Transcatheter Self-Expandable Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Small Aortic Annuli

Late Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation with Balloon-Versus Self-Expandable Valves: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-To-Event Data

Self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have their own features. There is a growing interest in long-term outcomes with the adoption of lifetime management in younger patients. To evaluate late outcomes in TAVI with SEV versus BEV, we performed a study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data published by May 31, 2023. We found no statistically significant difference in all-cause death after TAVI with SEV versus BEV. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our results.

Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement vs. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with Small Aortic Annulus: Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes from a Multi-Institutional Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes of patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

From 2015 to 2020, 622 consecutive patients with SAA underwent either SUAVR or TAVI. Through a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis, two homogeneous groups of 146 patients were formed. Primary endpoint: all cause-death at 36 months. Secondary endpoints: incidence of moderate to severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs).

RESULTS

All-cause death at three years was higher in the TAVI group (SUAVR 12.2% vs. TAVI 21.0%, P=0.058). Perioperatively, comparable hemodynamic performances were recorded in terms of indexed effective orifice area (SUAVR 1.12 ± 0.23 cm2/m2 vs. TAVI 1.17 ± 0.28 cm2/m2, P=0.265), mean transvalvular gradients (SUAVR 12.9 ± 5.3 mmHg vs. TAVI 12.2 ± 6.2 mmHg, P=0.332), and moderate-to-severe PPM (SUAVR 4.1% vs. TAVI 8.9%, P=0.096). TAVI group showed a higher cumulative incidence of MACCEs at 36 months (SUAVR 18.1% vs. TAVI 32.6%, P<0.001). Pacemaker implantation (PMI) and perivalvular leak ≥ 2 were significantly higher in TAVI group and identified as independent predictors of mortality (PMI: hazard ratio [HR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-6.94, P=0.008; PPM: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.25-5.94, P=0.012).

CONCLUSION

In patients with SAA, SUAVR and TAVI showed comparable hemodynamic performances. Moreover, all-cause death and incidence of MACCEs at follow-up were significantly higher in TAVI group.

Size of Self-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valve and Mid-Term Adverse Events After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

The hemodynamic performance of self-expandable valves (SEVs) is a preferable choice for small aortic annuli in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, no data are, so far, available regarding the relation between the size of SEVs and clinical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of prosthesis size on adverse events after TAVR using SEVs. We retrospectively analyzed 1,400 patients (23-mm SEV: 13.6%) who underwent TAVR using SEVs at 12 centers. The impact of SEV size on all-cause death and heart failure (HF) after TAVR was evaluated by multivariate Cox regression and propensity score (PS) matching analysis. During the follow-up period (median 511 days), 201 all-cause deaths and 87 HF rehospitalizations were observed. The incidence of all-cause death was comparable between small- (23-mm SEV) and larger-sized (26- or 29-mm SEV) (16.8% vs 13.9%, log-rank p = 0.29). The size of SEV was not associated with a higher incidence of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79 to 1.86 in Cox regression; HR 1.31, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.23 in PS matching) and HF after TAVR (subdistribution HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.72 in Cox regression; subdistribution HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.30 in PS matching). The multivariate model including postprocedural prosthesis-patient mismatch showed consistent results. In conclusion, small SEVs had comparable midterm clinical outcomes to larger-sized SEVs, even if the prosthesis-patient mismatch was observed after TAVR.

Durability of transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is now utilised as a less invasive alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across the whole spectrum of surgical risk. Long-term durability of the bioprosthetic valves has become a key goal of TAVI as this procedure is now considered for younger and lower-risk populations. The purpose of this article is to present a state-of-the-art overview on the definition, aetiology, risk factors, mechanisms, diagnosis, clinical impact, and management of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (BVD) and failure (BVF) following TAVI with a comparative perspective versus SAVR. Structural valve deterioration (SVD) is the main factor limiting the durability of the bioprosthetic valves used for TAVI or SAVR, but non-structural BVD, such as prosthesis-patient mismatch and paravalvular regurgitation, as well as valve thrombosis or endocarditis may also lead to BVF. The incidence of BVF related to SVD or other causes is low (<5%) at midterm (5- to 8-year) follow-up and compares favourably with that of SAVR. The long-term follow-up data of randomised trials conducted with the first generations of transcatheter heart valves also suggest similar valve durability in TAVI versus SAVR at 10 years, but these trials suffer from major survivorship bias, and the long-term durability of TAVI will need to be confirmed by the analysis of the low-risk TAVI versus SAVR trials at 10 years.

Single-center real-world data and technical considerations from 100 consecutive patients treated with the Perceval aortic bioprosthesis

Objectives

Although the Perceval sutureless aortic valve bioprosthesis presents a feasible alternative to conventional aortic valve prostheses, the extent of its applicability with respect to technical considerations for a real-world patient collective is still under debate.

Methods

One hundred patients received the Perceval prosthesis [males: 59; age: 72.5 (7.3-79) years] between December 2015 and February 2023 [EuroSCORE II: 2.8 (1.7-5.4)] for an aortic valve replacement (AVR), with additional concomitant procedures, for underlying severe aortic valve stenosis [n = 93 (93)], endocarditis [n = 5 (5)], and redo AVR [n = 7 (7)] including a prior surgical AVR [n = 4 (4)] and a failed transcatheter aortic valve implantation [n = 3 (3)]. Surgery was conducted primarily by median sternotomy [n = 71 (71)] and, alternatively, by the upper hemisternotomy approach [n = 29 (29)].

Results

Over a median follow-up time of 36.5 (16.5-53) months, eight patients (8%) underwent postoperative pacemaker implantation, with five (5%) due to high-grade atrioventricular block, while nine patients experienced a stroke (9%). The median values of maximum and mean gradients across all valve sizes were 22 (18-27.5) mmHg and 10 (13-18) mmHg, respectively. Two patients (2%) had moderate and one (1%) had severe paravalvular leakage, with the latter presenting the only case of underlying valve migration and induced redo AVR with valve explantation 2 days following initial surgery. Thirty-day mortality (and overall mortality) was 5% and 26%, respectively.

Conclusion

The implantation of the Perceval bioprosthesis is feasible for a variety of indications, with excellent hemodynamic results and low complication rates in a real-world high-risk patient collective.

Cardiac output in patients with small annuli undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation with self-expanding versus balloon expandable valve (COPS-TAVI)

BACKGROUND

There is limited data on cardiac output in patients with small aortic annuli undergoing trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) according to the implanted platform of balloon-expandable (BEV) compared to self-expanding valves (SEV).

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annuli who underwent successful TAVI. Cardiac output was measured using echocardiography within 4 weeks following TAVI. Data were recorded and analysed by an experienced operator who was not aware of the type of the implanted valve.

RESULTS

138 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 57 % underwent TAVI with BEV. Clinical and echocardiographic characteristics were comparable between the two platforms, except for more frequent previous cardiac surgery and smaller indexed aortic valve in the BEV group. There was no relationship between computed tomography-derived aortic annulus area and cardiac output post TAVI. When compared to patients who underwent TAVI with BEV, those with SEV had larger cardiac output [mean difference - 0.50 l/min, 95 % CI (-0.99, -0.01)] and cardiac index [mean difference - 0.20 l/min/m2, 95 % CI (-0.47, 0.07)], although the latter did not reach statistical significance. Unlike patients with small body surface area, in those with large body surface area both cardiac output and cardiac index were statistically larger in patients who underwent SEV compared to BEV.

