One-year outcomes of cohort 1 in the Edwards SAPIEN Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome (SOURCE) registry: the European registry of transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the Edwards SAPIEN valve

Infective endocarditis in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era: comprehensive review of a rare complication

In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a revolutionary alternative for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients at high risk for surgery. Prosthetic aortic valve endocarditis is a serious complication after SAVR with high morbidity and mortality. Although numerous TAVR procedures have been performed worldwide, infective endocarditis (IE) after TAVR was reported in the literature in few cases only and in 0% to 2.3% of patients enrolled in large TAVR cohorts. Our aim was to review the literature for IE following TAVR and to discuss the diagnostic and management strategies of this rare complication. Ten case reports of IE after TAVR were identified, 8 of which were published as case reports and 2 of which were presented in congresses. Infective endocarditis occurred in a mean time period of 186 days (median, 90 days) after TAVR. Most cases were characterized by fever and elevated inflammatory markers. Infective endocarditis after TAVR shared some common characteristics with IE after SAVR, yet it has some unique features. Echocardiographic findings included leaflet vegetations, severe mitral regurgitation with rupture of the anterior leaflet, and left ventricle outflow tract to left atrium fistula. Bacteriologic findings included several atypical bacteria or fungi. Cases of IE were managed either conservatively by antibiotics and/or using surgery, and the overall prognosis was poor. Infective endocarditis after TAVR deserves prompt diagnosis and treatment. Until further evidence is present, IE after TAVR should be managed according to SAVR guidelines with modifications as needed on a case-by-case basis.

Systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve and severe mitral regurgitation immediately after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

We report a high-risk patient with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who showed systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve (SAM) and severe mitral regurgitation immediately after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The patient did not have either SAM or mitral regurgitation, but showed significant septal hypertrophy on preoperative transthoracic echocardiography which could be associated with the occurrence of SAM. Caution should be exercised in patients with significant interventricular septal hypertrophy before TAVR.

Sutureless aortic valve replacement as an alternative treatment for patients belonging to the "gray zone" between transcatheter aortic valve implantation and conventional surgery: a propensity-matched, multicenter analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this propensity-matched, multicenter study was to compare early clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients undergoing transapical aortic valve implantation (TA-TAVI) versus patients undergoing sutureless aortic valve replacement (SU-AVR) for severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis.

METHODS

We reviewed 468 TA-TAVIs performed in 20 centers from April 2008 to May 2011, and 51 SU-AVRs performed in 3 centers from March to September 2011. Based on a propensity score analysis, 2 groups with 38 matched pairs were created. Variables used in the propensity analysis were age, sex, body surface area, New York Heart Association class, logistic EuroSCORE, peripheral vascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, aortic valve area, mitral regurgitation, and left ventricular ejection fraction.

RESULTS

Preoperative characteristics of the 2 groups were comparable. Hospital mortality was 5.3% and 0% in the TA-TAVI and SU-AVR groups, respectively (P = .49). We did not observe stroke or acute myocardial infarction in the 2 groups. Permanent pacemaker implantation was needed in 2 patients of each group (5.3%, P = 1.0). Dialysis was required in 2 patients (5.3%) in the SU-AVR group and in 1 patient (2.7%) in the TA-TAVI group (P = 1.0). Predischarge echocardiographic data showed that the incidence of paravalvular leak (at least mild) was greater in the TA-TAVI group (44.7% vs 15.8%, P = .001), but there were no differences in terms of mean transprosthetic gradient (10.3 ± 5 mm Hg vs 11 ± 3.7 mm Hg, P = .59).

CONCLUSIONS

This preliminary experience showed that, in patients at high risk for conventional surgery, SU-AVR is as safe and effective as TA-TAVI and that it is associated with a lower rate of postprocedural paravalvular leak.

[Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: when should it be used in aortic stenosis?]

