Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low- and intermediate-risk patients: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

The evolution of TAVI performance overtime: an overview of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for high and intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Recent studies have demonstrated non-inferiority of TAVI compared to surgery in low-risk patients. In the past decade, numerous literature reviews (SLRs) have assessed the use of TAVI in different risk groups. This is the first attempt to provide an overview of SRs (OoSRs) focusing on secondary studies reporting clinical outcomes/process indicators. This research aims to summarize the findings of extant literature on the performance of TAVI over time.

METHODS

A literature search took place from inception to April 2024. We searched MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for SLRs. SLRs reporting at least one review of clinical indicators were included. Subsequently, a two-step inclusion process was conducted: [1] screening based on title and abstracts and [2] screening based on full-text papers. Relevant data were extracted and the quality of the reviews was assessed.

RESULTS

We included 33 SLRs with different risks assessed via the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score. Mortality rates were comparable between TAVI and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR) groups. TAVI is associated with lower rates of major bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence, and new-onset atrial fibrillation. Vascular complications, pacemaker implantation, and residual aortic regurgitation were more frequent in TAVI patients.

CONCLUSION

This study summarizes TAVI performance findings over a decade, revealing a shift to include both high and low-risk patients since 2020. Overall, TAVI continues to evolve, emphasizing improved outcomes, broader indications, and addressing challenges.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Retrospective Observational Single-Center Study in Japan

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MICS-AVR) versus transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) in Asian patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational, single-center study in Japan, including cases of MICS-AVR (n = 202) and TF-TAVR (n = 248) between 2014 and 2021. In a total of 450 cases, propensity score matching was performed at a ratio of 1:1, resulting in 96 pairs. Furthermore, we performed competing-risk regression and mediation analyses to determine the treatment effect on outcomes of interests, considering death as a competing risk, and to evaluate the mediation effect of paravalvular leak (PVL) severity.

RESULTS

There were similar incidences of all-cause death, cardiac death, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage, and aortic valve reintervention between the 2 groups. However, the TF-TAVR cohort had a longer hospital length of stay and higher rates of significant PVL compared with the MICS-AVR cohort. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analyses revealed that heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.129, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.038 to 0.445, p = 0.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation (HR = 0.050, 95% CI: 0.006 to 0.409, p = 0.005) favored MICS-AVR. Competing-risk regression analyses confirmed similar findings. All outcomes were unrelated to PVL severity.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study of clinical outcomes in Asian patients undergoing MICS-AVR versus TF-TAVR, revealing that MICS-AVR could be a feasible and efficient alternative to TF-TAVR. Future larger-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the present results.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Preprocedural Planning for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: 2023 Update

This document discusses preprocedural planning for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, evaluating the imaging modalities used in initial imaging for preprocedure planning under two variants 1) Preintervention planning for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: assessment of aortic root; and 2) Preintervention planning for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: assessment of supravalvular aorta and vascular access. US echocardiography transesophageal, MRI heart function and morphology without and with IV contrast, MRI heart function and morphology without IV contrast and CT heart function and morphology with IV contrast are usually appropriate for assessment of aortic root. CTA chest with IV contrast, CTA abdomen and pelvis with IV contrast, CTA chest abdomen pelvis with IV contrast are usually appropriate for assessment of supravalvular aorta and vascular access. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision process support the systematic analysis of the medical literature from peer reviewed journals. Established methodology principles such as Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE are adapted to evaluate the evidence. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method User Manual provides the methodology to determine the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where peer reviewed literature is lacking or equivocal, experts may be the primary evidentiary source available to formulate a recommendation.