CONCLUSION

Cardiac output, as measured by echocardiography, was larger in patients with small annuli who underwent TAVI procedure with SEV compared to BEV. Such difference was more evident in patients with large body surface area.

Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Small Aortic Annulus: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The optimal treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus (SAA) remains to be determined. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic and clinical outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with a SAA.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter international randomized trial was performed in 15 university hospitals. Participants were 151 patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (mean diameter <23 mm) randomized (1:1) to TAVR (n=77) versus SAVR (n=74). The primary outcome was impaired valve hemodynamics (ie, severe prosthesis patient mismatch or moderate-severe aortic regurgitation) at 60 days as evaluated by Doppler echocardiography and analyzed in a central echocardiography core laboratory. Clinical events were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The mean age of the participants was 75.5±5.1 years, with 140 (93%) women, a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality of 2.50% (interquartile range, 1.67%-3.28%), and a median annulus diameter of 21.1 mm (interquartile range, 20.4-22.0 mm). There were no differences between groups in the rate of severe prosthesis patient mismatch (TAVR, 4 [5.6%]; SAVR, 7 [10.3%]; P=0.30) and moderate-severe aortic regurgitation (none in both groups). No differences were found between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 1 [1.3%]; SAVR, 1 [1.4%]; P=1.00) and stroke (TAVR, 0; SAVR, 2 [2.7%]; P=0.24) at 30 days. After a median follow-up of 2 (interquartile range, 1-4) years, there were no differences between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 7 [9.1%]; SAVR, 6 [8.1%]; P=0.89), stroke (TAVR, 3 [3.9%]; SAVR, 3 [4.1%]; P=0.95), and cardiac hospitalization (TAVR, 15 [19.5%]; SAVR, 15 [20.3%]; P=0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (women in the majority), there was no evidence of superiority of contemporary TAVR versus SAVR in valve hemodynamic results. After a median follow-up of 2 years, there were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. These findings suggest that the 2 therapies represent a valid alternative for treating patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA, and treatment selection should likely be individualized according to baseline characteristics, additional anatomical risk factors, and patient preference. However, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the limited sample size leading to an underpowered study, and need to be confirmed in future larger studies.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03383445.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical or Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Valves: A Comprehensive Review

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has proven to be a safe, effective, and less invasive approach to aortic valve replacement in patients with aortic stenosis. In patients who underwent prior aortic valve replacement, transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic valve dysfunction may occur as a result of structural deterioration or nonstructural causes such as prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and paravalvular regurgitation. Valve-in-Valve (ViV) TAVR is a procedure that is being increasingly utilized for the replacement of failed transcatheter or surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves. Data regarding long-term outcomes are limited due to the recency of the procedure's approval, but available data regarding the short- and long-term outcomes of ViV TAVR are promising. Studies have shown a reduction in perioperative and 30-day mortality with ViV TAVR procedures compared to redo surgical repair of failed bioprosthetic aortic valves, but 1-year and 5-year mortality rates are more controversial and lack sufficient data. Despite the reduction in 30-day mortality, PPM and rates of coronary obstruction are higher in ViV TAVR as compared to both redo surgical valve repair and native TAVR procedures. New transcatheter heart valve designs and new procedural techniques have been developed to reduce the risk of PPM and coronary obstruction. Newer generation valves, new procedural techniques, and increased operator experience with ViV TAVR may improve patient outcomes; however, further studies are needed to better understand the safety, efficacy, and durability of ViV TAVR.

Multicenter comparison of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 versus Evolut PRO transcatheter heart valves

BACKGROUND

New-generation self-expanding transcatheter aortic heart valves (THV) were designed to overcome technical constraints of their preceding generations. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (Neo2) versus Evolut PRO (PRO) devices.

METHODS

Seven hundred nine patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with either Neo2 (n = 496) or PRO (n = 213) were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were evaluated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups after PSM (Neo2: n = 155, Evolut Pro: n = 155). Technical success rates were high in both groups (Neo2: 94.8% vs PRO: 97.4%; p = 0.239). Need for permanent pacemaker implantation was less frequent with Neo2 compared with PRO (7.5% vs 20.6%; p = 0.002), whereas major vascular complications were more frequent with Neo2 (Neo2: 11.6% vs PRO: 4.5%; p = 0.022). Intended valve performance at discharge was high in both groups without relevant differences among groups (Neo2: 97.4% vs. 95.3%; p = 0.328).

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes after TAVI using latest-generation self-expanding THV were excellent, with overall low rates of adverse events. However, Neo2 was associated with lower pacemaker rates and reduced the prevalence of moderate-severe paravalvular leakage. Transprosthetic gradients after TAVI were higher with Neo2 compared with PRO.

Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valves Optimize Transvalvular Hemodynamics Independent of Intra- Versus Supra-Annular Design

This study sought to characterize transvalvular hemodynamics during the first 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) across various transcatheter heart valves (THVs), while adjusting for annular dimensions. This was an observational study of TAVIs from September 2021 to October 2022. The primary outcome was mean transvalvular pressure gradient (TVPG), measured using transthoracic echocardiography at day 0, day 1, and day 30 post-TAVI, and were compared across 3 THV, including the self-expandable intra-annular Portico (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) valve, the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California), and the self-expandable supra-annular Evolut Pro+ (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). A total of 560 patients who underwent TAVI were identified, of which 106 (18.9%) received a Portico THV, 176 (31.4%) received a SAPIEN THV, and 278 (49.6%) received an Evolut THV. For Portico THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.0 (4.7 to 9.0) to 7.0 (6.0 to 10.0) by day 30 (p = 0.009). For SAPIEN THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.5 (5.0 to 8.0) to 12.0 (9.0 to 15.0) by day 30 (p <0.001). For Evolut THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.0 (5.0 to 9.0) to 7.2 (5.0 to 10.0) by day 30 (p = 0.001). Adjusting for time and annular diameter in a multivariable mixed effects model, the SAPIEN group had a significantly greater increase in TVPG over time than the Evolut reference group (p <0.001), while there was no difference in the change of TVPG over time for the Portico group vs. the Evolut group (p = 0.874). In conclusion, compared with balloon-expandable valves, self-expanding THV may optimize transvalvular hemodynamics across all annular diameters, independent of their supra-annular and intra-annular design.

Clinical value of CT-derived simulations of transcatheter-aortic-valve-implantation in challenging anatomies the PRECISE-TAVI trial

BACKGROUND

Preprocedural computed tomography planning improves procedural safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, contemporary imaging modalities do not account for device-host interactions.

AIMS

This study evaluates the value of preprocedural computer simulation with FEops HEARTguideTM on overall device success in patients with challenging anatomies undergoing TAVI with a contemporary self-expanding supra-annular transcatheter heart valve.

