Propensity-Matched 1-Year Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Bicuspid and Tricuspid Patients

Comparison of downsizing strategy (HANGZHOU Solution) and standard annulus sizing strategy in type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: Rationale and design of a randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

There has not been a consensus on the prothesis sizing strategy in type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Modifications to standard annular sizing strategies might be required due to the distinct anatomical characteristics. We have devised a downsizing strategy for TAVR using a self-expanding valve specifically for patients with type 0 bicuspid AS. The primary aim of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of downsizing strategy with the Standard Annulus Sizing Strategy in TAVR for patients with type 0 bicuspid AS.

TRIAL DESIGN

It is a prospective, multi-center, superiority, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing the Down Sizing and Standard Annulus Sizing Strategy in patients with type 0 bicuspid aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Eligible participants will include patients with severe type 0 bicuspid AS, as defined by criteria such as mean gradient across aortic valve ≥40 mmHg, peak aortic jet velocity ≥4.0 m/s, aortic valve area (AVA) ≤1.0 cm², or AVA index ≤0.6 cm2/m2. These patients will be randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to either the Down Sizing Strategy group or the Standard Sizing Strategy group. In the Down Sizing Strategy group, a valve one size smaller will be implanted if the "waist sign" manifests along with less than mild regurgitation during balloon pre-dilatation. The primary end point of the study is a composite of VARC-3 defined device success, absence of both permanent pacemaker implantation due to high-degree atrioventricular block and new-onset complete left bundle branch block.

CONCLUSION

This study will compare the safety and efficacy of Down Sizing Strategy with the Standard Annulus Sizing Strategy and provide valuable insights into the optimal approach for sizing in TAVR patients with type 0 bicuspid AS. We hypothesize that the Down Sizing Strategy will demonstrate superiority when compared to the Standard Annulus Sizing Strategy. (Down Sizing Strategy (HANGZHOU Solution) vs Standard Sizing Strategy TAVR in Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis (Type 0) (TAILOR-TAVR), NCT05511792).

3-Year Outcomes From the Evolut Low Risk TAVR Bicuspid Study

BACKGROUND

Outcomes from transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low-surgical risk patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis beyond 2 years are limited.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate 3-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study.

METHODS

The Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm study conducted in 25 U.S.

CENTERS

Patients with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk with bicuspid aortic valve anatomy (all subtypes) underwent TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular Evolut R or PRO (Medtronic) bioprosthesis. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated all deaths and endpoint-related adverse events, and a central echocardiographic core laboratory assessed hemodynamic endpoints.

RESULTS

An attempted implant was performed in 150 patients from December 2018 to October 2019. The mean age was 70.3 ± 5.5 years, 48% (72/150) of the patients were women, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 1.3% (Q1-Q3: 0.9%-1.7%). Sievers type 1 was the dominant bicuspid morphology (90.7%, 136/150). The Kaplan-Meier rates of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke were 1.3% (95% CI: 0.3%-5.3%) at 1 year, 3.4% (95% CI: 1.4%-8.1%) at 2 years, and 4.1% (95% CI: 1.6%-10.7%) at 3 years. The incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 19.4% (95% CI: 12.4%-29.6%) at 3 years. There were no instances of moderate or severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation at 2 and 3 years after TAVR.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3-year results from the Evolut Low Risk Bicuspid Study demonstrate low rates of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke and favorable hemodynamic performance.

Third-Generation Transcatheter Aortic Heart Valve with Reverse Parachute Sealing Cuff in Patients with Aortic Valve Disease

BACKGROUND

The Navitor (Abbott Inc, IL, USA) transcatheter heart valve is a novel third-generation self-expanding bioprosthesis with specific features to mitigate paravalvular regurgitation (PVR). Owing to its novelty, there is a paucity of data on its application in clinical practice.

METHODS

Consecutive cohort analysis of the use of the Navitor system in an as-treated clinical setting at a quaternary heart hospital.

RESULTS

Sixty consecutive non-clinical trial patients treated with Navitor were identified. All patients underwent a successful procedure. The mean age was 79.3 years (±SD 7.82), 56.67% (n=34) were female, and the mean STS score was 4.87 (±SD 5.70). At 30 days post-procedure, all patients were alive with no readmissions for heart failure. One patient had a major vascular complication (1.7%). Four patients (7.14% of patients without a pre-existing pacemaker) received a new permanent pacemaker. Two patients (3.4%) had a non-disabling stroke. PVR at 30 days was trivial or none in 75% of patients, and no patient had worse than mild PVR.