30-Day Outcomes With the Portico Transcatheter Heart Valve: Insights From a Multi-Centre Australian Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established therapy for the treatment of aortic valve disease in appropriately selected patients. Previous studies using the self-expanding Portico transcatheter heart valve (THV), (Abbott Structural Heart, St Paul, MN, USA) have demonstrated the technical feasibility of this system albeit in the hands of relatively inexperienced Portico users. The objective of this study was to assess the real-world safety and efficacy of the Portico THV (with and without the FlexNav delivery system, Abbott Structural Heart) at the 30-day timepoint in an Australian cohort.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was a retrospective real-world cohort analysis of 269 consecutive patients with severe aortic valve disease who underwent TAVI at multiple centres within Australia between February 2015 and April 2021. Of the 269 patients, 51.7% were female, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 5.2 (±6.8) and 98.5% had successful implantations. Thirty (30)-day post-implantation all-cause mortality was observed in one (0.4%) patient, major vascular complications in two (0.7%) patients, more-than-mild paravalvular leak in six (2.2%) patients and requirement for new permanent pacemaker implantation in 27 (10.2%) patients. Haemodynamic parameters at 30 days included mean effective orifice area (EOA) of 2.3 (±0.9) cm² and mean aortic valve gradient (AVG) of 9.6 (±6.2) mmHg.

CONCLUSION

This analysis of the Portico THV in a real-world setting suggested that the system is associated with satisfactory safety and efficacy parameters. Previously published datasets may not have found similar findings owing to lower operator experience with the Portico THV system.

Five-year outcomes in trials comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a pooled meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data

OBJECTIVES

The incidence of outcomes in trials comparing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) is expected to be different in the short and long term. We planned a meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from trials comparing TAVI and SAVR to evaluate their time-varying effects on outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the literature from January 2007 through September 2021 on Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and specialistic websites, including randomized trials with allocation to TAVI or SAVR that reported at least 1-year follow-up and that graphed Kaplan-Meier curves of end points. The comparisons were done with grouped frailty Cox models in a landmark framework and fully parametric models.

RESULTS

Seven trials were included (7770 participants). TAVI showed a lower incidence of the composite of death or stroke in the first 6 months [risk-stratified hazard ratio (HR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-0.77, P-value <0.001], with an HR reversal after 24 months favouring SAVR (risk-stratified HR 1.25; 95% CI 1.08-1.46; P-value 0.003). These outcomes were confirmed for all-cause death (risk-stratified HR after 24 months 1.18; 95% CI 1.03-1.35; P-value 0.01). TAVI was also associated with an increased incidence of rehospitalization after 6 months (risk-stratified HR 1.42; 95% CI 1.06-1.91; P-value 0.018) that got worse after 24 months (risk-stratified HR 1.67; 95% CI 1.24-2.24; P-value <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although it could appear that there is no difference between TAVI and SAVR in the 5-year cumulative results, TAVI shows a strong protective effect in the short term that runs out after 1 year. TAVI becomes a risk factor for all-cause mortality and the composite end point after 24 months and for rehospitalization after 6 months.

Mortality in trials on transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus surgical aortic valve replacement: a pooled meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-derived individual patient data

OBJECTIVES

This meta-analysis of Kaplan-Meier-estimated individual patient data was designed to evaluate the effects of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) on the long-term all-cause mortality rate, to examine the potential time-varying effect and to model their hazard ratios (HRs) over time. Moreover, we sought to compare traditional meta-analytic tools and estimated individual patient data meta-analyses.

METHODS

Trials comparing TAVI versus SAVR were identified through Medline, Embase, Cochrane databases and specialist websites. The primary outcome was death from any cause at follow-up. Enhanced secondary analyses of survival curves were performed estimating individual patient time-to-event data from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Treatments were compared with the random effect Cox model in a landmark framework and fully parametric models.

RESULTS

We identified 6 eligible trials that included 6367 participants, randomly assigned to undergo TAVI (3252) or SAVR (3115). According to the landmark analysis, the incidence of death in the first year after implantation was significantly lower in the TAVI group [risk-profile stratified HR 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-0.99; P = 0.04], whereas there was a reversal of the HR after 40 months (risk-profile stratified HR 1.31, 95% CI 1.01-1.68; P = 0.04) favouring SAVR over TAVI. This time-varying trend of HRs was also confirmed by a fully parametric time-to-event model. Traditional meta-analytic tools were shown to be biased because they did not intercept heterogeneity and the time-varying effect.

CONCLUSIONS

The mortality rates in trials of TAVI versus SAVR are affected by treatments with a time-varying effect. TAVI is related to better survival in the first months after implantation whereas, after 40 months, it is a risk factor for all-cause mortality.

Cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

It is controversial that cerebral embolic protection devices (CEPDs) reduce clinical stroke during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Herein, we investigated the impact of CEPDs on in-hospital clinical stroke using a nationally representative sample.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, 109,240 patients who underwent TAVR between 2017 and 2018 were included. They were categorized into 2 groups according to usage of CEPDs; the CEPD and non-CEPD groups. After propensity score matching, 3805 pairs were acquired. Our main outcome was in-hospital clinical stroke. Other outcomes were in-hospital mortality, acute kidney injury (AKI), AKI leading to hemodialysis, bleeding requiring transfusion, overall bleeding complications, infectious complications, length of stay, and total cost. In-hospital clinical stroke did not significantly differ between the 2 groups (0.7% versus 1.1%, p = 0.449). The CEPD group was associated with a significantly lower in-hospital mortality (0.5% versus 1.4%, p = 0.029) and reduced total cost ($49,047 ± 19,666 versus $50,051 ± 23,190, p < 0.001), compared with the non-CEPD group, whereas there were no significant differences in the other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

By using the NIS database with a large number of cases, TAVR with CEPDs was not associated with a lower incidence of in-hospital clinical stroke compared with no use of CEPDs after matching.

Duration of Antiplatelet Therapy Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Background

Although current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 3 to 6 months following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), there are no studies directly comparing outcomes of different durations of DAPT following TAVR.

Methods and Results

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database were searched through November 2020 to identify clinical studies that investigated single antiplatelet therapy versus DAPT use following TAVR. Studies using oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapy concomitantly were excluded. The DAPT group was subdivided by the duration of DAPT. We extracted the risk ratios (RRs) of major or life‐threatening bleeding, stroke, and all‐cause mortality. Four randomized controlled trials, 2 propensity‐score matched studies, and 1 observational study were identified, yielding a total of 2498 patients who underwent TAVR assigned to the single antiplatelet therapy group (n=1249), 3‐month DAPT group (n=485), or 6‐month DAPT group (n=764). Pooled analyses demonstrated that when compared with the single antiplatelet therapy group, the rates of major or life‐threatening bleeding were significantly higher in the 3‐ and 6‐month DAPT groups (RR [95% CI]=2.13 [1.33–3.40], P=0.016; RR [95% CI]=2.54 [1.49–4.33], P=0.007, respectively) with no difference between the 3‐month DAPT versus 6‐month DAPT groups. The rates of stroke and all‐cause mortality were similar among the 3 groups.

Conclusions

In this network meta‐analysis of antiplatelet therapy following TAVR, single antiplatelet therapy with aspirin had lower bleeding without increasing stroke or death when compared with either 3‐ or 6‐month DAPT.

Challenging Anatomies for TAVR-Bicuspid and Beyond

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

Four-year mortality in women and men after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the SAPIEN 3

OBJECTIVES

To investigate 4-year, post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) survival and predictors of survival by sex, in a real-world cohort that underwent transfemoral TAVI with SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve.

BACKGROUND

Previous TAVI investigations of first-generation devices demonstrated an early- to mid-term survival advantage in women compared with men.

METHODS

SOURCE 3 (SAPIEN 3 Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome) is a post-approval, multicentre, observational registry. Patients (N = 1,694, 49.2% women, age 81.7 ± 6.7 years) with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk (logistic EuroSCORE 17.8%) underwent TAVI between 2014 and 2015. Kaplan-Meier event estimates were used to determine mortality by sex. Predictors of overall mortality were identified using a cox multivariate proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

At 4 years, women had lower all-cause mortality than men (36.0 vs 39.7%; p = .0911; HR: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.75-1.02]). No difference was observed for cardiac mortality between women 24.2% and men 24.7% (p = .76; HR: 0.97 [95% CI: 0.79-1.19]). When adjusted for baseline characteristics (age, height, weight, NYHA functional class, renal insufficiency, EuroScore, and tricuspid regurgitation), sex had no impact on mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, real-world cohort, all-cause mortality trended lower in women than men at 4 years post TAVI; however, several baseline factors, but not sex, were predictors of mortality. No difference between sexes was observed for cardiovascular mortality.