METHODS

This prospective multicenter observational study included patients with a challenging anatomy defined as bicuspid aortic valve, small annulus or severely calcified aortic valve. We compared the heart team's transcatheter heart valve (THV) planning decision based on (1) conventional multislice computed tomography (MSCT) and (2) MSCT imaging with FEops HEARTguideTM simulations. Clinical outcomes and THV performance were followed up to 30 days.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients were included (median age 79.9 years (IQR 74.2-83.8), 42% male). In 35% of the patients, preprocedural planning changed after FEops HEARTguideTM simulations (change in valve size selection [12%] or target implantation height [23%]). A new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) was implanted in 13% and >trace paravalvular leakage (PVL) occurred in 28.5%. The contact pressure index (i.e., simulation output indicating the risk of conduction abnormalities) was significantly higher in patients with a new PPI, compared to those without (16.0% [25th-75th percentile 12.0-21.0] vs. 3.5% [25th-75th percentile 0-11.3], p < 0.01) The predicted PVL was 5.7 mL/s (25th-75th percentile 1.3-11.1) in patients with none-trace PVL, 12.7 (25th-75th percentile 5.5-19.1) in mild PVL and 17.7 (25th-75th percentile 3.6-19.4) in moderate PVL (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

FEops HEARTguideTM simulations may provide enhanced insights in the risk for PVL or PPI after TAVI with a self-expanding supra-annular THV in complex anatomies.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter implantation of contemporary balloon-expandable and self-expandable valves in small aortic annuli

BACKGROUND

Evidence of clinical impact of PPM after TAVI is conflicting and might vary according to the type of valve implanted.

AIMS

To assess the clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with balloon-expandable (BEV) and self-expandable valves (SEV) in patients with small annuli.

METHODS

TAVI-SMALL 2 enrolled 628 patients in an international retrospective registry, which included patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annuli (annular perimeter <72 mm or area <400 mm2 ) treated with transfemoral TAVI at 16 high-volume centers between 2011 and 2020. Analyses were performed comparing patients with less than moderate (n = 452), moderate (n = 138), and severe PPM (n = 38). Primary endpoint was incidence of all-cause mortality. Predictors of all-cause mortality and PPM were investigated.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 380 days (interquartile range: 210-709 days), patients with severe PPM, but not moderate PPM, had an increased risk of all-cause mortality when compared with less than moderate PPM (log-rank p = 0.046). Severe PPM predicted all-cause mortality in patients with BEV (hazard ratio [HR]: 5.20, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27-21.2) and intra-annular valves (IAVs, HR: 4.23, 95% CI: 1.28-14.02), and it did so with borderline significance in the overall population (HR: 2.89, 95% CI: 0.95-8.79). Supra-annular valve (SAV) implantation was the only predictor of severe PPM (odds ratio: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.13-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with small aortic annuli and severe PPM after TAVI have an increased risk of all-cause mortality at early term follow-up, especially after IAV or BEV implantation. TAVI with SAV protected from severe PPM.

Case report: Self-expanding transcatheter valve implantation (Acurate Neo 2) in a very small native aortic annulus

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) and intermediate-to-high surgical risk. The presence of a small aortic annulus (SAA) has been associated with a higher incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) when surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) is performed. TAVR might be a treatment option offering better hemodynamics with a lower incidence of PPM. When a severe AS with a SAA is treated, TAVR-related risk as the coronary obstruction and the annulus rupture, must be also prevented. We present a case of a TAVR in a very small aortic annulus; to our knowledge, this is the smallest native aortic annulus treated percutaneously in a tricuspid stenotic aortic valve with a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve (THV) Acurate Neo 2.

Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After TAVR With Self-Expanding Valves

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV).

BACKGROUND

Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI.

METHODS

This study included 3,211 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 (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with extra-small aortic annuli

BACKGROUND

A small aortic annulus (SAA) is a risk factor for prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in patients undergoing surgical or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Data regarding TAVI in patients with extra-SAA are scarce.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and efficacy of TAVI in patients with extra-SAA.

METHODS

A multicentre registry study including patients with extra-SAA (defined as an aortic annulus area <280 mm2 and/or perimeter <60 mm) undergoing TAVI was established. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints were defined as device success and early safety at 30 days, respectively, using the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria, and were analysed according to valve type: self-expanding (SEV) versus balloon-expandable (BEV).

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were included, of which 139 (92.7%) were women, and 110 (73.3%) received an SEV. Intraprocedural technical success was 91.3%, with a higher rate in patients receiving an SEV (96.4% vs 77.5% with BEV; p=0.001). Overall, 30-day device success was 81.3%, (85.5% with SEV vs 70.0% with BEV; p=0.032). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 72.0% of patients (with no difference between groups; p=0.118). Severe PPM occurred in 12% (9.0% with SEV and 24.0% with BEV; p=0.039), with no impact on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or heart failure readmission at 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI is a safe and feasible treatment in patients with extra-SAA with a high rate of technical success. The use of SEV was associated with a lower rate of intraprocedural complications, higher device success at 30 days and better haemodynamic outcomes compared to BEV.

Managing the challenge of a small aortic annulus in patients with severe aortic stenosis

INTRODUCTION

Small aortic annulus (SAA) poses a challenge in the management of patients with severe aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve replacement - both surgical and transcatheter - since it has been associated with worse clinical outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to comprehensively summarize the available evidence regarding the management of aortic stenosis in patients with SAA and discuss the current controversies as well as future perspectives in this field.

EXPERT OPINION

It is paramount to agree in a common definition for diagnosing and properly treating SAA patients, and for that purpose, multidetector computer tomography is essential. The results of recent trials led to the expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement among patients of all the surgical-risk spectrum, and the choice of treatment (transcatheter, surgical) should be based on patient comorbidities, anatomical characteristics, and patient preferences.

Hemodynamic Performance of Transcatheter Aortic Valves: A Comprehensive Review

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a widely adopted treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Its popularity has grown significantly in recent years due to advancements in technology and imaging. As TAVI use is increasingly expanded to younger patients, the need for long-term assessment and durability becomes paramount. This review aims to provide an overview of the diagnostic tools to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of aortic prosthesis, with a special focus on the comparison between transcatheter and surgical aortic valves and between self-expandable and balloon-expandable valves. Moreover, the discussion will encompass how cardiovascular imaging can effectively detect long-term structural valve deterioration.

Comparison of Body Mass Index (Four Categories) to In-Hospital Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Although obesity is often associated with adverse outcomes in cardiovascular diseases, studies have demonstrated a beneficial effect on patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), coining the term "obesity paradox." We sought to determine if the obesity paradox is valid when patients are studied in body mass index (BMI) groups versus simplified classification of obese and nonobese. We examined the National Inpatient Sample database from 2016 to 2019 for all patients who underwent TAVI >18 years of age using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition procedure codes. Patients were grouped by BMI categories of underweight, overweight, obese, and morbidly obese. They were compared with normal-weight patients to assess the relative risk of in-hospital mortality, cardiogenic shock, ST-elevation myocardial infarction, bleeding complications requiring transfusions, and complete heart blocks requiring permanent pacemaker. A logistic regression model was constructed to account for potential confounders. Of the 221,000 patients who underwent TAVI, 42,315 patients with appropriate BMI designation were stratified into BMI groups. Compared to the normal-weight group, overweight, obese, and morbid-obese TAVI patients were associated with a lower risk of in-hospital mortality (relative risk [RR] 0.48, confidence interval [CI] 0.29 to 0.77, p <0.001), (RR 0.42, CI 0.28 to 0.63, p <0.001), (RR 0.49, CI 0.33 to 0.71, p <0.001 respectively), cardiogenic shock (RR 0.27, CI 0.20 to 0.38, p <0.001), (RR 0.21, CI 0.16 to 0.27, p <0.001), (RR 0.21, CI 0.16 to 0.26, p <0.001), and blood transfusions (RR 0.63, CI 0.50 to 0.79, p <0.001), (RR 0.47, CI 0.39 to 0.58, p <0.001), (RR 0.61, CI 0.51 to 0.74, p <0.001). This study indicated that obese patients were at a significantly lower risk of in-hospital mortality, cardiogenic shock, and bleeding complications requiring transfusions. In conclusion, our study supported the existence of the obesity paradox in TAVI patients.

