolutR group compared with the Lotus valve group (23.1% vs 7.8%; P = .006). Long-term, similar improvements in New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score were observed in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The REPRISE III trial found that, at 5 years, the clinical outcomes of the Lotus valve were comparable to those of the CoreValve/EvolutR and that the Lotus valve was safe and effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02202434.

A European update on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the COVID era

Minimally invasive approaches for aortic valve replacement are now at the forefront of pathological aortic valve treatment. New trials show comparability of these devices to existing therapies, not only in high-risk surgical cohorts but also in low-risk and intermediate-risk cohorts. This review provides vital clinical and anatomical background to aortic valvular disease treatment guidelines, while also providing an update on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices in Europe, their interventional trials and associated complications.

Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Devices in Aortic Stenosis: A Network Meta-Analysis of 42,105 Patients

Background: In recent years, trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an excellent alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Currently, there are several approved devices on the market, yet comparisons among them are scarce. We aimed to compare the various devices via a network meta-analysis. Methods: We performed a network meta-analysis including randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-matched studies that provide comparisons of either a single TAVI with SAVR or two different TAVI devices and report clinical outcomes. Results: We included 12 RCT and 13 propensity-matched studies comprising 42,105 patients, among whom 27,134 underwent TAVI using various valve systems (Sapien & Sapien XT, Sapien 3, Corvalve, Evolut & Evolut Pro, Acurate Neo, Portico). The mean follow-up time was 23.4 months. Sapien 3 was superior over SAVR in the reduction of all-cause mortality (OR = 0.53; 95%CrI 0.31–0.91), while no significant difference existed between other devices and SAVR. Aortic regurgitation was more frequent among TAVI devices compared to SAVR. There was no significant difference between the various THVs and SAVR in cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, NYHA class III-IV, and endocarditis. Conclusions: Newer generation TAVI devices, especially Sapien 3 and Evolut R/Pro are associated with improved outcomes compared to SAVR and other devices of the older generation.

Two-year clinical outcomes after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation with balloon-expandable versus self-expanding valves: A subanalysis of the GALILEO trial

BACKGROUND

Midterm data comparing clinical outcomes after successful implantation of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THV) are limited. We aimed to compare 2-year outcomes after successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the Edwards balloon-expandable or the Medtronic self-expanding THV.

METHODS

Two-year outcomes were analyzed according to the implanted THV in the GALILEO trial. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) was a composite of all-cause death or thromboembolic events including stroke, myocardial infarction, symptomatic valve thrombosis, systemic embolism, deep-vein thrombosis, or pulmonary embolism.

RESULTS

Among 1644 patients recruited in 136 centers across 16 countries between 2015 and 2018, 499 received a self-expanding and 757 patients received a balloon-expandable THV. Patients treated with a self-expanding THV were more likely to be female, and had higher surgical risk, lower hemoglobin levels, and more frequent valve-in-valve procedures than those with a balloon-expandable THV. After multivariable adjustment, there were no significant differences in major clinical outcomes between self-expanding versus balloon-expandable THV: MACCE (17.0% vs. 13.4%, adjusted-hazard ratios [HR] 1.18, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.82-1.69); all-cause death (11.4% vs. 9.3%, adjusted-HR 1.26; 95% CI: 0.78-2.05); cardiovascular death (8.5% vs. 4.0%, adjusted-HR 1.53; 95% CI: 0.82-2.86), any stroke (5.1% vs. 3.7%, adjusted-HR 0.86; 95% CI: 0.43-1.73); major or life-threatening bleeding (5.9% vs. 6.8%, adjusted-HR 0.93; 95% CI: 0.53-1.63).

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov. NCT02556203.

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year follow-up data from the GALILEO trial indicate that successful TAVI either with self-expanding or balloon-expandable THVs according to physician discretion did not show difference in rates of MACCE.

Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Thrombosis and Literature Review

An 83-year-old gentleman with a history of 23-mm Hancock-II-bioprosthetic aortic valve (BAV) replacement ten-years prior presented with symptoms of dyspnea and lower extremity edema. During the preceding seven-years, he had been noted to have asymptomatic increased mean transvalvular gradients (MG; 36–50 mmHg) felt to be due to either early bioprosthetic degeneration, pannus formation, or patient–prosthesis mismatch. An echocardiogram at the time of symptom development demonstrated significant flow acceleration through the aortic valve, mild regurgitation, and severely increased MG (48 mmHg) with prolonged acceleration time (AT, 140 msec). A trial of warfarin anticoagulation resulted in dramatic improvement after only 6 weeks with laminar flow through the AV, near-total resolution of regurgitation, and a decrease in MG to 14 mmHg and AT to 114 msec. These findings strongly suggest that BAV thrombosis was the predominant mechanism responsible for the longstanding high MG. Our case highlights that BAV thrombosis should be considered in the differential of elevated gradients regardless of the age of prosthesis, and that a trial of warfarin anticoagulation may be beneficial even if elevated gradients have been present for a prolonged period. Valvular gradients are often abnormal long before a formal diagnosis; however, these may reverse quickly with anticoagulation therapy.

Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Hemodynamics: Definitions, Outcomes, and Evidence Gaps: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

A virtual workshop was organized by the Heart Valve Collaboratory to identify areas of expert consensus, areas of disagreement, and evidence gaps related to bioprosthetic aortic valve hemodynamics. Impaired functional performance of bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement is associated with adverse patient outcomes; however, this assessment is complicated by the lack of standardization for labelling, definitions, and measurement techniques, both after surgical and transcatheter valve replacement. Echocardiography remains the standard assessment methodology because of its ease of performance, widespread availability, ability to do serial measurements over time, and correlation with outcomes. Management of a high gradient after replacement requires integration of the patient's clinical status, physical examination, and multimodality imaging in addition to shared patient decisions regarding treatment options. Future priorities that are underway include efforts to standardize prosthesis sizing and labelling for both surgical and transcatheter valves as well as trials to characterize the consequences of adverse hemodynamics.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerated transcatheter aortic valves: the TRANSIT-PPM international project

Background

A severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is associated with adverse outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for de novo aortic stenosis or a failed surgical bioprosthesis. The impact of severe PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR is unknown.

Aim

We sought to investigate the incidence and 1-year outcomes of different grades of PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR.

Materials and methods

The TRANSIT-PPM is an international registry, including cases of degenerated TAVR treated with a second TAVR. PPM severity, as well as in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year outcomes were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria.

Results

Among 28 centers, 155 patients were included. Severe PPM was found in 6.5% of patients, whereas moderate PPM was found in 14.2% of patients. The rate of severe PPM was higher in patients who underwent TAV-in-TAVR with a second supra-annular self-expanding (S-SE) TAVR (10%, p = 0.04). Specifically, the rate of severe PPM was significantly higher among cases of a SE TAVR implanted into a balloon-expandable (BE) device (19%, p = 0.003). At 1-year follow-up, the rate of all-cause mortality, and the rate of patients in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV were significantly higher in the cohort of patients with severe PPM (p = 0.016 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Almost all the patients with a severe PPM after the first TAVR had a failed &lt; 23 mm BE transcatheter heart valve (THV): the treatment with an S-SE resolved the severe PPM in the majority of the cases.

Conclusion

After TAV-in-TAVR, in a fifth of the cases, a moderate or severe PPM occurred. A severe PPM is associated with an increased 1-year all-cause mortality.

Clinical trial registration

[https://clinicaltrials.gov], identifier [NCT04500964].

TAVR for All? The Surgical Perspective

In spite of the noninferiority of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in high- and intermediate-risk patients, there are still obstacles that need to be overcome before the procedure is further expanded and clinically integrated. The lack of evidence on the long-term durability of the bioprostheses used for TAVR remains of particular concern. In addition, surgery may be preferred over TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) or with concomitant pathologies such as other valve diseases (mitral regurgitation/tricuspid regurgitation), aortopathy, and coronary artery disease. In this review, we discuss and summarize relevant data from clinical trials, current trends, and remaining obstacles, and provide our perspective on the indications for the expansion of TAVR.

Use of a self-expanding transcatheter valve for a degenerated INTUITY valve

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerated surgical bioprosthesis is becoming a more common therapeutic option. Rapid-deployment valves are novel, have distinct structural differences from standard surgical valves, and are increasingly used in minimal-access surgery. We report the case of a 61-year-old man who developed severe stenosis of an Edwards INTUITY Elite rapid-deployment valve and who subsequently underwent successful valve-in-valve placement of a self-expanding transcatheter valve. To our knowledge, this is the first description of the technical aspects of and considerations for using the self-expanding transcatheter platform in the Edwards INTUITY Elite valve.

Update on Minimalist TAVR Care Pathways: Approaches to Care in 2022

Purpose of Review

This review summarizes current data supporting a minimalist TAVR approach and identifies the need for additional study to optimize TAVR care. The authors discuss future directions of the TAVR landscape and how this necessitates evolution of minimalist care pathways.