Improvement of renal function after transcatheter aortic valve replacement and its impact on survival

Background

Chronic kidney disease as well as acute kidney injury are associated with adverse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, little is known about the prognostic implications of an improvement in renal function after TAVR.

Methods

Renal improvement (RI) was defined as a decrease in postprocedural creatinine in μmol/l of ≥1% compared to its preprocedural baseline value. A propensity score representing the likelihood of RI was calculated to define patient groups which were comparable regarding potential confounders (age, sex, BMI, NYHA classification, STS score, log. EuroSCORE, history of atrial fibrillation/atrial flutter, pulmonary disease, previous stroke, CRP, creatinine, hsTNT and NT-proBNP). The cohort was stratified into 5 quintiles according to this propensity score and the survival time after TAVR was compared within each subgroup.

Results

Patients in quintile 5 (n = 93) had the highest likelihood for RI. They were characterized by higher creatinine, lower eGFR, higher NYHA class, higher NT-proBNP, being mostly female and having shorter overall survival time. Within quintile 5, patients without RI had significantly shorter survival compared to patients with RI (p = 0.002, HR = 0.32, 95% CI = [0.15–0.69]). There was no survival time difference between patients with and without RI in the whole cohort (p = 0.12) and in quintiles 1 to 4 (all p > 0.16). Analyses of specific subgroups showed that among patients with NYHA class IV, those with RI also had a significant survival time benefit (p < 0.001, HR = 0.15; 95%-CI = [0.05–0.44]) compared to patients without RI.

Conclusions

We here describe a propensity score-derived specific subgroup of patients in which RI after TAVR correlated with a significant survival benefit.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12882-021-02274-5.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An alternative for severe aortic stenosis

ABSTRACT

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is considered a lower-risk procedure for patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. Several FDA-approved trials performed in the United States support TAVR to be beneficial over surgical aortic valve replacement in certain patient populations. An optimal TAVR program consists of a multidisciplinary team that selects candidates for the procedure based on shared decision-making and the patient's anatomy and risk factors, and follows the patients through the Transcatheter Valve Therapy National Registry.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Prognostic value of cardiac 123 I-metaiodobenzylguanidine imaging for predicting cardiac events after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Aims

In patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS), cardiac sympathetic nervous (CSN) dysfunction and its improvement after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have been reported. The prognostic impact of CSN function remains unclear. This study investigated the prognostic value of cardiac ¹²³I‐metaiodobenzylguanidine (MIBG) imaging for predicting cardiac events after TAVR.

Methods and results

This single‐centre prospective observational study enrolled patients with AS between July 2017 and May 2019. MIBG scintigraphy was performed before and soon after TAVR to evaluate the late heart–mediastinum ratio (L‐H/M). Patients were classified into three pairs of groups based on the baseline and post‐TAVR L‐H/M (≥2.0 or <2.0) and on the presence of TAVR‐related improvement in L‐H/M. The study endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all‐cause death, non‐fatal myocardial infarction, and hospitalization due to heart failure. Among the 187 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR, 107 (27 men; median age: 86 years) were evaluated. Over a median follow‐up of 366 days, 15 (14.0%) patients had MACE. The incidence of MACE was significantly low in patients with L‐H/M improvement and/or high post‐TAVR L‐H/M (≥2.0). Baseline L‐H/M and frailty were associated with poor response of L‐H/M to TAVR treatment. TAVR‐related improvement in L‐H/M had significant effects on MACE, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 0.233 (95% confidence interval, 0.064–0.856; P = 0.028).

Conclusions

TAVR‐related improvement in L‐H/M was an independent predictor of cardiac events, 1 year after TAVR. Cardiac MIBG imaging is useful for predicting cardiac events after TAVR.

Anatomical Predictors of Pacemaker Dependency After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Conduction disturbances after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are often transient. Limited data exist on anatomic factors predisposing to pacemaker dependency after TAVR. We sought to assess the rate and the possible predictors of pacemaker dependency after TAVR.

METHODS

Consecutive patients undergoing pacemaker implantation up to 30 days after TAVR between May 2014 and September 2019 were included. Baseline electrocardiographic, computed tomography, and procedural characteristics were collected, including valve implantation depth and membranous septum length, an anatomic surrogate of the distance between the aortic annulus and the His bundle. Pacemaker dependency at 30 days and 1 year and all-cause mortality during follow-up were evaluated.