Intermediate Follow-Up of Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annuli

The clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in patients with small aortic annuli who underwent transcatheter aortic valve (AV) implantation with either balloon-expandable (BE) or self-expanding (SE) valves remains controversial. We assessed in-hospital and intermediate clinical outcomes in 573 patients with transfemoral transcatheter AV implantation with a small AV annulus, defined as an AV annulus area ≤430 mm². A total of 337 patients treated with a 23-mm BE valve (SAPIEN 3, Ultra) were compared with 236 patients treated with a 26-mm SE valve (Evolut series). Valve-in-valve cases were excluded, and late echo follow-up (mean 674 ± 438 days) was assessed in a subset of 292 patients (51.0%). Well-matched BE and SE cohorts did not differ with respect to major in-hospital outcomes, other than a borderline increase in vascular complications and composite bleeding in patients with SE. Patients with BE had a higher incidence of severe PPM on discharge echocardiography (16.9% vs 6.8%, p <0.002). The mean AV gradient at 30 days was higher for patients with BE (12.2 ± 4.2 vs 6.2 ± 7.9 mm Hg, p <0.001) and at late follow-up (14.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.2 ± 3.5 mm Hg, p <0.001). The follow-up left ventricular ejection fraction and incidence of >mild aortic insufficiency were similar. All-cause mortality for the 2 cohorts was similar, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 61.2 months (57.8 to 64.5; p = 0.98). There were no significant survival differences between combined patients with BE and SE with no, moderate, or severe PPM, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 32.5 (30.5 to 34.5) months combining valve types (p = 0.23). In conclusion, despite an increased incidence of PPM with higher mean AV gradients that persist on late echocardiography in the BE cohort, patients with BE and SE with small aortic annuli have similar clinical outcomes at intermediate follow-up. Moderate and severe PPM had no impact on survival at a mean follow-up of 32.5 months.

Predictors of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background

Recently, the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3 criteria redefined bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (BVD) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, the rate of BVD is scarcely reported in current practice.

Aims

We aimed to evaluate the rate and predictors of BVD after TAVI based on the VARC-3 criteria.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed patients who had undergone TAVI using single-centre data. BVD was reported as exposure-adjusted event rates with a patient-year unit (per 100 patient-years). Predictors of BVD after TAVI were analysed using Fine-Gray competing risk regression to account for the competing risk of death.

Results

Among 514 patients, the rate of BVD was 7.5 events per 100 patient-years (n=74) at a median follow-up of 1.9 years. The main cause of BVD was moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM; n=59). The Fine-Gray model demonstrated that predilatation was associated with a lower rate of BVD, mainly moderate or severe PPM (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [sub-HR] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.21-0.88). In a subgroup analysis, the patients with a small aortic annulus (area <400 mm² or perimeter <72 mm) tended to benefit from predilatation (p for interaction=0.03). The same regression model also demonstrated that a small balloon-expandable valve (BEV; ≤23 mm) was associated with a higher rate of BVD (adjusted sub-HR 2.46, 95% CI: 1.38-4.38).

Conclusions

Our study suggested that the rate of BVD in patients undergoing TAVI is relatively low at midterm follow-up. Predilatation, particularly in small annuli and small BEV might have an impact on BVD, mainly caused by moderate or severe PPM, after TAVI.

Study Level Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With the ACURATE neo Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve

The ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve is a self-expanding device. Several studies have investigated safety and efficacy, but meta-analysis and pooled data are lacking. We aimed to provide a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the ACURATE neo valve. A systematic literature search for eligible records was conducted. The primary endpoint was device success as designated by Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. The secondary endpoints (time frame: 30 days) were all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, need for new permanent pacemaker, major vascular complications, major bleeding, acute kidney injury stage II or III, and paravalvular regurgitation grade moderate or severe (II or III). Our search yielded a total of 355 records, 20 of those (n = 5858 ACURATE neo receivers) were included in our meta-analysis. Device success was achieved in 94.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.4-96.5%) of the patients. The 30-day all-cause mortality incidence proportion was 1.8% (95% CI, 1.3-2.4%). New pacemaker implantation was required in 7.7% (95% CI, 6.4-9.2%) of the patients, stroke occurred in 1.9% (95% CI, 1.6-2.3%), myocardial infarction in 0.5% (95% CI, 0.3-0.7%), major bleeding in 5.0% (95% CI, 3.9-6.5%), major vascular complication in 5.6% (95% CI, 4.0-7.8%), acute kidney injury stage ≥2 in 2.5% (95% CI, 1.8-3.4%), and paravalvular leak grade ≥moderate was observed in 4.3% (95% CI, 3.0-6.2%). Balloon predilatation and postdilatation incidence was 93.9% (95% CI, 87.0-97.3%) and 43.2% (95% CI, 37.9-48.6%), respectively. ACURATE neo appears to be safe and effective in our analysis with high device success incidence, low mortality, and low new pacemaker implantations.

Clinical outcomes in women and men with small aortic annuli undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: A multicenter, retrospective, propensity score-matched comparison

BACKGROUND

Sex-specific characteristics in patients with aortic stenosis and small annuli undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) might affect clinical outcomes and hemodynamics.

METHODS

TAVI-SMALL 2 international retrospective registry included 1378 patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annuli (annular perimeter <72 mm or area < 400 mm2) treated with transfemoral TAVI at 16 high-volume centers between 2011 and 2020. Women (n = 1233) were compared with men (n = 145). One-to-one propensity score (PS) matching resulted in 99 pairs. Primary endpoint was incidence of all-cause mortality. Incidence of pre-discharge severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and its association with all-cause mortality were investigated. Binary logistic and Cox regression were performed to adjust the treatment effect for PS quintiles.

RESULTS

Incidence of all-cause mortality at a median follow-up of 377 days did not differ between sex in the overall (10.3 vs. 9.8%, p = 0.842) and PS-matched (8.5 vs. 10.9%, p = 0.586) populations. After PS matching, pre-discharge severe PPM was numerically higher in women vs. men (10.2 vs. 4.3%), even though no evidence of a difference was found (p = 0.275). Within the overall population, women with severe PPM suffered a higher incidence of all-cause mortality when compared to those with less than moderate PPM (log-rank p = 0.024) and less than severe PPM (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

No difference in all-cause mortality at medium-term follow-up was observed between women and men with aortic stenosis and small annuli undergoing TAVI. Incidence of pre-discharge severe PPM was numerically higher in women than men, and it was associated with increased all-cause mortality in women.

Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Comparing Medtronic's Evolut PRO and Evolut R: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become a broadly acceptable alternative to AV surgery in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). New valve designs are becoming available to address the shortcomings of their predecessors and improve clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out to compare Medtronic's Evolut PRO, a new valve, with the previous Evolut R design. Procedural, functional and clinical endpoints according to the VARC-2 criteria were assessed.

