Cerebral embolic protection and severity of stroke following transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Clinical impact of cerebral protection during transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Embolization of debris can complicate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) causing stroke. Cerebral embolism protection (CEP) devices can divert or trap debris.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of CEP during TAVI vs the standard procedure.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, SCOPUS and DOAJ 1/01/2014-04/12/2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized and observational studies comparing CEP versus standard TAVI, according to PRISMA.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

stroke.

SECONDARY OUTCOMES

death, bleeding, vascular access complications, acute kidney injury and infarct area.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two investigators independently assessed study quality and extracted data.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Twenty-six articles were included (540.247 patients). The primary endpoint was significantly lower (RR = 0.800 95%CI:0.682-0.940; p = 0.007) with CEP. Similarly, death rates were significantly lower with CEP (RR = 0.610 95%CI:0.482-0.771; p < 0.001). No difference was found for bleeding (RR = 1.053 95%CI:0.793-1.398; p = 0.721), vascular complications (RR = 0.937 95%CI:0.820-1.070; p = 0.334) or AKI (RR = 0.982 95%CI:0.754-1.279; p = 0.891).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of CEP during TAVI is associated with improved outcomes. Future studies will identify patients who benefit most from CEP.

Examining the Role of Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices in Preventing Postoperative Stroke in Patients with a History of Stroke or Transient Ischemic: Insights from the National Inpatient Sample

Cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been shown to lower the risk of stroke during the procedure. However, their long-term and clinical effects on neuro-cognition are unknown. Therefore, we hypothesized the benefit of CEPD in TAVR patients with a prior history of stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA). National Inpatient Sample (2019) and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision codes were used to identify patients undergoing TAVR with prior stroke or TIA. Propensity-matched analysis was performed to adjust for baseline characteristics and comorbidities. Primary outcome measures were postoperative stroke and all-cause mortality. Length of stay and hospital cost were secondary outcomes. Of 8450 unmatched TAVR patients with prior stroke or TIA in 2019, 1095 (13%) utilized CEPD. After propensity matching previous myocardial infarction (MI), coronary artery bypass grafting, and drug abuse were higher in the TAVR-only cohort. Postoperative stroke rate (1.4% vs 2.2%; P = 0.081) and odds [adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.11-2.17; P = 0.341] were lower in the CEPD group. There was no difference in all-cause in-hospital mortality between the 2 groups (0.9% vs 1.0%). Length of stay (3 vs 2 days, P <0.001) and hospital expenditure ($172,711 vs $162,284; P = 0.002) were higher for the TAVR-only cohort. CEPD in TAVR patients with prior stroke or TIA did not show statistically significant postoperative stroke benefits. However, further larger-scale prospective studies are needed to evaluate the long-term neurocognitive benefits of CEPD in these patients. As the use of TAVR continues to expand, optimizing peri-procedural strategies such as the use of CEPD remains a critical area of research to improve patient outcomes.

Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an updated meta-analysis

Background

The use of cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) reveals conflicting data.

Aims

This updated meta-analysis aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the SENTINEL Cerebral Protection System.

Methods

A literature search for relevant studies up to September 2022 was performed. Study outcomes were divided based on time period - overall (up to 30 days) and short (≤7 days). The outcomes studied include stroke (disabling, non-disabling), mortality, neuroimaging findings, transient ischaemic attack, acute kidney injury and major vascular and bleeding complications.

Results

A total of 15 studies involving 294,134 patients were included. Regarding overall outcomes, significant reductions were noted for mortality (odds ratio [OR] 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-0.88; p=0.008), all stroke (OR 0.64, 95% CI: 0.46-0.88; p=0.006) and disabling stroke (OR 0.42, 95% CI: 0.23-0.74; p=0.003) using the SENTINEL device. No significant differences were noted for other outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity across the studies for mortality (p=0.013) and all stroke (p=0.003). Including only randomised data (n=4), there was only significant reduction in the incidence of disabling stroke (OR 0.39, 95% CI: 0.17-0.89; p=0.026) in the SENTINEL group. In studies reporting ≤7-day outcomes (n=8), use of the SENTINEL device demonstrated significantly lower rates of all stroke (p<0.001), disabling stroke (p<0.001) and major bleeding complications (p=0.02). No differences in neuroimaging outcomes were noted.

Conclusions

In this updated meta-analysis, use of the SENTINEL Cerebral Protection System was associated with lower rates of mortality, all stroke and disabling stroke, although significant heterogeneity was noted for mortality and all stroke. Including exclusively randomised data, there was only significant reduction in the incidence of disabling stroke. No significant adverse outcomes with device use were noted.

Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection devices for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated meta-analysis

Background and Aims

Cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices are employed to capture embolic debris and reduce the risk of stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Evidence is mixed regarding the safety and efficacy of CEP. We aimed to summarize the safety and effectiveness of CEP use during TAVR.

Methods

Electronic databases, including PubMed, PubMed Central, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Embase, were searched using relevant search terms for articles relating to CEP. All relevant data from 20 studies were extracted into a standardized form. Statistical analyses were performed using Revman 5.4. Odds ratio (OR) or mean differences (MDs) were used to estimate the desired outcome with a 95% confidence interval (CI).

Results

Twenty studies (eight randomized controlled trials [RCTs]) involving 210,871 patients (19,261 in the CEP group and 191,610 in TAVR without the CEP group) were included. The use of CEP was associated with a lower odds of 30-day mortality by 39% (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.53-0.70) and stroke by 31% (OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.92). Comparing devices, benefit in terms of mortality and stroke was observed with the use of the Sentinel device (Boston Scientific), but not among other devices. No differences were observed in the outcomes of acute kidney injury, major or life-threatening bleeding events, or major vascular complications between groups. When only RCTs were included, there were no observed differences in the primary or secondary outcomes for CEP versus no CEP use during TAVR.

Conclusions

The totality of evidence suggests a net benefit for the use of CEP, weighted by studies in which the Sentinal device was used. However, given the RCT subanalysis, additional evidence is needed to identify patients at the highest risk of stroke for optimal decision-making.

Cerebral Embolic Protection Devices: Current State of the Art

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a first-line treatment for severe aortic stenosis with intermediate to high-risk population with its use increasingly expanding into younger and low-risk cohorts as well. Cerebrovascular events are one of the most serious consequential complications of TAVR, which increase morbidity and mortality. The most probable origin of such neurological events is embolic in nature and the majority occur in the acute phase after TAVR when embolic events are most frequent. Cerebral embolic protection devices have been designed to capture or deflect these emboli, reducing the risk of peri-procedural ischaemic events. They also carry the potential to diminish the burden of new silent ischemic lesions during TAVR. Our review explores different types of these device systems, their rationale, and the established clinical data.