Recent Findings

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a mainstay in the treatment of aortic stenosis since the initial procedure in 2002. Recently, attention has shifted to TAVR optimization and the minimalist approach with a focus on minimizing procedural sedation, protocolization of perioperative management, and prioritization on early discharge. This approach has been shown to be safe and reduce procedure time, length of stay, and overall cost for hospital systems.

Summary

The minimalist care pathway avoids general anesthesia, shortens procedure time and length of stay, and reduces cost without changing mortality or readmission rates at 30 days. A variety of protocols have been proposed without a clear consensus on specific components or patient eligibility. There is a continued need for data regarding patient risk stratification, valve selection, and discharge strategy as TAVR becomes increasingly common.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair or Replacement: Competitive or Complementary?

Over the last two decades, transcatheter devices have been developed to repair or replace diseased mitral valves (MV). Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) devices have been proven to be efficient and safe, but many anatomical structures are not compatible with these technologies. The most significant advantage of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) over transcatheter repair is the greater and more reliable reduction in mitral regurgitation. However, there are also potential disadvantages. This review introduces the newest TMVr and TMVR devices and presents clinical trial data to identify current challenges and directions for future research.

10-Year Impact of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Leaflet Design (Intra- Versus Supra-Annular) in Mortality and Hemodynamic Performance

Background

The impact of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) leaflet design on long-term device performance is still unknown. This study sought to compare the clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of intra- (IA) versus supra-annular (SA) TAVR designs up-to 10-years following implantation.

Methods

Consecutive patients with at least 5-years follow-up following TAVR for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis from June 2007 to December 2016 were included. Bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) and hemodynamic valve deterioration (HVD) were defined according to VARC-3 updated definitions and estimated using cumulative incidence function to account for the competing risk of death.

Results

A total of 604 patients (82 years; 53% female) were analyzed and divided into IA (482) and SA (122) groups. Overall survival rates at 10-years were similar (IA 15%, 95%CI: 10-22; SA 11%, 95%CI: 6-20; p = 0.21). Compared to the SA TAVR, mean transaortic gradients were significantly higher and increased over time in the IA group. IA TAVRs showed higher 10-year cumulative incidences of BVF (IA 8% vs. SA 1%, p = 0.02) and severe HVD (IA 5% vs. SA 1%, p = 0.05). The occurrence of BVF and HVD in the IA group occurred primarily in the smallest TAVR devices (20-23-mm). After excluding these sizes, the cumulative incidences of BVF (IA 5% vs. SA 1%, p = 0.40) and severe HVD (IA 2% vs. SA 1%, p = 0.11) were similar.

Conclusion

In this study, TAVR leaflet design had no impact on survival at 10-years. IA devices showed higher transaortic gradients and cumulative incidences of HVD and BVF predominantly occurring in the smallest valve sizes.

Outcomes in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

The use of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is increasing, but studies evaluating clinical outcomes in these patients are scarce. Also, there are limited data to guide the choice of valve type in ViV-TAVI. Therefore, this CENTER-study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI compared to patients with native valve TAVI (NV-TAVI). In addition, we compared outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI treated with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable valves. A total of 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 11333 patients with NV-TAVI were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching, resulting in 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 512 patients with NV-TAVI. Mean age was 81±7 years, 58% were female, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.3% (4.0% to 12.8%). Mortality rates were comparable between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI patients at 30 days (4.1% vs 5.9%, p = 0.30) and 1 year (14.2% vs 17.3%, p = 0.34). Stroke rates were also similar at 30 days (2.8% vs 1.8%, p = 0.38) and 1 year (4.9% vs 4.3%, p = 0.74). Permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted in patients with ViV-TAVI (8.8% vs 15.0%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.92, p = 0.02). Patients with ViV-TAVI were treated with self-expandable valves (n = 162) and balloon-expandable valves (n = 94). Thirty-day major bleeding was less frequent in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 13%, odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.42 to 18.52, p = 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was numerically lower in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 7%, odds ratio 3.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 14.51, p = 0.11). In conclusion, ViV-TAVI seems a safe and effective treatment for failing bioprosthetic valves with low mortality and stroke rates comparable to NV-TAVI for both valve types.

Comparison of performance of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves

Objective

To evaluate the flow dynamics of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valves pertaining to turbulence and pressure recovery. Transcatheter aortic valves are characterized by different designs that have different valve performance and outcomes.