CONCLUSIONS

The Navitor system in this as-treated cohort was associated with favourable clinical, haemodynamic, and safety outcomes.

Mechanism of balloon burst during transcatheter aortic valve replacement pre-dilatation: Image observation and validation by finite element analysis

BACKGROUND

Balloon burst during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is serious complication. This study pioneers a novel approach by combining image observation and computer simulation validation to unravel the mechanism of balloon burst in a patient with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis.

METHOD

A new computational model for balloon pre-dilatation was developed by incorporating the element failure criteria according to the Law of Laplace. The effects of calcification and aortic tissue material parameters, friction coefficients, balloon types and aortic anatomy classification were performed to validate and compare the expansion behavior and rupture mode of actual balloon.

RESULTS

Balloon burst was dissected into three distinct stages based on observable morphological changes. The mechanism leading to the complete transverse burst of the non-compliant balloon initiated at the folding edges, where contacted with heavily calcified masses at the right coronary sinus, resulting in high maximum principal stress. Local sharp spiked calcifications facilitated rapid crack propagation. The elastic moduli of calcification significantly influenced balloon expansion behavior and crack morphology. The simulation case of the calcific elastic modulus was set at 12.6 MPa could closely mirror clinical appearance of expansion behavior and crack pattern. Furthermore, the case of semi-compliant balloons introduced an alternative rupture mechanism as pinhole rupture, driven by local sharp spiked calcifications.

CONCLUSIONS

The computational model of virtual balloons could effectively simulate balloon dilation behavior and burst mode during TAVR pre-dilation. Further research with a larger cohort is needed to investigate the balloon morphology during pre-dilation by using this method to guide prosthesis sizing for potential favorable outcomes.

Bicuspid aortic stenosis: National three-year outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement among Medicare beneficiaries

OBJECTIVE

Randomized trials of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacements have excluded bicuspid anatomy. We compared 3-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients aged more than 65 years with bicuspid aortic stenosis.

METHODS

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid data were used to identify 6450 patients undergoing isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (n = 3771) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (n = 2679) for bicuspid aortic stenosis (2012-2019). Propensity score matching with 21 baseline characteristics including frailty created 797 pairs.

RESULTS

Unmatched patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement were older than patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (78 vs 70 years), with more comorbidities and frailty (all P < .001). After matching, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a similar mortality risk compared with surgical aortic valve replacement within the first 6 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08, 95% CI, 0.67-1.69) but a higher mortality risk between 6 months and 3 years (HR, 2.16, 95% CI, 1.22-3.83). Additionally, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of heart failure readmissions before 6 months (HR, 0.51, 95% CI, 0.31-0.87) but a higher risk between 6 months and 3 years (HR, 4.78, 95% CI, 2.21-10.36). The 3-year risks of aortic valve reintervention (HR, 1.03, 95% CI, 0.30-3.56) and stroke (HR, 1.21, 95% CI, 0.75-1.96) were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Among matched Medicare beneficiaries undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis, 3-year mortality was higher after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. However, transcatheter aortic valve replacement was associated with a similar risk of mortality and a lower risk of heart failure readmissions during the first 6 months after the intervention. Randomized comparative data are needed to best inform treatment choice.

Effect of transcatheter aortic valve replacement on ascending aorta dilatation rate in patients with tricuspid and bicuspid aortic stenosis

Objectives

The aim of the present study was to assess the differences between BAV and TAV patients with chronic moderate to severe or severe AS regarding presentation, incidence of TAVR, survival, ascending aorta diameter and dilatation rate before and after TAVR.

Methods

The study included 667 consecutive patients with chronic moderate to severe or severe AS from January 2012 and December 2022. Outcomes included all-cause mortality, incidence of TAVR, and ascending aorta diameter and dilatation rate.

Results

There were 185 BAV-AS and 482 TAV-AS patients, and BAV-AS patients were younger (67 vs 78 years, P = 0.027). Total follow-up was 4.5 years (IQR: 2.7-8.9 years), 290 patients underwent TAVR, and 165 patients died. The 8-year TAVR incidence was higher in BAV-AS (55% ± 4%) vs TAV-AS (41% ± 5%; P = 0.02). The 8-year survival was higher in BAV-AS (85% ± 6%) vs TAV-AS (71% ± 6%; P < 0.0001) and became insignificant after age adjustment (P = 0.33). The dilatation rate of ascending aorta was significantly faster in BAV-AS patients compared with TAV-AS patients before TAVR. However, the ascending aorta dilatation rate for BAV-AS and TAV-AS patients was not significantly different after TAVR.

