Mid-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Extremely Large Annuli With Edwards SAPIEN 3 Valve

Performance of the 32 mm Myval transcatheter heart valve for treatment of aortic stenosis in patients with extremely large aortic annuli in real-world scenario: First global, multicenter experience

BACKGROUND

Extremely large aortic valve anatomy is one of the remaining limitations leading to exclusion of patients for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

AIMS

The newly approved Myval 32 mm device is designed for use in aortic annulus areas up to 840 mm2 . Here we want to share the initial worldwide experience with the device.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Retrospective data were collected from 10 patients with aortic stenosis and very large annular anatomy (mean area 765.5 mm2 ), who underwent implantation with 32 mm Myval transcatheter heart valve at eight centers. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 device success was achieved in all cases. Mild paravalvular leak was observed in three patients and two patients required new pacemaker implantation. One patient experienced retroperitoneal hemorrhage caused by the contralateral 6 F sheath and required surgical revision. No device-related complications, stroke, or death from any cause occurred within the 30-day follow-up period. In a studied cohort of 2219 consecutive TAVR-screened patients from a central European site, only 0.27% of patients showed larger anatomy than covered by the 32 mm Myval device by instructions for use without off-label use of overexpansion. This rate was significantly higher for the 34 mm Evolut Pro (1.8%) and 29 mm Sapien 3 (2.1%) devices.

CONCLUSIONS

The Myval 32 mm prosthesis showed promising initial results in a cohort of patients who previously had to be excluded from TAVR. It is desirable that all future TAVR systems accommodate larger anatomy to allow optimal treatment of all patients.

Impact of Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Meta-Analysis of Kaplan-Meier-Derived Individual Patient Data

BACKGROUND

It remains controversial whether prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (in general considered moderate if indexed effective orifice area is 0.65-0.85 cm2/m2 and severe when <0.65 cm2/m2) affects the outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the time-varying effects and association of PPM with the risk of overall mortality.

METHODS

Study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data from Kaplan-Meier curves of studies published by December 30, 2021.

RESULTS

In total, 23 studies met our eligibility criteria and included a total of 81,969 patients included in the Kaplan-Meier curves (19,612 with PPM and 62,357 without PPM). Patients with moderate/severe PPM had a significantly higher risk of mortality compared with those without PPM (HR: 1.09 [95% CI: 1.04-1.14]; P < 0.001). In the first 30 months after the procedure, mortality rates were significantly higher in the moderate/severe PPM group (HR: 1.1 [95% CI: 1.05-1.16]; P < 0.001). In contrast, the landmark analysis beyond 30 months yielded a reversal of the HR (0.83 [95% CI: 0.68-1.01]; P = 0.064), but without statistical significance. In the sensitivity analysis, although the authors observed that severe PPM showed higher risk of mortality in comparison with no PPM (HR: 1.25 [95% CI: 1.16-1.36]; P < 0.001), they did not observe a statistically significant difference for mortality between moderate PPM and no PPM (HR: 1.03 [95% CI: 0.96-1.10]; P = 0.398).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe PPM, but not moderate PPM, was associated with higher risk of mortality following TAVR. These results provide support to implementation of preventive strategies to avoid severe PPM following TAVR.

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.

Personalised Treatment in Aortic Stenosis: A Patient-Tailored Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Approach

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) has become a game changer in the management of severe aortic stenosis shifting the concept from inoperable or high-risk patients to intermediate or low surgical-risk individuals. Among devices available nowadays, there is no clear evidence that one device is better than the other or that one device is suitable for all patients. The selection of the optimal TAVI valve for every patient represents a challenging process for clinicians, given a large number of currently available devices. Consequently, understanding the advantages and disadvantages of each valve and personalising the valve selection based on patient-specific clinical and anatomical characteristics is paramount. This review article aims to both analyse the available devices in the presence of specific clinical and anatomic features and offer guidance to select the most suitable valve for a given patient.

Outcomes and feasibility of redo-TAVR after Sapien 3 Ultra TAVR in extremely-undersized versus nominally-sized annuli

OBJECTIVES

To compare outcomes in Sapien 3 Ultra (S3U) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with extreme annular undersizing (EAU) versus nominal annular sizing (NAS).

BACKGROUND

The Edwards S3U valve has reduced paravalvular leak (PVL) in TAVR but outcomes remain unknown in extremely undersized anatomy. Implanting a smaller S3U valve may facilitate future redo-TAVR but risk compromising hemodynamics.

METHODS

From December 2019 to July 2021, 366 patients with native aortic stenosis underwent S3U TAVR. Patients with EAU (annular areas >430 mm² for 23 mm or >546 mm² for 26 mm) were compared to NAS (338-430 mm² for 23 mm or 430-546 mm² for 26 mm). In-hospital and 30-day outcomes, and redo-TAVR feasibility were determined.