Methods

Assessment of transcatheter aortic valves was performed using self-expanding devices (26-mm Evolut [Medtronic], 23-mm Allegra [New Valve Technologies], and small Acurate neo [Boston Scientific]) and a balloon-expandable device (23-mm Sapien 3 [Edwards Lifesciences]). Particle image velocimetry assessed the flow downstream. A Millar catheter was used for pressure recovery calculation. Velocity, Reynolds shear stresses, viscous shear stress, and pressure gradients were calculated.

Results

The maximal velocity at peak systole obtained with the Evolut R, Sapien 3, Acurate neo, and Allegra was 2.12 ± 0.19 m/sec, 2.41 ± 0.06 m/sec, 2.99 ± 0.10 m/sec, and 2.45 ± 0.08 m/sec, respectively (P < .001). Leaflet oscillations with the flow were clear with the Evolut R and Acurate neo. The Allegra shows the minimal range of Reynolds shear stress magnitudes (up to 320 Pa), and Sapien 3 the maximal (up to 650 Pa). The Evolut had the smallest viscous shear stress magnitude range (up to 3.5 Pa), and the Sapien 3 the largest (up to 6.2 Pa). The largest pressure drop at the vena contracta occurred with the Acurate neo transcatheter aortic valve with a pressure gradient of 13.96 ± 1.35 mm Hg. In the recovery zone, the smallest pressure gradient was obtained with the Allegra (3.32 ± 0.94 mm Hg).

Conclusions

Flow dynamics downstream of different transcatheter aortic valves vary significantly depending on the valve type, despite not having a general trend depending on whether or not valves are self-expanding or balloon-expandable. Deployment design did not have an influence on flow dynamics.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a balloon-expandable prosthesis in a patient with single coronary artery: a case report

BACKGROUND

Single coronary artery is a rare coronary artery anomaly with an incidence of <0.03%. The coexistence of coronary artery anomalies with severe aortic stenosis is extremely rare. Due to the singularity of the coronary artery orifice, the most concerning risk of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in such patients is coronary occlusion, which may very well be life-threatening.

CASE SUMMARY

An 83-year-old female complaining of chest pain was referred to our hospital for severe aortic stenosis. The multi-slice computed tomography showed a congenital single coronary artery originating from the right sinus of Valsalva. The left coronary artery branched off of the right coronary artery, and passed between the aorta and main pulmonary artery. The heart team of the hospital decided to perform TAVI via femoral artery with a balloon-expandable prosthesis, with coronary angioplasty devices on standby in case of coronary occlusion. The TAVI procedure was performed successfully without coronary occlusion.

DISCUSSION

Although there have been some case reports of TAVI in patients with single coronary artery, little is known about the safety of TAVI in such cases, and which device (such as the balloon-expandable or the self-expandable prosthesis) is preferable. From this particular case, and accumulation of past and various TAVI experience, the balloon-expandable prosthesis can be a safe device choice in carefully selected patients with coronary artery anomalies.

Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement or re-surgical aortic valve replacement in degenerated bioprostheses: A systematic review and meta-analysis of short and midterm results

INTRODUCTION

Despite limited to short and midterm outcomes, valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a valid alternative to re-surgical aortic valve replacement (re-SAVR) for high- and intermediate-risk patients with degenerated surgical bioprosthesis.

METHODS

All studies comparing multivariate adjustment between ViV TAVI and re-SAVR were screened. The primary end-points were all-cause and cardiovascular (CV) mortality at 30 days and at Midterm follow-up. Short-term complications were the secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

We obtained data from 11 studies, encompassing 8570 patients, 4224 undergoing ViV TAVI, and 4346 re-SAVR. Four studies included intermediate-risk patients and seven high-risk patients. 30-day all-cause and CV mortality were significantly lower in ViV (odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] 0.29-0.64 and OR 0.44, 0.26-0.73 respectively), while after a mean follow-up of 717 (180-1825) days, there was no difference between the two groups (OR 1.04, 0.87-1.25 and OR 1.05, 0.78-1.43, respectively). The risk of stroke (OR 1.03, 0.59-1.82), MI (OR 0.70, 0.34-1.44), major vascular complications (OR 0.92, 0.50-1.67), and permanent pacemaker implantation (OR 0.67, 0.36-1.25) at 30 days did not differ, while major bleedings and new-onset atrial fibrillation were significantly lower in ViV patients (OR 0.41, 0.25-0.67 and OR 0.23, 0.12-0.42, respectively, all 95% CIs).