RESULTS

Of 728 TAVR patients, 112 (53.5% men; median age, 81 years) underwent pacemaker implantation after TAVR. Of these, 44.6% (50 of 112) were pacemaker dependent at 30 days and 46.7% (36 of 77) at 1 year. By multivariate analysis, independent predictors of 30-day pacemaker dependency included left ventricular outflow tract calcifications under the left coronary cusp (odds ratio, 5.69 [95% CI, 1.45-22.31]; P=0.013) and a difference between membranous septum length and implantation depth (ΔMSID) ≥3 mm (odds ratio, 7.58 [95% CI, 2.07-27.78]; P=0.002). Conversely, membranous septum length and implantation depth alone were not associated with pacemaker dependency (odds ratio, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.60-1.05]; P=0.11 and odds ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.99-1.24]; P=0.08). At a median follow-up of 28.1 (11.7-48.6) months, pacemaker-dependent patients did not show a worse survival (P=0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Less than half of the patients undergoing pacemaker implantation after TAVR are pacemaker-dependent at midterm follow-up. ΔMSID ≥3 mm and the presence of left ventricular outflow tract calcifications under the left coronary cusp, but not membranous septum length nor implantation depth alone, are predictive of long-term pacemaker dependency after TAVR, thus influencing device selection and programming.

Clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves vs. native aortic stenosis: insights from a meta-analysis

There is no meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes between valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation for failed surgical bioprosthetic valves (ViV-TAVI) and native valve TAVI for aortic stenosis (NV-TAVI). We aimed to investigate clinical outcomes between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI using a meta-analysis. EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched through April 2020 to investigate the comparative outcomes between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI. The main outcomes were short-term (30-day/in-hospital) mortality, pacemaker implantation (PMI), life threatening and/or major bleeding, stroke, and coronary obstruction, and long-term (1-year) mortality and stroke. Our search identified 5 observational studies enrolling a total of 8428 patients (1442 patients with ViV-TAVI and 6986 with NV-TAVI). ViV-TAVI was associated with significantly lower rates of short-term mortality, PMI, and life threatening and/or major bleeding, compared with NV-TAVI (relative risk [RR] [95% CI] 0.54 [0.34-0.84], P = 0.007; 0.25 [0.19-0.35], P < 0.0001; 0.64 [0.46-0.89], P = 0.008, respectively). There were no significant differences in rates of short-term stroke and coronary obstruction between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI (RR [95% CI] 0.59 [0.35-1.01], P = 0.06; 1.86 [0.78-4.41], P = 0.16, respectively). ViV-TAVI was also associated with a significantly lower rate of 1-year mortality compared with NV-TAVI (RR [95% CI] 0.64 [0.51-0.81], P = 0.0002), whereas there was no significant difference in long-term stroke (RR [95% CI] 0.71 [0.45-1.12], P = 0.51). ViV-TAVI was associated with significantly lower rates of short-term mortality, PMI, and life threatening and/or major bleeding, and long-term mortality, without increased risks of stroke and coronary obstruction, compared with NV-TAVI.

Using Wearable Devices to Monitor Physical Activity in Patients Undergoing Aortic Valve Replacement: Protocol for a Prospective Observational Study

Background

In last few decades, several tools have been developed to measure physical function objectively; however, their use has not been well established in clinical practice.

Objective

This study aims to describe the preoperative physical function and to assess and compare 6-month postoperative changes in the physical function of patients undergoing treatment for aortic stenosis with either surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The study also aims to evaluate the feasibility of wearable devices in assessing physical function in such patients.

Methods

This is a prospective observational study. The enrollment will be conducted 1 month before patients’ SAVR/TAVR. Patients will be provided with the wearable device at baseline (activity tracker device, Garmin vívoactive 3). They will be trained in the use of the device, and they will be requested to wear it on the wrist of their preferred hand until 12 months after SAVR/TAVR. After baseline assessment, they will undergo 4 follow-up assessments at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after SAVR/TAVR. At baseline and each follow-up, they will undergo a set of standard and validated tests to assess physical function, health-related quality of life, and sleep quality.