Conclusions

Compared with TAV-AS, BAV-AS patients were younger and underwent TAVR more frequently, resulting in a considerable survival advantage. After TAVR, ascending aorta dilatation rates were similar in BAV-AS and TAV-AS patients, suggesting an important role of hemodynamics on ascending aorta dilatation in BAV-AS.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease: Procedural Planning and Clinical Outcomes

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is the most common congenital heart disease, with a prevalence of 1-2% and occurring in >20% of octogenarians referred for aortic valve replacement. However, BAV patients have been systematically excluded from pivotal randomized trials. Since TAVI indications are moving toward low-risk patients, an increase in the number of BAV patients who undergo TAVI is expected. BAV represents a challenge due to its unique morphological features (raphe, extreme asymmetrical valve calcifications, cusp asymmetry and aortopathy) and the lack of consensus about the accurate sizing method. The role of multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) in the planification of the TAVI procedure is well-established, being useful to define the optimal valve sizing and the implantation strategy. New-generation devices, more experience of the operators and better planification of the procedure have been associated with similar clinical outcomes in bicuspid and tricuspid patients undergoing TAVI.

Clinical outcomes and the impact of valve morphology for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valves: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is present in approximately 0.5%-2% of the general population, causing significant aortic stenosis (AS) in 12%-37% of affected individuals. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is being considered the treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic AS across all risk spectra.

AIM

Aim Our study aims to compare TAVR outcomes in patients with BAV versus tricuspid aortic valves (TAV).

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane trials. Studies were included if they included BAV and TAV patients undergoing TAVR with quantitative data available for at least one of our predefined outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed by the random-effects model using Stata software.

RESULTS

Fifty studies of 203,288 patients were included. BAV patients had increased 30-day all-cause mortality (odds ratio [OR] = 1.23 [1.00-1.50], p = 0.05), in-hospital stroke (OR = 1.39 [1.01-1.93], p = 0.05), in-hospital and 30-day PPI (OR = 1.13 [1.00-1.27], p = 0.04; OR = 1.16 [1.04-1.13], p = 0.01) and in-hospital, 30-day and 1-year aortic regurgitation (AR) (OR = 1.48 [1.19-1.83], p < 0.01; OR = 1.79 [1.26-2.52], p < 0.01; OR = 1.64 [1.03-2.60], p = 0.04). Subgroup analysis on new-generation valves showed a reduced 1-year all-cause mortality (OR = 0.86 [CI = 0.75-0.98], p = 0.03), despite higher in-hospital and 30-day PPI (OR = 0.1.21 [1.04-1.41], p = 0.01; OR = 1.17 [1.05-1.31], p = 0.01) and in-hospital AR (OR = 1.62 [1.14-2.31], p = 0.01) in the BAV group. The quality of included studies was moderate-to-high, and only three analyses presented high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

TAVR is associated with comparable outcomes in patients with BAV and TAV. Careful selection of BAV cases by preprocedural assessment of valve anatomy and burden of calcification, pre- and post-procedural dilation, and implementing newer generations of valves may improve the safety and efficacy of TAVR in BAV patients.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: Meta-Analysis and Systemic Review