CONCLUSIONS

In high- and intermediate-risk patients with degenerated surgical bioprostheses, ViV TAVI is associated with reduced short-term mortality, compared with re-SAVR. Nevertheless, no differences were found in all-cause and CV mortality at midterm follow-up. PROSPERO CRD42021226488.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with the Self-Expandable Core Valve Evolut Prosthesis Using the Cusp-Overlap vs. Tricusp-View

Despite the rapid increase in experience and technological improvement, the incidence of conduction disturbances in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the self-expandable CoreValve Evolut valve remains high. Recently, a cusp-overlap view (COP) implantation technique has been proposed for TAVR with self-expandable valves offering an improved visualization during valve expansion compared to the three-cusp view (TCV). This study aims to systematically analyze procedural outcomes of TAVR patients treated with the CoreValve Evolut valve using a COP compared to TCV in a high-volume center. The primary endpoint was technical success according the 2021 VARC-3 criteria. A total of 122 consecutive patients (61 pts. TCV: April 2019 to November 2020; 61 pts. COP: December 2020 to October 2021) that underwent TAVR with the CoreValve Evolut prosthesis were included in this analysis. Although there was no difference in the primary endpoint technical success between TCV and COP patients (93.4% vs. 90.2%, OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.16, 2.4, p = 0.51), we observed a significantly lower risk for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) among COP patients (TCV: 27.9% vs. COP: 13.1%, OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.15, 0.97, p = 0.047). Implantation of the CoreValve Evolut prosthesis using the COP might help to reduce the rate of PPI following TAVR.

Impact of Valve Size on Paravalvular Leak and Valve Hemodynamics in Patients With Borderline Size Aortic Valve Annulus

Background

Transcatheter heart valve (THV) selection for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is crucial to achieve procedural success. Borderline aortic annulus size (BAAS), which allows a choice between two consecutive valve sizes, is a common challenge during device selection. In the present study, we evaluated TAVI outcomes in patients with BAAS according to THV size selection.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study including patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and BAAS, measured by multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT), undergoing TAVI with self-expandable (SE) or balloon-expandable (BE) THV from the Israeli multi-center TAVI registry. The aim was to evaluate outcomes of TAVI, mainly paravalvular leak (PVL) and valve hemodynamics, in patients with BAAS (based on MDCT) according to THV sizing selection in between 2 valve sizes. In addition, to investigate the benefit of shifting between different THV types (BE and SE) to avoid valve size selection in BAAS.

Results

Out of 2,352 patients with MDCT measurements, 598 patients with BAAS as defined for at least one THV type were included in the study. In BAAS patients treated with SE-THV, larger THV selection was associated with lower rate of PVL, compared to smaller THV (45.3 vs. 64.5%; pv = 0.0038). Regarding BE-THV, larger valve selection was associated with lower post-procedural transvalvular gradients compared to smaller THV (mean gradient: 9.9 ± 3.7 vs. 12.5 ± 7.2 mmHg; p = 0.019). Of note, rates of mortality, left bundle branch block, permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, annular rupture, and/or coronary occlusion did not differ between groups.

Conclusion

BAAS is common among patients undergoing TAVI. Selection of a larger THV in these patients is associated with lower rates of PVL and optimized THV hemodynamics with no effect on procedural complications. Additionally, shift from borderline THV to non-borderline THV modified both THV hemodynamics and post-dilatation rates.

Current and future transcatheter aortic valve replacement valves

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review analyzes currently available commercial transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) valves as well as valves in investigational status and those in preclinical testing. The design features and clinical outcomes of the Edwards SAPIEN S3 and Medtronic Evolut PRO+ are described and compared with highlight clinical circumstances where one may be favoured over the other.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple randomized and nonrandomized trials have compared commercial and investigational TAVR valves. The results of these are summarized and discussed within this review with a focus on how the SAPIEN S3 and Evolut PRO+ both compare to each other as well as various valves in different investigational stages.

SUMMARY

TAVR is an innovative and ground-breaking technology that will forever have revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis. Though the technology and valves themselves have come a long way, further developments are necessary if we are to continue to expand its indications and achieve a safer perioperative experience with more durable valves.

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

BACKGROUND

The SMall Annuli Randomized To Evolut or SAPIEN (SMART) Trial was designed to compare the performance of the two most widely available commercial transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices in patients with symptomatic severe native aortic stenosis with a small aortic valve annulus undergoing transfemoral TAVR. Patients with small aortic valve annuli are typically female and are often underrepresented in clinical trials.