Results

The ethics committee of Vicenza in Veneto Region in Italy approved the study (Protocol No. 943; January 4, 2019). As of October 2020, the enrollment of participants is ongoing.

Conclusions

The use of the wearable devices for real-time monitoring of physical activity of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement is a promising opportunity for improving the clinical management and consequently, the health outcomes of such patients.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03843320; https://tinyurl.com/yyareu5y

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/20072

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in cardiogenic shock: TAVI-shock registry results

OBJECTIVES

Aim of this study is to evaluate safety, feasibility, and mid-term outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in cardiogenic shock (CS).

BACKGROUND

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis (SAS) complicated by CS is indicated but associated with a grim prognosis. TAVI might be a more reasonable treatment option in this setting but data are scant.

METHODS

From March 2008 to February 2019, 51 patients with severe aortic valvulopathy (native SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis) and CS treated by TAVI in 11 European centers were included in this multicenter registry. Demographic, clinical, and procedural data were collected, as well as clinical and echocardiographic follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean age of our study population was 75.8 ± 13, 49% were women, and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 19 ± 15%. Device success was achieved in 94.1%, with a 5% incidence of moderate/severe paravalvular leak. The 30-day events were mortality 11.8%, stroke 2.0%, vascular complications 5.9%, and acute kidney injury 34%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 early safety endpoint was reached in 35.3% of cases. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 25.7% and the readmission for congestive heart failure was 8.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI seems to be a therapeutic option for patients with CS and SAS or degenerated aortic bioprosthesis in terms of both safety and efficacy at early and long-term follow-up.

Coronary Access and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Up to 3 Years After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With a Balloon-Expandable Valve

Background:

Coronary artery disease and aortic stenosis often coexist. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a valid therapeutic option for younger, lower-risk patients who may eventually require coronary artery disease treatment. Thus, post-TAVI coronary access (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention are expected to increase. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively evaluate patients who were enrolled in the SOURCE 3 (SAPIEN 3 Aortic Bioprosthesis European Outcome) European registry for treatment with the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve and underwent CA with or without percutaneous coronary intervention after TAVI.

Methods:

Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with or without CA up to 3 years after TAVI were compared. A Kaplan-Meier estimate with a univariate model determined the impact of CA on cardiac mortality.

Results:

Of 1936 TAVI patients (mean age 81.6 years, 52% male), 68 (3.5%) had CA within 3 years (mean 441±332 days) after TAVI. At baseline, the logistic EuroSCORE was similar (20.2% versus 18.3%, P=0.2, CA and non-CA groups, respectively). Higher rates of coronary artery disease (76.5% versus 50.6%, P<0.001), myocardial infarction (20.6% versus 11.5%, P=0.03) and previous coronary artery bypass graft (22.1% versus 11.0%, P=0.01) were present in the CA group. In 100% of patients, CA was successfully achieved. The clinical success of percutaneous coronary intervention was 97.9%. Cardiovascular mortality was numerically higher in patients with CA than in those without CA.

Conclusions:

In the large SOURCE 3 European registry, CA was needed at 3-year follow-up after TAVI with a balloon-expandable valve in 3.5% of patients and was successful in all patients. The clinical success of percutaneous coronary intervention was 97.9%.

Registration:

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02698956.

Coronary Angiography After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) to Evaluate the Risk of Coronary Access Impairment After TAVR-in-TAVR

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)‐in‐TAVR is a possible treatment for transcatheter heart valve (THV) degeneration. However, the displaced leaflets of the first THV will create a risk plane (RP) under which the passage of a coronary catheter will be impossible. The aim of our study was to evaluate the potential risk of impaired coronary access (CA) after TAVR‐in‐TAVR.