RESULTS

Eleven observational studies involving N = 12,363 patients were included. Evolut PRO patients differed regarding age (p < 0.001), sex (p < 0.001) and STS-PROM estimated risk. There was no difference between the two devices in terms of TAVI-related early complications and clinical endpoints. A 35% reduction of the risk of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak (PVL) favoring the Evolut PRO was observed (RR 0.66, 95%CI, [0.52, 0.86] p = 0.002; I2 = 0%). Similarly, Evolut PRO-treated patients demonstrated a reduction of over 35% in the risk of serious bleeding as compared with the Evolut R (RR 0.63, 95%CI, [0.41, 0.96]; p = 0.03; I2 = 39%), without differences in major vascular complications.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence shows good short-term outcomes of both the Evolut PRO and Evolut R prostheses, with no differences in clinical and procedural endpoints. The Evolut PRO was associated with a lower rate of moderate-to-severe PVL and major bleeding.

Prosthesis Tailoring for Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has risen over the past 20 years as a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of severe aortic stenosis, and is now a well-established and recommended treatment option in suitable patients irrespective of predicted risk of mortality after surgery. Studies of numerous devices, either newly developed or reiterations of previous prostheses, have been accruing. We hereby review TAVI devices, with a focus on commercially available options, and aim to present a guide for prosthesis tailoring according to patient-related anatomical and clinical factors that may favor particular designs.

Haemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the ACURATE neo device has been associated with a non-negligible incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR). The new-generation ACURATE neo2 has been designed to mitigate this limitation.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to compare TAVR with the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices.

METHODS

The NEOPRO and NEOPRO-2 registries retrospectively included patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with self-expanding valves at 24 and 20 centres, respectively. Patients receiving the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices (from January 2012 to December 2021) were included in this study. Predischarge and 30-day VARC-3 defined outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR. Subgroup analyses per degree of aortic valve calcification were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 2,026 patients (neo: 1,263, neo2: 763) were included. Predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR was less frequent for the neo2 group (2% vs 5%; p<0.001), resulting in higher VARC-3 intended valve performance (96% vs 90%; p<0.001). Furthermore, more patients receiving the neo2 had none/trace paravalvular AR (59% vs 38%; p<0.001). The reduction in paravalvular AR with neo2 was mainly observed with heavy aortic valve calcification. New pacemaker implantation and VARC-3 technical and device success rates were similar between the 2 groups; there were more frequent vascular and bleeding complications for the neo device. Similar 1-year survival was detected after TAVR (neo2: 90% vs neo: 87%; p=0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR with the ACURATE neo2 device was associated with a lower prevalence of moderate or severe paravalvular AR and more patients with none/trace paravalvular AR. This difference was particularly evident with heavy aortic valve calcification.

Lifetime Management of Aortic Stenosis: Transcatheter Versus Surgical Treatment for Young and Low-Risk Patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is now indicated across all risk categories of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and has been proposed as first line option for the majority of patients >74 years old. However, median age of patients enrolled in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement low-risk trials is 74 years and transcatheter aortic valve replacement has never been systematically investigated in young low risk patients. Although the long-term data in surgical aortic valve replacement in young patients (age <75) are well known, such data remain lacking in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. In the absence of clear guideline recommendations in patients with challenging anatomies (eg, hostile calcium, bicuspid), it is important to know the potential advantages and disadvantages of each treatment and to consider how they might integrate with each other in the lifetime management of such patients. In this review, we discuss current outstanding issues on the management of severe aortic stenosis from a lifetime management perspective, particularly in terms of initial intervention and future reinterventions.

Impact of aortic annular size and valve type on haemodynamics and clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Introduction: Data on patients with small aortic annuli (SAA) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are limited. We aim to describe the impact of aortic annular size, particularly SAA and TAVI valve type on valve haemodynamics, durability and clinical outcomes. Method: All patients in National Heart Centre Singapore who underwent transfemoral TAVI for severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis from July 2012 to December 2019 were included. Outcome measures include valve haemodynamics, prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), structural valve degeneration (SVD) and mortality. Results: A total of 244 patients were included. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.22±6.08, with 52.5% patients with small aortic annulus (<23mm), 33.2% patients with medium aortic annulus (23–26mm) and 14.3% patients with large aortic annulus (>26mm). There were more patients with self-expanding valve (SEV) (65.2%) versus balloon-expandable valve (BEV) (34.8%). There were no significant differences in indexed aortic valve area (iAVA), mean pressure gradient (MPG), PPM, SVD or mortality across all aortic annular sizes. However, specific to the SAA group, patients with SEV had larger iAVA (SEV 1.19±0.35cm2/m2 vs BEV 0.88±0.15cm2/m2, P<0.01) and lower MPG (SEV 9.25±4.88 mmHg vs BEV 14.17±4.75 mmHg, P<0.01) at 1 year, without differences in PPM or mortality. Aortic annular size, TAVI valve type and PPM did not predict overall mortality up to 7 years. There was no significant difference in SVD between aortic annular sizes up to 5 years. Conclusion: Valve haemodynamics and durability were similar across the different aortic annular sizes. In the SAA group, SEV had better haemodynamics than BEV at 1 year, but no differences in PPM or mortality. There were no significant differences in mortality between aortic annular sizes, TAVI valve types or PPM. Keywords: Aortic stenosis, small aortic annulus, transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Early and mid-term outcome of patients with low-flow-low-gradient aortic stenosis treated with newer-generation transcatheter aortic valves

Patients with non-paradoxical low-flow-low-gradient (LFLG) aortic stenosis (AS) are at increased surgical risk, and thus, they may particularly benefit from transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, data on this issue are still limited and based on the results with older-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs). The aim of this study was to investigate early and mid-term outcome of TAVR with newer-generation THVs in the setting of LFLG AS. Data for the present analysis were gathered from the OBSERVANT II dataset, a national Italian observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study that enrolled 2,989 consecutive AS patients who underwent TAVR at 30 Italian centers between December 2016 and September 2018, using newer-generation THVs. Overall, 420 patients with LVEF ≤50% and mean aortic gradient <40 mmHg were included in this analysis. The primary outcomes were 1-year all-cause mortality and a combined endpoint including all-cause mortality and hospital readmission due to congestive heart failure (CHF) at 1 year. A risk-adjusted analysis was performed to compare the outcome of LFLG AS patients treated with TAVR (n = 389) with those who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR, n = 401) from the OBSERVANT I study. Patients with LFLG AS undergoing TAVR were old (mean age, 80.8 ± 6.7 years) and with increased operative risk (mean EuroSCORE II, 11.5 ± 10.2%). VARC-3 device success was 83.3% with 7.6% of moderate/severe paravalvular leak. Thirty-day mortality was 3.1%. One-year all-cause mortality was 17.4%, and the composite endpoint was 34.8%. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR 1.78) and EuroSCORE II (HR 1.02) were independent predictors of 1-year mortality, while diabetes (HR 1.53) and class NYHA IV (HR 2.38) were independent predictors of 1-year mortality or CHF. Compared with LFLG AS treated with SAVR, TAVR patients had a higher rate of major vascular complications and permanent pacemaker, while SAVR patients underwent more frequently to blood transfusion, cardiogenic shock, AKI, and MI. However, 30-day and 1-year outcomes were similar between groups. Patients with non-paradoxical LFLG AS treated by TAVR were older and with higher surgical risk compared with SAVR patients. Notwithstanding, TAVR was safe and effective with a similar outcome to SAVR at both early and mid-term.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), first described in 1978, occurs when a prosthetic valve functions normally, but has an effective orifice area that is too small relative to the patient's body surface area. It results in residual left ventricular afterload and higher transvalvular pressure gradient, which has been considered to impair prognosis. PPM following surgical aortic replacement is reportedly associated with worse clinical outcomes, such as high mortality. However, the impact of PPM on clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains unclear. There is conflicting evidence on the impact of PPM following TAVI due to differences across studies in terms of follow-up period, methods, patient populations, and type of bioprosthetic valve. The present review summarizes the most recent evidence on PPM after TAVI.