METHODS

The SMART Trial is an international, prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled, post-market trial. The trial will be conducted in approximately 700 subjects at approximately 90 sites globally. Inclusion criteria include severe aortic stenosis, aortic valve annulus area of ≤430 mm² based on multi-detector computed tomography, and appropriate anatomy for both the Medtronic Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding and Edwards SAPIEN 3/3 Ultra balloon-expandable devices. The primary clinical outcome composite endpoint is defined as mortality, disabling stroke or heart failure rehospitalization at 12 months. The co-primary valve function composite endpoint is defined as bioprosthetic valve dysfunction at 12 months which includes hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction, defined as a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg, non-structural valve dysfunction, defined as severe prothesis-patient mismatch or ≥moderate aortic regurgitation, thrombosis, endocarditis, and aortic valve re-intervention. Powered secondary endpoints will be assessed hierarchically.

CONCLUSIONS

The SMART trial will be the largest head-to-head comparative trial of transfemoral TAVR using the two most widely available contemporary TAVR devices in the setting of small aortic annuli and the largest trial to enroll primarily women.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov, Unique identifier: NCT04722250.

Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis and systematic review was performed to evaluate the clinical relevance of subclinical leaflet thrombosis (SLT) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched for eligible randomized and nonrandomized studies until November 2020. Risk ratios (RRs) or odds ratios and 95% CIs were calculated, using a random-effects model. Overall, 25 studies were eligible for the analysis and comprised a total of 11,098 patients. The median incidence of SLT was 6% at a median follow-up of 30 days. Use of intra-annular valves was associated with 2-fold greater risk for the development of SLT compared with use of supra-annular valves. There was no difference in the risk for SLT (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.72-1.29; P = 0.83) between single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) and dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), whereas oral anticoagulation (OAC) was associated with a 58% relative risk reduction for SLT (RR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.29-0.61; P < 0.00001) compared with SAPT and DAPT. In patients with diagnosed leaflet thrombosis at follow-up, the risk for stroke or transient ischemic attack was increased by 2.6-fold (RR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.60-4.09; P < 0.00001) compared with patients without leaflet thrombosis. In patients diagnosed with SLT, the odds of SLT resolution increased by 99% after switch from antiplatelet agents to OAC (odds ratio: 0.01; 95% CI: 0.00-0.06; P < 0.00001). To summarize, indication-based use of OAC after transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with a lower risk for SLT compared with SAPT and DAPT. Switching to OAC seems to be effective for SLT resolution. As SLT increased the odds of stroke or transient ischemic attack in the included population, further studies are needed to investigate whether screening tests for SLT and appropriate antithrombotic therapy improve long-term valve functionality and clinical prognosis.

Long-Term Echocardiographic Follow-Up After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation to Assess Structural Valve Deterioration and Bioprosthetic Valve Failure

BACKGROUND

Indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in aortic stenosis are expanding and the life expectancy of patients following TAVI is increasing. Determining the long-term durability of TAVI valves is therefore important. Rates of long-term (≥5 years) structural valve deterioration (SVD) vary widely and there are currently no comparable data from Australia. The aim herein was to determine the incidence of haemodynamic SVD and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) using recently standardised definitions in a Western Australian cohort after at least 5 years.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients undergoing TAVI at Royal Perth Hospital between January 2009 and January 2015. Of 211 patients, 55 survived ≥5 years and had echocardiographic data available for review. Median time to the echocardiogram was 5.9 years (max 7.8 years); 49% male, mean age 83 years.

RESULTS

Of the 55 survivors who had echocardiograms available ≥5 years after TAVI, four (9%) had moderate haemodynamic SVD and one (2%) had severe SVD and BVF.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest excellent long-term durability of contemporary TAVI valves in an Australian cohort with very low incidence of SVD and BVF. These findings add confidence to the expanding applications of TAVI valves.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Valve Durability Among Different Transcatheter and Surgical Aortic Valve Bioprosthesis