Methods and Results

We prospectively performed coronary angiography after TAVR with different THVs in 137 consecutive patients, looking where the catheter crossed the valve frame. If coronary cannulation was achieved from below the RP, the distance between valve frame and aortic wall was measured by aortic angiography. CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR was defined as feasible if the catheter passed above the RP, as theoretically feasible if passed under the RP with valve‐to‐aorta distance >2 mm, and as unfeasible if passed under the RP with valve‐to‐aorta distance ≤2 mm. Seventy‐two patients (53%) received a Sapien 3 THV, 26 (19%) received an Evolut Pro/R THV, and 39 (28%) received an Acurate Neo THV. CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR was considered feasible in 40.9% (68.1%, 19.2%, and 5.1%, respectively; P<0.001), theoretically feasible in 27.7% (8.3%, 42.3%, and 53.8%, respectively; P<0.001), and unfeasible in 31.4% (23.6%, 38.5%, and 41.1%, respectively; P=0.116). Independent predictors of impaired CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR were female sex (odds ratio [OR], 3.99; 95% CI, 1.07–14.86; P=0.040), sinotubular junction diameter (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.48–0.80; P<0.001), and implantation of a supra‐annular THV (OR, 6.61; 95% CI, 1.98–22.03; P=0.002).

Conclusions

CA after TAVR‐in‐TAVR might be unfeasible in >30% of patients currently treated with TAVR. Patients with a small sinotubular junction and those who received a supra‐annular THV are at highest risk of potential CA impairment with TAVR‐in‐TAVR.

Gender Differences in Postoperative Outcomes After Cardiac Surgery

Women presenting for cardiac surgery tend to be older and have hypertension, diabetes, and overweight or underweight body mass index than men. Despite improvements in surgical techniques and medications, women have increased risk for morbidity and mortality after multiple types of cardiac surgery. Women presenting for transcatheter aortic valve replacement are older and frailer than men, and have increased risk of intraoperative complications, but lower mortality at mid- and long-term ranges compared with men. Adherence to recovery and rehabilitation from cardiac surgery is challenging for women. Solutions should focus on increased family support, and use of group exercise and activities.

Mortality after transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement: an updated meta-analysis of randomised trials

Background

To determine whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) improves early (30-day) and midterm (1-year) mortality compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), we performed an updated meta-analysis of all the currently available randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

Methods

To identify all RCTs providing both 30-day and 1‑year mortality after TAVI versus SAVR, PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched up to and including July 2019. A risk difference (RD) and its 95% confidence interval were generated using data of prespecified outcomes in both the TAVI and SAVR groups. Study-specific estimates were pooled using inverse variance-weighted averages of RDs in the random-effects model.

Results

We identified seven eligible high-quality RCTs including a total of 7631 as-treated patients. Pooled analyses demonstrated significantly lower 30-day (RD −0.60%; p = 0.046) and 1‑year all-cause mortality (RD −1.12%; p = 0.03) after TAVI than after SAVR. No funnel plot asymmetry was detected for 30-day and 1‑year mortality. Meta-regression analyses indicated that RDs of 30-day and 1‑year mortality between TAVI and SAVR were not modulated by mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score. Bleeding complications at 30 days and 1 year and stage 2/3 acute kidney injury at 30 days were significantly less frequent after TAVI than after SAVR, whereas major vascular complications and new permanent pacemaker implantation at 30 days and 1 year were significantly more frequent after TAVI than after SAVR.

Conclusion

The best evidence from the present meta-analysis of all the currently available RCTs suggests that TAVI may reduce 30-day and 1‑year all-cause mortality compared with SAVR.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12471-020-01378-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Transcatheter treatment of native aortic valve regurgitation: Results from an international registry using the transfemoral ACURATE neo valve

•

Native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) presents technical challenges for TAVR.

•

This is the largest study on NAVR patients treated with the ACURATE neo valve.

•

Intraprocedural mortality was 0%, device success 87.5% and moderate PVL rate 8.3%.

•

Device success tended to be higher with perimeter-based >10% oversizing.

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been validated for the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients at high and intermediate surgical risk. Recently, TAVR has been proposed as an alternative to medical therapy in inoperable patients with severe native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR). This multicenter international registry sought to evaluate safety and efficacy of TAVR with the self-expandable ACURATE neo valve in a cohort of patients with NAVR.

Methods

A total of 24 patients with severe NAVR treated by TAVR between September 2016 and October 2018 in 13 European centers were included. Clinical, procedural and follow up data were inserted in a dedicated database. Outcomes were codified according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria.