Procedural Outcomes of a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve in Small Annuli

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding transcatheter valves (THV) seem superior to balloon-expanding valves in regard to the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). Data on the occurrence of PPM with the ACURATE neo/neo2 system as a representative of self-expanding prostheses in very small annuli, even below the applicable instructions for use (IFU), are scarce.

METHODS

Data from 654 patients with severe native aortic stenosis treated with the smallest size ACURATE neo/neo2 valve (size S, 23 mm) at two German high-volume centers from 06/2012 to 12/2021 were evaluated. We compared clinical and hemodynamic outcomes among patients with implantation in adherence to the recommended sizing (on-label n = 529) and below the recommended sizing range (off-label n = 125) and identified predictors for PPM in the overall population. BMI-adjusted PPM was defined according to VARC-3 recommendations.

RESULTS

Post-procedure, the mean gradient (10.0 mmHg vs. 9.0 mmHg, p = 0.834) and the rate of paravalvular leakage (PVL) ≥ moderate (3.2% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.770) were similar between on-label and off-label implantations. The rate of moderate to severe PPM (24%) was comparably low in ACURATE neo/neo2 S, with a very low proportion of severe PPM whether implanted off- or on-label (4.9% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.552). Thirty-day all-cause mortality was higher among patients with off-label implantations (6.5% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.036). In the subgroup of these patients, no device-related deaths occurred, and cardiac causes did not differ (each 5). Besides small annulus area and high BMI, a multivariate analysis identified a greater cover index (OR 3.26), deep implantation (OR 2.25) and severe calcification (OR 2.07) as independent predictors of PPM.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACURATE neo/neo2 S subgroup shows a convincing hemodynamic outcome according to low mean gradient even outside the previous IFUs without a relevant increase in the rate of PVL or PPM. In addition to known factors such as annulus area and BMI, potential predictors for PPM are severe annulus calcification and implantation depth. Nevertheless, the ACURATE neo/neo2 system seems to be a reliable option in patients with very small annuli.

Technical Aspects and Development of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Aortic stenosis is the most common valve disease requiring surgery or percutaneous treatment. Since the first-in-man implantation in 2002 we have witnessed incredible progress in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In this article, we review the technical aspects of TAVI development with a look at the future. Durability, low thrombogenicity, good hydrodynamics, biocompatibility, low catheter profile, and deployment stability are the attributes of an ideal TAVI device. Two main design types exist-balloon-expandable and self-expanding prostheses. Balloon-expandable prostheses use a cobalt-chromium alloy frame providing high radial strength and radiopacity, while the self-expanding prostheses use a nickel-titanium (Nitinol) alloy frame, which expands to its original shape once unsheathed and heated to the body temperature. The valve is sewn onto the frame and consists of the porcine or bovine pericardium, which is specially treated to prevent calcinations and prolong durability. The lower part of the frame can be covered by polyethylene terephthalate fabric or a pericardial skirt, providing better sealing between the frame and aortic annulus. The main future challenges lie in achieving lower rates of paravalvular leaks and new pacemaker implantations following the procedure, lower delivery system profiles, more precise positioning, longer durability, and a good hemodynamic profile. Patient-specific design and the use of autologous tissue might solve these issues.

Evolving Devices and Material in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: What to Use and for Whom

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has revolutionized the treatment of aortic stenosis, providing a viable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients deemed to be at prohibitive surgical risk, but also for selected patients at intermediate or low surgical risk. Nonetheless, there still exist uncertainties regarding the optimal management of patients undergoing TAVR. The selection of the optimal bioprosthetic valve for each patient represents one of the most challenging dilemmas for clinicians, given the large number of currently available devices. Limited follow-up data from landmark clinical trials comparing TAVR with SAVR, coupled with the typically elderly and frail population of patients undergoing TAVR, has led to inconclusive data on valve durability. Recommendations about the use of one device over another in given each patient’s clinical and procedural characteristics are largely based on expert consensus. This review aims to evaluate the available evidence on the performance of different devices in the presence of specific clinical and anatomic features, with a focus on patient, procedural, and device features that have demonstrated a relevant impact on the risk of poor hemodynamic valve performance and adverse clinical events.

Sex Disparities in Hemodynamics and Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Contemporary Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Studies have reported worse outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in women receiving early generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs). They have smaller aortic annuli, which could result in higher gradients and more patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) after TAVI. We investigated the interactions between contemporary THV hemodynamics and outcomes in women who underwent TAVI. We conducted a retrospective, observational study of patients who underwent contemporary TAVI from 2015 to 2020. We compared baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, and hemodynamics according to sex. We then dichotomized women according to aortic annular area (<430 or ≥430 mm²). Included were 869 patients who underwent TAVI with the SAPIEN 3 or CoreValve Evolut PRO/PRO+. Most patients with small annuli were female (82.5%). They had nonsignificantly higher mortality (30-day: 1.5% vs 0.6%, p = 0.313; 1-year: 4.1% vs 2.7%, p = 0.265). Those who received self-expanding THVs had lower gradients (8.0 mm Hg vs 13.8 mm Hg, p <0.001), resulting in less moderate PPM (21.2% vs 73.6%, p <0.001), similar severe PPM (19.5% vs 15.3%, p = 0.454), and higher rates of pacemaker implantation (14.4% vs 4.2%, p = 0.009). Women with small annuli who received a balloon-expandable THV had nonsignificantly higher mortality (30-day: 2.1% vs 0.8%, p = 0.631; 1-year: 6.3% vs 1.7%, p = 0.118). In conclusion, women who underwent contemporary TAVI had nonsignificantly higher mortality, which could be due to higher PPM rates. These findings were more pronounced in the subset of women with small annuli, in whom those who received self-expanding THVs demonstrated superior hemodynamics at the cost of increased rates of pacemaker implantation.

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.

Expanding our horizons for the use of transcatheter self-expanding valves: what does the future hold?

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established alternative to aortic valve surgery in patient with severe aortic valve stenosis. As interventionalists are pushing towards treatment of patients with lower risk profile with a wide range of anatomies, contemporary transcatheter heart valves (THV) should offer an excellent performance in terms of residual gradient, rate of pacemaker and perivalvular leak.

AREAS COVERED

Self-expandable (SE) valve offer a valid alternative to balloon-expandable (BE) valves, nevertheless comparative trials suggest a better outcome of patients treated with BE over SE platforms. New generation SE valves offer an excellent outcome in terms of procedural safety, however implementations in valve design and performance are required to reach the BE valves performance.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

in the near future, new devices should be able to obtain optimal results with a negligible rate of complications. Developments in the design of the delivery system together with refinements in valve technology are desirable to achieve results which are comparable to surgical aortic valve replacement.