Durability of transcatheter heart valve (THV) is critical as the indication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) expands to patients with longer life-expectancy. We aimed to compare the durability of different THV systems (balloon-expandable [BE] and self-expandable [SE]) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) prosthesis. PUBMED and EMBASE were searched through February 2021 for randomized trials investigating parameters of valve durability after TAVI and/or SAVR in severe aortic stenosis. A network meta-analysis using random-effect model was performed. Synthesis was performed with 5-year follow-up data for echocardiographic outcomes and the longest available follow-up data for clinical outcomes. Ten trials with a total of 9,388 patients (BE-THV: 2,562; SE-THV: 2,863; SAVR: 3,963) were included. Follow-up ranged from 1 to 6 years. SE-THV demonstrated significantly larger effective orifice area, lower mean aortic valve gradient (AVG), and less increase in mean AVG at 5-year compared with BE-THV and SAVR. Structural valve deterioration (SVD) was less frequent in SE-THV compared with BE-THV and SAVR (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.27; HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.47, respectively). Total moderate-severe aortic regurgitation and reintervention was more frequent in BE-THV (HR 4.21, 95% CI 2.40 to 7.39; HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.26, respectively), and SE-THV (HR 7.51, 95% CI 3.89 to 14.5; HR 2.86, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.13, respectively) compared with SAVR. In conclusion, TAVI with SE-THV demonstrated favorable forward-flow hemodynamics and lowest risk of SVD compared with BE-THV and SAVR at mid-term. However, both THV systems suffer an increased risk of AR and re-intervention, and long-term data from newer generation valves is warranted.

Propitious temporal changes in clinical outcomes after transcatheter compared to surgical aortic valve replacement; a meta-analysis of over 65,000 patients

Background

The treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) has rapidly evolved over the past decade, in both transcatheter (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), resulting in reported improved clinical outcomes. Operator experience and technical improvements have improved outcomes especially for patients undergoing TAVR. We sought to determine and compare 1-year outcomes using a contemporary meta-analysis.

Method

We searched the Medline (MESH), Cochrane and Google scholar databases using keywords “AS”, “atrial fibrillation” (AFib) and “stroke”. We performed a meta-analysis to compare TAVR with SAVR populations for post-procedural stroke, all-cause and cardiovascular mortality at 1-year.

Results

A total of 23 studies met criteria for analysis with total population of 66,857 patients, of which 61,913 had TAVR and 4944 had SAVR. Temporal trends demonstrated overall improvement in outcome for both, TAVR and SAVR groups through the decade. Outcomes, in terms of stroke (3.1% vs. 5%), all-cause (12.4% vs. 10.3%) and cardiovascular mortality (7.2% vs. 6.2%) were similar at 1-year, in TAVR versus SAVR, respectively.

Conclusion

Despite overall gradual improvement in both TAVR and SAVR outcomes over the decade, there is a statistical overlap in confidence intervals for all-cause, cardiovascular mortality and postprocedural stroke at 1-year. While 23 individual studies demonstrate considerable advantages of each technique in certain cohorts, integrating over 65,000 pts with our stratified surgical analysis suggests that TAVR is comparable to SAVR for low and intermediate risk population while superior to SAVR only in the highest-risk population for short and intermediate term outcomes. This has substantial socio-economic implications as we contemplate expanding our TAVR indications to low/intermediate risk populations.

The JenaValve pericardial transcatheter aortic valve replacement system to treat aortic valve disease

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is a valuable alternative technique to surgery and the spectrum of therapy continues to evolve. The JenaValve Pericaridal transcatheter aortic valve replacement System allows prosthesis fixation in a native, noncalcified aortic annulus with a unique paper clip-like anchorage mechanism. The low rate of paravalvular leakage and permanent pacemaker implantation emphasizes the further widespread use of the JenaValve - despite the limited data available. In May 2021, a CE mark for the transfemoral implantation in both aortic regurgitation and aortic stenosis was granted. However, no data have been published so far. The ongoing ALIGN trials are expected to provide the pending long-term data.

In vitro Doppler versus catheter transvalvular pressure gradients in balloon-expandable versus self-expanding transcatheter aortic valves

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this in vitro study was to compare Doppler versus catheter transvalvular pressure gradients (TPG) in third generations balloon-expandable (BE) versus self-expanding (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THV).

BACKGROUND

TPG is a key parameter to assess and follow valve hemodynamic function following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). It remains uncertain and debated whether, and to which extent, TPGs differ according to the type of THV, that is, BE versus SE and to the method used for TPG measurement, that is, Doppler echocardiography versus cardiac catheterization.

METHODS

The CoreValve EVOLUT PRO 26 mm and the SAPIEN 3 23 mm THVs were tested in a left heart simulator using a 21 mm aortic annulus under following conditions: heart rate: 70 bpm, mean aortic pressure: 100 mmHg, stroke volume: 30, 70 and 100 ml. Mean TPGs were measured by continuous-wave Doppler and by micro-tip pressure catheters positioned in the left ventricle and at 50 mm downstream to the tip of the THV leaflets.