30% of patients with significant aortic stenosis are not considered for operative aortic valve replacement because of the high perioperative risk. An alternative catheter based option for these patients is the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI). In general, there are two approaches for TAVI: transfemoral and transapical. Transfemoral aortic valve replacement is performed by transcatheter replacement of an aortic valve via the femoral arteries. Transapical valve replacement is achieved by transcatheter implantation via the fifth intercostal space. The most common complications are vessel injuries, bleeding complications, new onset of AV-block, development of paravalvular insufficiency, acute kidney injury, stroke and TIA. The first long-term observations suggest positive results. First clinical trials in a high-risk population show a promising outcome. Therefore TAVI offers a reasonable therapy option for patients with high perioperative risk. Further long-term clinical trials are still pending.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation 10-year anniversary: review of current evidence and clinical implications

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is currently the standard of care to treat patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) and is generally accepted to alleviate symptoms and prolong survival. Based on the results of randomized trials, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the new standard of care for patients with symptomatic AS who are deemed 'inoperable'. Debatably, TAVI is also an alternative to SAVR in selected patients who are at high risk but operable. As we approach 10 years of clinical experience with TAVI, with over 50 000 implantations in 40 countries, a review of the current literature and clinical outcomes with this rapidly evolving technology is appropriate.

The year in review: the surgical treatment of valvular disease-2011

This review highlights important advances in techniques, guidelines, outcomes and innovations in valve surgery during 2011.

Perspective on the cost-effectiveness of transapical aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients: Outcomes of a decision-analytic model

BACKGROUND

The incremental cost-effectiveness of transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is ill-defined in high-risk patients where aortic valve replacement (AVR) is an option, and has not been ascertained outside a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

We developed a Markov model to examine the progression of patients between health states, defined as peri- and post-procedural, post-complication, and death. The mean and variance of risks, transition probabilities, utilities and cost of transapical TAVI, high-risk AVR, and medical management were derived from analysis of relevant registries. Outcome and cost were derived from 10,000 simulations. Sensitivity analyses further evaluated the impact of mortality, stroke, and other commonly observed outcomes.

RESULTS

In the reference case, both transapical TAVI and high-risk AVR and TAVI were cost-effective when compared to medical management ($44,384/QALY and $42,637/QALY, respectively). Transapical TAVI failed to meet accepted criteria for incremental cost-effectiveness relative to AVR, which was the dominant strategy. In sensitivity analyses, the mortality rates related to the two strategies, the utilities post-AVR and post-transapical TAVI, and the cost of transapical TAVI, were the main drivers of model outcome.

CONCLUSION

Transapical TAVI did not satisfy current metrics of incremental cost-effectiveness relative to high-risk AVR in the reference case. However, it may provide net health benefits at acceptable cost in selected high-risk patients among whom AVR is the standard intervention.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and cerebrovascular events: the current state of the art

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the care of high-risk patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis. Those considered at high or prohibitive risk of major adverse outcomes with open surgical aortic valve replacement may now be offered an alternative less-invasive therapy. Despite the rapid evolution and clinical application of this new technology, recent studies have raised concerns about adverse cerebrovascular event rates in patients undergoing TAVI. In this review, we explore the current data both in relation to procedure-related silent cerebrovascular ischemic events, as well as clinically apparent stroke. The timing of neurological events and their prognostic implications are also examined. Finally, potential mechanisms of TAVI-related cerebrovascular injury are described, in addition to efforts to minimize their occurrence.

2-year results of CoreValve implantation through the subclavian access: a propensity-matched comparison with the femoral access

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to assess the procedural and 2-year results of the subclavian approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with those of the femoral approach by using propensity-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND

The subclavian approach with the CoreValve prosthesis (Medtronic, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) represents an interesting opportunity when the femoral access is unfeasible.

METHODS

All consecutive patients enrolled in the Italian CoreValve Registry who underwent TAVI with the subclavian approach were included. Propensity score analysis was used to identify a matching group of patients undergoing femoral TAVI.