RESULTS

There were 79 (21.6%) EAU patients, with more bicuspid (p = 0.0014) and ≥moderate annular/left ventricular outflow tract calcification (p < 0.001). The EAU group had less annular oversizing than NAS group (23 mm: -8.2 ± 2.6% vs. 4.0 ± 7.0%, p < 0.001; 26 mm: -8.9 ± 2.2% vs. 6.7 ± 6.9%, p < 0.001), more balloon overfilling (71.3% vs. 11.6%, p < 0.001), and postdilatation (15.0% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.016). No differences were found in in-hospital or 30-day mortality and stroke (p > 0.05). Mild PVL (13.4% EAU vs. 11.5% NAS, p = 0.56) and mean gradients (23 mm: 13.0 ± 4.5 vs. 14.1 ± 5.4 mmHg, p = 0.40; 26 mm: 11.4 ± 4.1 vs. 11.5 ± 3.9 mmHg, p = 1.0) were similar at 30 days. Had the EAU group undergone NAS with the larger Sapien 3/S3U, by computed tomography analysis simulating 80:20 or 90:10 target implant depth, 33.3%-60.9% (vs. 4.3%-23.2%) would not be feasible for redo-TAVR due to high risk of coronary obstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

In this first report of EAU with S3U TAVR, similar excellent short-term outcomes can be achieved compared to NAS, and may preserve future redo-TAVR option.

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.

Coronary Artery Disease in Patients with Aortic Stenosis and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Implications for Management

Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular heart disease among elderly patients. Since the pathophysiology of degenerative AS shares common pathways with atherosclerotic disease, the severity of AS in the elderly population is often concurrent to the presence of coronary artery disease (CAD). Although surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard treatment for severe AS, the high operative morbidity and mortality in complex and fragile patients was the trigger to develop less invasive techniques. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been posed as the standard of care for elderly patients with severe AS with various risk profiles, which has meant that the concomitant management of CAD has become a crucial issue in such patients. Given the lack of randomised controlled trials evaluating the management of CAD in TAVI patients, most of the recommendations are based on retrospective cohort studies so that the Heart Team approach – together with an assessment of multiple parameters including symptoms and clinical characteristics, invasive and non-invasive ischaemic burden and anatomy – are crucial for the proper management of these patients. This article provides a review of current knowledge about assessment and therapeutic approaches for CAD and severe AS in patients undergoing TAVI.

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.

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Aortic Valve Replacement in the PARTNER 2 Trial and Registry

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare incidence and impact of measured prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM_M) versus predicted PPM (PPM_P) after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

BACKGROUND

TAVR studies have used measured effective orifice area indexed (EOAi) to body surface area (BSA) to define PPM, but most SAVR series have used predicted EOAi. This difference may contribute to discrepancies in incidence and outcomes of PPM between series.

METHODS

The study analyzed SAVR patients from the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) 2A trial and TAVR patients from the PARTNER 2 SAPIEN 3 Intermediate Risk registry. PPM was classified as moderate if EOAi ≤0.85 cm²/m² (≤0.70 if obese: body mass index ≥30 kg/m²) and severe if EOAi ≤0.65 cm²/m² (≤0.55 if obese). PPM_M was determined by the core lab-measured EOAi on 30-day echocardiogram. PPM_P was determined by 2 methods: 1) using normal EOA reference values previously reported for each valve model and size (PPM_P1; n = 929 SAVR, 1,069 TAVR) indexed to BSA; and 2) using normal reference EOA predicted from aortic annulus size measured by computed tomography (PPM_P2; n = 864 TAVR only) indexed to BSA. Primary endpoint was the composite of 5-year all-cause death and rehospitalization.

RESULTS

The incidence of moderate and severe PPM_P was much lower than PPM_M in both SAVR (PPM_P1: 28.4% and 1.2% vs. PPM_M: 31.0% and 23.6%) and TAVR (PPM_P1: 21.0% and 0.1% and PPM_P2: 17.0% and 0% vs. PPM_M: 27.9% and 5.7%). The incidence of severe PPM_M and severe PPM_P1 was lower in TAVR versus SAVR (P < 0.001). The presence of PPM by any method was associated with higher transprosthetic gradient. Severe PPM_P1 was independently associated with events in SAVR after adjustment for sex and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (hazard ratio: 3.18;95% CI: 1.69-5.96; P < 0.001), whereas no association was observed between PPM by any method and outcomes in TAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

EOAi measured by echocardiography results in a higher incidence of PPM following SAVR or TAVR than PPM based on predicted EOAi. Severe PPM_P is rare (<1.5%), but is associated with increased all-cause death and rehospitalization after SAVR, whereas it is absent following TAVR.

Considerations for Optimal Device Selection in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Review

Importance

Aortic valve stenosis (AS) is the most common manifestation of acquired valvular heart disease in developed countries. Several large-scale randomized clinical trials investigating the entire spectrum of patients with severe symptomatic AS from low to prohibitive risk have established transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as a safe and effective alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement.

Observations

There are currently only 3 types of TAVR devices commercially available in the US, but several other valve types are undergoing clinical trials in the US. Because of fundamental differences in engineering features, each TAVR device type has specific strengths and limitations. This review aims to provide an overview of design features and clinical outcomes of various TAVR devices that are either commercially available or undergoing clinical investigation.

Conclusions and Relevance

Given the lack of large-scale head-to-head comparisons of various TAVR devices and the rapid development of new device iterations, there is insufficient evidence to claim superiority of one device type over another. Nonetheless, as each TAVR device has unique design characteristics, certain patient-related and anatomy-related factors may slightly favor one or several particular designs.