Patient Prosthesis Mismatch After SAVR and TAVR

Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) remains one out of many factors to be considered during decision-making for the treatment of aortic valve pathologies. The idea of adequate sizing of a prosthetic heart valve was established by Rahimtoola already in 1978. In this article, the author described the phenomenon that the orifice area of a prosthetic heart valve may be too small for the individual patient. PPM is assessed by measurement or projection of the prosthetic effective orifice area indexed to body surface area (iEOA), while it is recommended to use different cut point values for non-obese and obese patients for the categorization of moderate and severe PPM. Several factors influence the accuracy of both the projected and the measured iEOA for PPM assessment, which leads to a certain number of false assignments to the PPM or no PPM group. Despite divergent findings on the impact of PPM on clinical outcomes, there is consensus that PPM should be avoided to prevent sequelae of increased prosthetic gradients after aortic valve replacement. To prevent PPM, it is required to anticipate the iEOA of the prosthesis prior to the procedure. The use of adequate reference tables, derived from echocardiographically measured mean effective orifice area (EOA) values from preferably large numbers of patients, is most appropriate to predict the iEOA. Such tables should be used also for transcatheter heart valves in the future. During the decision-making process, all available options should be taken into account for the individual patient. If the predicted size and type of a surgical prosthesis cannot be implanted, additional surgical procedures, such as annular enlargement with the Manougian technique, or alternative procedures, such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) can prevent PPM. PPM prevention for TAVI patients is a new field of interest and includes anticipation of the iEOA, prosthesis selection, and procedural strategies.

Procedural Results of Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Aortic Annuli Diameter ≥26 mm: insights from the German Aortic Valve Registry

Patients presenting with severe aortic stenosis and large aortic annuli are challenging to treat because of the size limitations of available transcatheter heart valves. In this study, we aimed to determine clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients presenting with large aortic annuli who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Patients from the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent TAVI either with the Edwards Sapien (ES) or Medtronic CoreValve (MCV) systems from 2011 to 2017 were included. They were further stratified into a large (aortic annulus diameter 26 to 29 mm for ES; 26 to 30 mm for MCV) and extra-large (aortic annulus diameter >29 mm for ES; >30 mm for MCV) group and analyzed using propensity score adjustment. Extra-large was set beyond the sizing limitations according to the manufacturer's instructions for use. Patients in the large (n = 5,628) and extra-large (n = 509) groups were predominantly male (large: 92.6% vs extra-large: 91.9%). The 30-day mortality was comparable (large: 3.9% vs extra-large: 5.0%, p = 0.458). Procedure duration (large: 78.9 minutes ± 0.82 vs extra-large: 86.4 minutes ± 1.9, p <0.001) was longer in the extra-large group. Likewise, vascular complications (large: 6.2% vs extra-large: 12%, p = 0.002) and the need for a permanent pacemaker implantation (large: 18.8% vs extra-large: 26.0%, p = 0.027) were more often present in the extra-large group. Aortic regurgitation ≥II after valve implantation was numerically higher (large: 3.0% vs extra-large: 5.3%, p = 0.082) in patients with extra-large anatomy. In conclusion, patients with large and extra-large aortic annulus diameters who underwent TAVI have comparable 30-day mortality. Beyond the recommended annulus range, there is a higher risk for vascular complications and permanent pacemaker implantation.

Myval versus alternative balloon- and self-expandable transcatheter heart valves: A central core lab analysis of conduction disturbances

BACKGROUND

Several studies have compared surface electrocardiographic changes following different self-expandable (SE) (Evolut (Medtronic, USA); Acurate (Boston Scientific, USA); Portico (Abbott, USA); and Allegra (NVT, Germany)) and balloon-expandable (BE) Sapien-3 (Edwards Lifesciences, USA) transcatheter heart valves. We aimed to compare these prosthesis with the novel Myval BE prosthesis (Meril Life, India).

METHODS

Academic European registry of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis who received any of the 6 aforementioned valves. Baseline, post-procedural, and discharge 12‑leads electrocardiograms (ECG) were centrally analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 1131 patients were included: 135 Myval (11.9%), 290 Sapien-3 (25.6%), 298 Evolut (26.3%), 180 Acurate (15.9%), 125 Portico (11.1%), and 103 Allegra (9.1%). There were no baseline differences in intraventricular conduction disturbances rate. Compared to the novel BE Myval, there were similar procedural and in-hospital outcomes. Similar rates of early new permanent pacemaker implant (PPI) were observed amongst Myval (7.4%), Sapien-3 (13.4%), and Acurate (9.1%), but Evolut, Portico, and Allegra presented significantly higher rates (18.5%, p = 0.003; 29.5% p < 0.001 and 22%, p = 0.001, respectively). Central analysis of ECGs, unraveled significant prolongation of the PR segment with Evolut, Portico and Allegra whereas Evolut, Acurate, and Portico showed significant QRS widening compared to Myval. However, at discharge no differences in PR segment duration were observed while, Evolut, and Portico- but not Acurate, Allegra or Sapien-3 - still presented significant widening of QRS segment compared to Myval.

CONCLUSIONS

After blinded central ECG analysis, the novel Myval balloon-expandable prosthesis was associated with a low rate of early conduction disturbances.

Self-expandable transcatheter heart valves for aortic stenosis. Short-term outcome and matched hemodynamic performance

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Aortic self-expandable (SE) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices are particularly useful for patients with aortic stenosis and small/tortuous vessels, small aortic annuli, or low coronary ostia. However, it is unclear whether the growing range of SE devices shows comparable hemodynamic and clinical outcomes. We aimed to determine the differential hemodynamic (residual valve area and regurgitation) and clinical outcomes of these devices in comparable scenarios.

METHODS

All patients were enrolled from 4 institutions and were managed with 4 different SE TAVI devices. Baseline and follow-up clinical data were collected and echocardiographic tests blindly and centrally analyzed. Patients were compared according to valve type and a 1:1 matched comparison was performed according to degree of calcification, aortic annulus dimensions, left ventricular ejection fraction, and body surface area.

RESULTS

In total, 514 patients were included (Evolut R/PRO, 217; ACURATE neo, 107; ALLEGRA, 102; Portico, 88). Surgical risk scores were comparable in the unmatched population. No differences were observed in the post-TAVI regurgitation rate and in in-hospital mortality (2.7%). The rate of pacemaker implantation at discharge was significantly different among devices (P=.049), with Portico showing the highest rate (23%) and ACURATE neo the lowest (9.5%); Evolut R/PRO and ALLEGRA had rates of 15.9% and 21.2%, respectively. The adjusted comparison showed worse residual TAVI gradients and aortic valve area with ACURATE neo vs ALLEGRA (P=.001) but the latter had higher risk of valve embolization and a tendency for more cerebrovascular events.

CONCLUSIONS

A matched comparison of 4 SE TAVI devices showed no differences regarding residual aortic regurgitation and in-hospital mortality.

Annular size and interaction with trans-catheter aortic valves for treatment of severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: Insights from the BEAT registry

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is safe and feasible in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), but whether annular size may influence TAVR results in BAV patients remains unclear. We aimed at evaluating the impact of aortic annular size on procedural and clinical outcomes of BAV patients undergoing TAVR, as well as potential interactions between annular dimension and trans-catheter heart valve (THV) type (balloon-expandable (BEV) vs. self-expanding (SEV).