RESULTS

Subclavian approach was used in 141 patients (61% men; median age 83 years; median logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation score 23.7%). The femoral group of 141 patients was matched for baseline clinical characteristics, except for peripheral artery disease. The 2 groups showed similar procedural success (97.9% vs. 96.5%; p = 0.47), major vascular complications (5.0% vs. 7.8%; p = 0.33), life-threatening bleeding events (7.8% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.48), and combined safety endpoint (19.9% vs. 25.5%; p = 0.26). The subclavian group showed lower rates of acute kidney injury/stage 3 (4.3% vs. 9.9%; p = 0.02), of minor vascular complications at the 18-F sheath insertion site (2.1% vs. 11.3%; p = 0.003), and of all types of bleeding events related to vascular complications. Survival at 2 years was 74.0 ± 4.0% in the subclavian group compared with 73.7 ± 3.9% in the femoral group (p = 0.78). The 2-year freedom from cardiovascular death was 87.2 ± 3.1% versus 88.7 ± 2.8% in the subclavian versus femoral group, respectively (p = 0.84).

CONCLUSIONS

The subclavian approach for TAVI is safe and feasible, with procedural and medium-term results similar to the femoral approach. Subclavian access should be considered a valid option not only when the femoral approach is impossible but also when it is difficult, albeit feasible.

Frequency and causes of stroke during or after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is invariably associated with the risk of clinically manifest transient or irreversible neurologic impairment. We sought to investigate the incidence and causes of clinically manifest stroke during TAVI. A total of 214 consecutive patients underwent TAVI with the Medtronic-CoreValve System from November 2005 to September 2011 at our institution. Stroke was defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium recommendations. Its cause was established by analyzing the point of onset of symptoms, correlating the symptoms with the computed tomography-detected defects in the brain, and analyzing the presence of potential coexisting causes of stroke, in addition to a multivariate analysis to determine the independent predictors. Stroke occurred in 19 patients (9%) and was major in 10 (5%), minor in 3 (1%), and transient (transient ischemic attack) in 6 (3%). The onset of symptoms was early (≤24 hours) in 8 patients (42%) and delayed (>24 hours) in 11 (58%). Brain computed tomography showed a cortical infarct in 8 patients (42%), a lacunar infarct in 5 (26%), hemorrhage in 1 (5%), and no abnormalities in 5 (26%). Independent determinants of stroke were new-onset atrial fibrillation after TAVI (odds ratio 4.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 15.6), and baseline aortic regurgitation grade III or greater (odds ratio 3.2, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 9.3). In conclusion, the incidence of stroke was 9%, of which >1/2 occurred >24 hours after the procedure. New-onset atrial fibrillation was associated with a 4.4-fold increased risk of stroke. In conclusion, these findings indicate that improvements in postoperative care after TAVI are equally, if not more, important for the reduction of periprocedural stroke than preventive measures during the procedure.

Genomic medicine in the prevention and treatment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading cause of death in the world. Over the past decade considerable progress has been made in understanding the genomic basis of polygenic disorders including CVD. The future application of genomic medicine to the prevention and treatment of CVDs will ultimately lessen the burden of CVD. Given the complex nature of CVD, information derived from newer evolving fields, such as transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics, will allow us to fully interrogate features of the human genome to better understand disease pathogenesis and to identify new drug targets. In this article, we will review how genomics will allow enhanced risk prediction of cardiovascular events, provide personalized treatment options and hasten the drug development process, with a particular focus on atherosclerotic CVD.

Incidence and predictors of acute kidney injury after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are at increased risk for acute kidney injury (AKI). The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) recently published criteria for AKI after TAVR. We aimed to identify predictors, assess the prognostic impact of AKI after TAVR, and compare various criteria for AKI.

METHODS

Patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR were retrospectively analyzed for periprocedural AKI (<72 hours) according to the VARC definition (increase in serum creatinine ≥0.3 mg/dL or ≥1.5× baseline) or according to the modified Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End-stage kidney disease (RIFLE) criteria (decrease of >25% in estimated glomerular filtration rate at 48 hours).