Results

Mean age was 79.4 years, 58.4% were female. Mean EuroSCORE II and STS score were 5% and 3.9%, respectively. Device success was 87.5%. Moderate paravalvular leak (PVL) was found in two (8.3%) of patients, both with a perimeter oversizing index <10%. Implantation of a second device was necessary in three cases (12.5%), one for severe PVL and two for device displacement. New pacemaker implantation rate was 21.1%. At 30 days, stroke and all-cause mortality rates were 0% and 4.1%, respectively.

Conclusions

This multicenter study suggests good feasibility and early safety of transfemoral TAVR with the self-expandable ACURATE neo device in patients with severe NAVR refused for surgery. Rates of moderate PVL, new pacemaker implantation and need for a second valve were higher than those reported for TAVR in aortic stenosis.

Factors influencing the choice between transcatheter and surgical treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients younger than 80 years: Results from the OBSERVANT study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze the baseline features and clinical outcomes of patients younger than 80 years undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) real-world study, focusing on variables guiding Heart Team decision toward TAVI.

BACKGROUND

Patients treated with TAVI, independently of surgical risk score, are mostly older than 80 years.

METHODS

OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. For this analysis, baseline characteristics, therapeutic approach and outcomes up to 5 years of follow-up of 4,801 patients under 80 years of age were collected. Patients were stratified by age classes (<65, 65-74, and 75-79 years).

RESULTS

Patients <80 years of age with severe symptomatic AS undergoing TAVI (n = 483) had significantly higher Logistic EuroSCORE (10.84% vs. 5.22%, p < .001) and prevalence of comorbidities compared to subjects undergoing SAVR (n = 4,318). The decision to perform TAVI over SAVR was driven by anatomical factors, mainly previous cardiac surgery (odds ratio [OR] 24.73, confidence interval [CI] 12.71-48.10, p < .001) and the presence of porcelain aorta (OR 17.44, CI 6.67-45.55, p < .001), and clinical factors, mainly moderate-severe frailty score (OR 5.49, CI 3.33-9.07, p < .001), oxygen dependency (OR 7.42, CI 2.75-20.04, p < .001) and need for dialytic treatment (OR 5.24, CI 1.54-17.80, p < .008). Among patients undergoing TAVI, those under 65 years had the highest baseline risk profile (despite a low Logistic EuroSCORE) and the highest 5-year mortality compared to those 65-74 and 75-79-year-old (65.22% vs. 48.54% vs. 55.24%, log-rank p = .061).

CONCLUSION

Among patients under 80 years of age with symptomatic severe AS, only 10% underwent TAVI. These patients were at higher baseline risk compared to those undergoing SAVR. The decision to perform TAVI was driven by the presence of both anatomical and clinical factors beyond surgical risk scores. Patients under 65 years of age, despite the low Logistic EuroSCORE, had the highest preoperative risk profile and carried the worse outcome.

Current results and remaining challenges of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement expansion in intermediate and low risk patients

TAVR has become the standard treatment in patients at increased surgical risk (STS or EuroSCORE II ≥4% or logistic EuroSCORE I ≥ 10% or other risk factors not included in these scores such as frailty, porcelain aorta, sequelae of chest radiation) and it is increasingly being performed in patients at intermediate to low (STS or EuroSCORE II <4% or logistic EuroSCORE I < 10%) surgical risk. Although non-inferiority has been demonstrated in intermediate and low-risk patients, several challenges need to be addressed before expansion to younger patients. Current trends, trials results, and remaining challenges are summarized and discussed in this review.

TAVR-present, future, and challenges in developing countries

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a well-established therapy for inoperable and high-risk patients of Aortic Stenosis in most of the part of the world. The technological advancements in the hemodynamic performance and design of valve prosthesis and also the data provided by various trials regarding the safety and efficacy of TAVR have widened the scope of TAVR in intermediate and low-risk groups also. The main focus of this review is to discuss the feasibility of TAVR in developing countries. Along with this review, it also gives a detailed outlook of the pros and cons of TAVR along with insight into the future of TAVR and its adoption into the low-risk group.