RESULTS

Doppler TPGs (9.5 ± 3.9 mmHg) were on average 40.5 ± 13.9% higher (p < 0.001) than catheter TPGs (6.3 ± 3.4 mmHg). Both Doppler and catheter TPGs were lower (p = 0.003) in the SE versus BE THVs (Doppler: 8.7 ± 3.5 vs. 10.7 ± 4.6; catheter: 5.0 ± 1.7 mmHg vs. 7.1 ± 2.2). The Doppler versus catheter difference in TPG increased with the higher flow conditions. The Doppler versus catheter difference in TPG was similar in BE versus SE THVs (3.6 ± 1.1 vs. 3.7 ± 1.4 mmHg or 42 ± 9 vs. 47 ± 9%; p = 0.58) overall and in each flow conditions.

CONCLUSION

The Doppler TPGs are, on average, 40% higher than the catheter TPGs for both BE and SE THVs. The SE THV had lower Doppler and catheter TPGs compared to the BE THV, at normal and high flow states. The absolute and percent differences between Doppler versus catheter TPGs were similar in BE versus SE THVs.

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.

In-hospital outcomes of self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in Germany

Introduction

The effect of valve type on outcomes in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) has recently been subject of debate. We investigate outcomes of patients treated with balloon-expanding (BE) vs. self-expanding (SE) valves in in a cohort of all these procedures performed in Germany in 2018.

Methods

All patients receiving TF-TAVR with either BE (N = 9,882) or SE (N = 7,413) valves in Germany in 2018 were identified. In-hospital outcomes were analyzed for the endpoints in-hospital mortality, major bleeding, stroke, acute kidney injury, postoperative delirium, permanent pacemaker implantation, mechanical ventilation > 48 h, length of hospital stay, and reimbursement. Since patients were not randomized to the two treatment options, logistic or linear regression models were used with 22 baseline patient characteristics and center-specific variables as potential confounders. As a sensitivity analysis, the same confounding factors were taken into account using the propensity score methods (inverse probability of treatment weighting).

Results

Baseline characteristics differed substantially, with higher EuroSCORE (p < 0.001), age (p < 0.001) and rate of female sex (p < 0.001) in SE treated patients. After risk adjustment, no marked differences in outcomes were found for in-hospital mortality [risk adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for SE instead of BE 0.94 (96% CI 0.76;1.17), p = 0.617] major bleeding [aOR 0.91 (0.73;1.14), p = 0.400], stroke [aOR 1.13 (0.88;1.46), p = 0.347], acute kidney injury [OR 0.97 (0.85;1.10), p = 0.621], postoperative delirium [aOR 1.09 (0.96;1.24), p = 0.184], mechanical ventilation > 48 h [aOR 0.98 (0.77;1.25), p = 0.893], length of hospital stay (risk adjusted difference in days of hospitalization (SE instead of BE): − 0.05 [− 0.34;0.25], p = 0.762) and reimbursement [risk adjusted difference in reimbursement (SE instead of BE): − €72 (− €291;€147), p = 0.519)] There is, however, an increased risk of PPI for SE valves (aOR 1.27 [1.15;1.41], p < 0.001). Similar results were found after application of propensity score adjustment.

Conclusions

We find broadly equivalent outcomes in contemporary TF-TAVR procedures, regardless of the valve type used. Incidence of major complications is very low for both types of valve.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00392-021-01928-6.

Durability of Transcatheter Heart Valves: Standardized Definitions and Available Data

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is a well-established alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Currently, this technique is shifting towards younger patient groups with intermediate- and low-risk profile, which raises the question about long-term durability. Despite acceptable results up to 5 years, little is currently known about valve performance beyond 5 years. Since valve deterioration, thrombosis and endocarditis seem to be the main factors affecting valve durability, precise and widely accepted definitions of these parameters were stated by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in 2017, followed by the Valve in Valve International Data (VIVID) group definitions in 2018 and the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 (VARC-3) definitions in 2021. Until the introduction of these definitions, interstudy comparisons were difficult due to missing uniformity. Since the release of these recommendations, an increasing number of studies have reported their data on long-term durability using these new criteria. The aim of the present article is to discuss the current definitions on bioprosthetic valve durability, and to summarize the available data on long-term durability of transcatheter aortic valves.