RESULTS

Acute kidney injury, according to the VARC definition, occurred in 24 (14.6%) of 165 patients after TAVR. Acute kidney injury, according to RIFLE criteria, occurred in 19 patients (11.5%). Men (63% vs 38%, P = .03) and patients receiving blood transfusion (63% vs 39%, P = .04) were more likely to develop AKI. In multivariable analysis, only blood transfusion emerged as a predictor for AKI (odds ratio 3.74, 95% CI 1.36-10.3). Patients who developed AKI had higher in-hospital (21% vs 4%, P = .007) and 30-day mortality (29% vs 7%, P = .004) as compared with patients without AKI.

CONCLUSION

Acute kidney injury is a frequent complication of TAVR. Even a small increase (0.3 mg/dL) in baseline creatinine post-TAVR is associated with worse outcome. The poor prognosis of these patients should encourage improvement in patient selection and careful management for prevention of this complication.

Comparison of complications and outcomes to one year of transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis

Comparisons of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis remain sparse or limited by a short follow-up. We sought to evaluate early and midterm outcomes of consecutive patients (n = 618) undergoing successful TAVI (n = 218) or isolated SAVR (n = 400) at 2 centers. The primary end point was incidence of Valvular Academic Research Consortium-defined major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events (MACCEs) up to 1 year. Control of potential confounders was attempted with extensive statistical adjustment by covariates and/or propensity score. In-hospital MACCEs occurred in 73 patients (11.8%) and was more frequent in patients treated with SAVR compared to those treated with TAVI (7.8% vs 14.0%, p = 0.022). After addressing potential confounders using 3 methods of statistical adjustment, SAVR was consistently associated with a higher risk of MACCEs than TAVI, with estimates of relative risk ranging from 2.2 to 2.6 at 30 days, 2.3 to 2.5 at 6 months, and 2.0 to 2.2 at 12 months. This difference was driven by an adjusted increased risk of life-threatening bleeding at 6 and 12 months and stroke at 12 months with SAVR. Conversely, no differences in adjusted risk of death, stroke and myocardial infarction were noted between TAVI and SAVR at each time point. In conclusion, in a large observational registry with admitted potential for selection bias and residual confounding, TAVI was not associated with a higher risk of 1-year MACCEs compared to SAVR.

Late contained aortic root rupture and ventricular septal defect after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a highly specialized technique offering a new therapeutic option to patients at high risk for conventional surgery. However, despite continuous improvements in operators' expertise and device technology, complications associated with this catheter procedure are not uncommon. We report an unusual case of late contained rupture of the aortic annulus, combining a para-aortic false aneurysm and a ventricular septal defect, after the placement of an Edwards Sapien prosthesis.

Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement for inoperable severe aortic stenosis

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is the recommended therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are not suitable candidates for surgery. The outcomes beyond 1 year in such patients are not known.

METHODS

We randomly assigned patients to transfemoral TAVR or to standard therapy (which often included balloon aortic valvuloplasty). Data on 2-year outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 358 patients underwent randomization at 21 centers. The rates of death at 2 years were 43.3% in the TAVR group and 68.0% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001), and the corresponding rates of cardiac death were 31.0% and 62.4% (P<0.001). The survival advantage associated with TAVR that was seen at 1 year remained significant among patients who survived beyond the first year (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.36 to 0.92; P=0.02 with the use of the log-rank test). The rate of stroke was higher after TAVR than with standard therapy (13.8% vs. 5.5%, P=0.01), owing, in the first 30 days, to the occurrence of more ischemic events in the TAVR group (6.7% vs. 1.7%, P=0.02) and, beyond 30 days, to the occurrence of more hemorrhagic strokes in the TAVR group (2.2% vs. 0.6%, P=0.16). At 2 years, the rate of rehospitalization was 35.0% in the TAVR group and 72.5% in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). TAVR, as compared with standard therapy, was also associated with improved functional status (P<0.001). The data suggest that the mortality benefit after TAVR may be limited to patients who do not have extensive coexisting conditions. Echocardiographic analysis showed a sustained increase in aortic-valve area and a decrease in aortic-valve gradient, with no worsening of paravalvular aortic regurgitation.