METHODS

BEAT is a multicenter registry of consecutive BAV stenosis undergoing TAVR. For this sub-study patients were classified according to annular dimension in small-annulus (area < 400 mm² or perimeter <72 mm), medium-annulus (area ≥ 400 and < 575 mm², perimeter ≥72 mm and< 85 mm), large-annulus (area ≥ 575 mm² or perimeter ≥85 mm). Primary endpoint was Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) device success.

RESULTS

45(15.5%) patients had small, 132(45.3%) medium, and 114(39.2%) large annuli. Compared with other groups, patients with large annuli were more frequently male, younger, with higher body mass index, larger aortic valve area, higher rate of moderate-severe calcification, lower mean trans-aortic valve gradient and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. In large-annuli SEVs were associated with a lower VARC-2 device success (75.9% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.049) driven by a higher rate of paravalvular valvular leak (PVL) compared to BEVs (20.7% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001). However, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed according to annular size nor THV type.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR in BAV patients is feasible irrespective of annular size. However in patients with large aortic annulus SEVs were associated with a significantly higher rate of PVLs compared to BEVs.

The selection of transcatheter heart valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Transcatheter heart valve technology has rapidly progressed since initial approval in the United States. There are currently two widely available transcatheter heart valve delivery systems approved in the US; however limited data exist on optimal device selection for various patient populations. This review explores the characteristics of currently approved transcatheter heart valve systems and scenarios where one valve system may be favored over others. We provide a simplified decision tree for selecting the optimal transcatheter valve system for specific patient-centered characteristics.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a small aortic annulus: performance of supra-, intra- and infra-annular transcatheter heart valves

BACKGROUND

A small aortic annulus is associated with increased risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Whether specific transcatheter heart valve (THV) designs yield superior hemodynamic performance in these small anatomies remains unclear.

METHODS

Data from 8411 consecutive patients treated with TAVI from May 2012 to April 2019 at four German centers were retrospectively evaluated. A small aortic annulus was defined as multidetector computed tomography-derived annulus area < 400 mm². TAVI was performed with a balloon-expanding intra-annular (Sapien-3, n = 288), self-expanding intra-annular (Portico, n = 110), self-expanding supra-annular (Evolut, n = 179 and Acurate-Neo, n = 428) and mechanically expanding infra-annular (Lotus, n = 64) THV according to local practice. PPM was defined as indexed effective orifice area ≤ 0.85cm²/m².

RESULTS

A small annulus was found in 1069 (12.7%) patients. PPM was detected in 38.3% overall with a higher prevalence after implantation of a balloon-expanding intra-annular or mechanically expanding infra-annular THV compared to self-expanding intra- and supra-annular THV. Multivariable analysis linked self-expanding THV (Evolut: Odds ratio [OR] 0.341, Acurate-Neo: OR 0.436, Portico: OR 0.291), postdilatation (OR 0.648) and age (OR 0.968) to lower rates of PPM, while aortic valve calcification was associated with an increased risk (OR 1.001). Paravalvular regurgitation > mild was more frequent after TAVI with self-expanding THV (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

In this large contemporary multicenter patient population, a substantial number of patients with a small aortic anatomy were left with PPM after TAVI. Self-expanding supra- and intra-annular THV demonstrated superior hemodynamics in these patients at risk, however at the cost of higher rates of residual paravalvular regurgitation.

Clinical and Technical Challenges of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is present when the effective area of a prosthetic valve inserted into a patient is inferior to that of a normal human valve; the hemodynamic consequence of a valve too small compared with the size of the patient's body is the generation of higher than expected transprosthetic gradients. Despite evidence of increased risk of short- and long-term mortality and of structural valve degeneration in patients with PPM after surgical aortic valve replacement, its clinical impact in patients subject to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is yet unclear. We aim to review and update on the definition and incidence of PPM after TAVI, and its prognostic implications in the overall population and in higher-risk subgroups, such as small aortic annuli or valve-in-valve procedures. Last, we will focus on the armamentarium available in order to reduce risk of PPM when planning a TAVI procedure.

Predictors and Clinical Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Self-Expandable TAVR in Small Annuli

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to define predictors of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and its impact on mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expandable valves (SEVs) in patients with small annuli.

BACKGROUND

TAVR seems to reduce the risk for PPM compared with surgical aortic valve replacement, especially in patients with small aortic annuli. Nevertheless, predictors and impact of PPM in this population have not been clarified yet.

METHODS

Predictors of PPM and all-cause mortality were investigated using multivariable logistic regression analysis from the cohort of the TAVI-SMALL (International Multicenter Registry to Evaluate the Performance of Self-Expandable Valves in Small Aortic Annuli) registry, which included patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annuli (annular perimeter <72 mm or area <400 mm² on computed tomography) treated with transcatheter SEVs: 445 patients with (n = 129) and without (n = 316) PPM were enrolled.

RESULTS

Intra-annular valves conferred increased risk for PPM (odds ratio [OR]: 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16 to 4.81), while post-dilation (OR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.25-0.84) and valve oversizing (OR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.28-1.00) seemed to protect against PPM occurrence. At a median follow-up of 354 days, patients with severe PPM, but not those with moderate PPM, had a higher all-cause mortality rate compared with those without PPM (log-rank p = 0.008). Multivariable Cox regression confirmed severe PPM as an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 4.27; 95% CI: 1.34 to 13.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with aortic stenosis and small aortic annuli undergoing transcatheter SEV implantation, use of intra-annular valves yielded higher risk for PPM; conversely, post-dilation and valve oversizing protected against PPM occurrence. Severe PPM was independently associated with all-cause mortality.

Comparison of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement between Self-Expanding versus Balloon-Expandable Valves in Patients with Small Aortic Annulus

Background and Objectives

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been reported as a good alternative for surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with small aortic annulus. Head-to-head comparisons of different transcatheter aortic valves in these patients are insufficient. We compared the outcomes after TAVR between two different types of recent transcatheter aortic valves (self-expanding vs. balloon-expandable) in patients with small aortic annulus.

Methods

A total of 70 patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annulus (mean diameter ≤23 mm or minimal diameter ≤21 mm on computed tomography) underwent TAVR with either a self-expanding valve with supra-annular location (n=45) or a balloon-expandable valve with intra-annular location (n=25). The echocardiographic hemodynamic parameters after TAVR and 1-year follow-up were compared.

Results

Between the self-expanding and balloon-expandable valve-treated patients, the clinical outcomes including permanent pacemaker implantation (11.1% vs. 8.0%), acute kidney injury stage 2 or 3 (4.4% vs. 4.0%), and major vascular complication (4.4% vs. 0.0%) were similar without all-cause mortality, stroke, and life-threatening bleeding during 30-day follow-up. Compared with the balloon-expandable valve-treated patients, the self-expanding valve-treated patients presented larger effective orifice area (EOA) (1.46±0.28 vs. 1.75±0.42 cm², p=0.002) and indexed EOA (0.95±0.21 vs. 1.18±0.28 cm²/m², p=0.001), whereas mean aortic valve gradient (11.7±2.9 vs. 8.9±5.2 mmHg, P=0.005) and incidence of ≥moderate prosthesis-patient mismatch (36.0% vs. 8.9%, p=0.009) were lower. These hemodynamic differences were maintained at 1-year follow-up.

Conclusions

TAVR with self-expanding valves was associated with superior hemodynamic outcomes compared with balloon-expandable valves in patients with small aortic annulus.