CONCLUSIONS

Among appropriately selected patients with severe aortic stenosis who were not suitable candidates for surgery, TAVR reduced the rates of death and hospitalization, with a decrease in symptoms and an improvement in valve hemodynamics that were sustained at 2 years of follow-up. The presence of extensive coexisting conditions may attenuate the survival benefit of TAVR. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

Registry of transcatheter aortic-valve implantation in high-risk patients

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging intervention for the treatment of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and coexisting illnesses. We report the results of a prospective multicenter study of the French national transcatheter aortic-valve implantation registry, FRANCE 2.

METHODS

All TAVIs performed in France, as listed in the FRANCE 2 registry, were prospectively included in the study. The primary end point was death from any cause.

RESULTS

A total of 3195 patients were enrolled between January 2010 and October 2011 at 34 centers. The mean (±SD) age was 82.7±7.2 years; 49% of the patients were women. All patients were highly symptomatic and were at high surgical risk for aortic-valve replacement. Edwards SAPIEN and Medtronic CoreValve devices were implanted in 66.9% and 33.1% of patients, respectively. Approaches were either transarterial (transfemoral, 74.6%; subclavian, 5.8%; and other, 1.8%) or transapical (17.8%). The procedural success rate was 96.9%. Rates of death at 30 days and 1 year were 9.7% and 24.0%, respectively. At 1 year, the incidence of stroke was 4.1%, and the incidence of periprosthetic aortic regurgitation was 64.5%. In a multivariate model, a higher logistic risk score on the European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE), New York Heart Association functional class III or IV symptoms, the use of a transapical TAVI approach, and a higher amount of periprosthetic regurgitation were significantly associated with reduced survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective registry study reflected real-life TAVI experience in high-risk elderly patients with aortic stenosis, in whom TAVI appeared to be a reasonable option. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic.).

Markov model for selection of aortic valve replacement versus transcatheter aortic valve implantation (without replacement) in high-risk patients

Comparisons between transcatheter aortic valve implantation without replacement (TAVI) and tissue aortic valve replacement (AVR) in clinical trials might not reflect the outcomes in standard clinical practice. This could have important implications for the relative cost-effectiveness of these alternatives for management of severe aortic stenosis in high-risk patients for whom surgery is an option. The mean and variance of risks, transition probabilities, utilities, and cost of TAVI, AVR, and medical management derived from observational studies were entered into a Markov model that examined the progression of patients between relevant health states. The outcomes and cost were derived from 10,000 simulations. Sensitivity analyses were based on variations in the likelihood of mortality, stroke, and other commonly observed outcomes. Both TAVI and AVR were cost-effective compared to medical management. In the reference case (age 80 years, the perioperative TAVI and AVR mortality was 6.9% vs 9.8%, and annual mortality was 21% vs 24%), the utility of TAVI was greater than that of AVR (1.78 vs 1.72 quality-adjusted life years) and the lifetime cost of TAVI exceeded that of AVR ($59,503 vs $56,339). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $52,773/quality-adjusted life years. Threshold analyses showed that variation in the probabilities of perioperative and annual mortality after AVR and after TAVI and annual stroke after TAVI were important determinants of the favored strategy. Sensitivity analyses defined the thresholds at which TAVI or AVR was the preferred strategy with regard to health outcomes and cost. In conclusion, TAVI satisfies current metrics of cost-effectiveness relative to AVR and might provide net health benefits at acceptable cost for selected high-risk patients among whom AVR is the current procedure of choice.

Transfemoral Edwards-Novaflex valve implantation in a patient with aorto-iliac endoprosthesis and severely tortuous bilateral external iliac arteries-"Railing track"

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has nowadays been introduced as an alternative for surgical aortic valve replacement as a treatment for high risk aortic stenosis patients. This procedure is not free of complications: the SOURCE registry, indeed, showed that vascular complications are more frequent with the transfemoral approach. We present the case of an 82-year-old man with known history of severe aortic stenosis at high-risk for surgery. Pre-TAVI screening shows bilateral severely tortuous iliac arteries and aorto-bi-iliac endoprosthesis. Transapical TAVI as a first choice was rejected due to severe lung disease. The patient was then treated by Transfemoral TAVI using a dedicated interventional technique that is described in this case-report.

Clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using valve academic research consortium definitions: a weighted meta-analysis of 3,519 patients from 16 studies

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to perform a weighted meta-analysis to determine the rates of major outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) definitions and to evaluate their current use in the literature.

BACKGROUND

Recently, the published VARC definitions have helped to add uniformity to reporting outcomes after TAVR.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases from January 1, 2011, through October 12, 2011, was conducted using predefined criteria. We included studies reporting at least 1 outcome using VARC definitions.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies including 3,519 patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The pooled estimate rates of outcomes were determined according to VARC's definitions: device success, 92.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 88.7% to 95.5%); all-cause 30-day mortality, 7.8% (95% CI: 5.5% to 11.1%); myocardial infarction, 1.1% (95% CI: 0.2% to 2.0%); acute kidney injury stage II/III, 7.5% (95% CI: 5.1% to 11.4%); life-threatening bleeding, 15.6% (95% CI: 11.7% to 20.7%); major vascular complications, 11.9% (95% CI: 8.6% to 16.4%); major stroke, 3.2% (95% CI: 2.1% to 4.8%); and new permanent pacemaker implantation, 13.9% (95% CI: 10.6% to 18.9%). Medtronic CoreValve prosthesis use was associated with a significant higher rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation compared with the Edwards prosthesis (28.9% [95% CI: 23.0% to 36.0%] vs. 4.9% [95% CI: 3.9% to 6.2%], p < 0.0001). The 30-day safety composite endpoint rate was 32.7% (95% CI: 27.5% to 38.8%) and the 1-year total mortality rate was 22.1% (95% CI: 17.9% to 26.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

VARC definitions have already been used by the TAVR clinical research community, establishing a new standard for reporting clinical outcomes. Future revisions of the VARC definitions are needed based on evolving TAVR clinical experiences.

Percutaneous Valve Therapy: Choosing the Appropriate Patients and Outcomes

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is the current gold standard for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS), but transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) currently represents a viable alternative to conventional SAVR for patients with AS at high risk of operative mortality. On multivariate analysis it has been shown that female gender is independently associated with better recovery of the left ventricular systolic function after TAVI and that left ventricular hypertrophy reverses more frequently in female patients after SAVR. During follow-up, however, women remain significantly more symptomatic compared with men, mainly because they present with more advanced valve disease at a significantly older age.

Development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): a 20-year odyssey

The development of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) by our group has been a 20-year odyssey. In 1993, postmortem studies validated the concept of intravalvular stenting in calcific aortic stenosis. The first prototypes of balloon-expandable valves were tested in an animal model in 2000. The first-in-man implantation was performed in Rouen in 2002, rapidly followed by two prospective series in compassionate cases in our centre. TAVI took flight in 2004 in the hands of Edwards Lifesciences, with major improvements in devices and approaches. At the same time, the self-expanding CoreValve was launched. Thousands of high-surgical-risk patients were enrolled in feasibility studies, leading to the Conformité Européenne (CE) mark being granted in 2007 for the two devices. A number of postmarketing registries have shown dramatic improvements in procedural and midterm results and decreased complication rates, with more experience and improved technology. The results of the randomized PARTNER study in the USA recently confirmed the important place of TAVI in non-operable and high-surgical-risk patients. To date, more than 50,000 patients have benefited from TAVI worldwide (2300 patients in 33 centres in France in 2011) and the number is consistently increasing. An optimal multidisciplinary collaboration and formally trained experienced physicians are the keys to success. An extension of indications to lower-risk patients might be expected in the coming years but should be cautiously investigated. Ten years after the first-in-man case, TAVI is here to stay and the future is promising.