Because of its anatomic and procedural complexities, bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) has been excluded from previous trials investigating transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of TAVR in BAV and tricuspid aortic valve patients. We searched the databases systematically from inception until March 2023 for studies that reported the outcomes of TAVR in BAV and tricuspid aortic valve patients. The primary focus was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Additional outcomes included outcomes at 30-day follow-up. Secondary and subgroup analyses were performed on propensity-matched patients, patients at low surgical risk, and based on the type of transcatheter valve type. We included 30 studies with a total of 193,274 patients who underwent TAVR, of which 14,353 patients had BAV stenosis. The rate of 1-year mortality was lower in the BAV group compared with the tricuspid group with the results reaching statistical significance (odds ratio [OR] 0.86, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.75 to 0.98, p = 0.02). The rate of 30-day stroke, however, was higher in patients with BAV who underwent TAVR (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.43, p <0.05). Other 30-day clinical outcomes were similar between the 2 groups. Similar outcomes were observed in secondary analysis of matched populations with less mortality and higher rate of stroke in patients with BAV (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96, p = 0.01, and OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.75, p <0.05, respectively). Comparing the outcomes for self-expandable and balloon-expandable valves resulted in similar results. Subgroup analysis of low-surgical-risk patients similarly showed lower 1-year mortality in patients with BAV (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.91, p = 0.01), without difference in 30-day stroke between the 2 groups (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.88, p = 0.30). In conclusion, this report indicates that TAVR is safe and feasible in patients with BAV, including patients at low surgical risk. The higher rate of 30-day stroke, however, warrants caution when pursuing TAVR in this population. More studies, specifically randomized trials, are still warranted to further assess the safety and the long-term outcomes in this group.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Evolut platform for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: the international, multicentre, prospective BIVOLUTX registry

BACKGROUND

Prospective data about transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients are limited.

AIMS

We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of the Evolut PRO and R (34 mm) self-expanding prostheses in BAV patients and explore the impact of different computed tomography (CT) sizing algorithms in a prospective registry.

METHODS

A total of 149 bicuspid patients were treated in 14 countries. The primary endpoint was the intended valve performance at 30 days. Secondary endpoints were 30-day and 1-year mortality, severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and the ellipticity index at 30 days. All study endpoints were adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria.

RESULTS

The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.6% (1.7-4.2). Type I L-R BAV was observed in 72.5% of the patients. Evolut valve sizes 29 and 34 mm were utilised in 49.0% and 36.9% of the cases, respectively. The 30-day cardiac death rate was 2.6%; the 1-year cardiac death rate was 11.0%. Valve performance at 30 days was observed in 142/149 (95.3%) patients. The mean aortic valve area post-TAVI was 2.1 (1.8-2.6) cm2, and the mean aortic gradient was 7.2 (5.4-9.5) mmHg. No patient had more than moderate aortic regurgitation at 30 days. PPM was observed in 13/143 (9.1%) surviving patients and was severe in 2 patients (1.6%). Valve function was maintained at 1 year. The mean ellipticity index remained 1.3 (interquartile range 1.2-1.4). Overall, 30-day and 1-year clinical and echocardiography outcomes were similar between the two sizing strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

BIVOLUTX demonstrated a favourable bioprosthetic valve performance and good clinical outcomes after TAVI with the Evolut platform in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis. No impact from the sizing methodology could be identified.

Early and Long-Term Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes of Sutureless vs. Sutured Bioprosthesis for Aortic Valve Replacement

Objective: The goal of this manuscript is to compare clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) with Perceval sutureless bioprosthesis (SU-AVR) and sutured bioprosthesis (SB). Methods: Following the PRISMA statement, data were extracted from studies published after August 2022 and found in PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL/CCTR, ClinicalTrials.gov, SciELO, LILACS, and Google Scholar. The primary outcome of interest was post-procedural permanent pacemaker implantation, and the secondary outcomes were new left bundle branch block (LBBB), moderate/severe paravalvular leak (PVL), valve dislocation (pop-out), need for a second transcatheter heart valve, 30-day mortality, stroke, and echocardiographic outcomes. Results: Twenty-one studies were included in the analysis. When SU-AVR was compared to other SB, mortality ranged from 0 to 6.4% for Perceval and 0 to 5.9% for SB. Incidence of PVL (Perceval 1-19.4% vs. SB 0-1%), PPI (Perceval 2-10.7% vs. SB 1.8-8.5%), and MI (Perceval 0-7.8% vs. SB 0-4.3%) were comparable. In addition, the stroke rate was lower in the SU-AVR group when compared to SB (Perceval 0-3.7% vs. SB 1.8-7.3%). In patients with a bicuspid aortic valve, the mortality rate was 0-4% and PVL incidence was 0-2.3%. Long-term survival ranged between 96.7 and 98.6%. Valve cost analysis was lower for the Perceval valve and higher for sutured bioprosthesis. Conclusions: Compared to SB valves, Perceval bioprosthesis has proved to be a reliable prosthesis for surgical aortic valve replacement due to its non-inferior hemodynamics, implantation speed, reduced cardiopulmonary bypass time, reduced aortic cross-clamp time, and shorter length of stay.

Comparison of patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as a safe and effective alternative to surgery for aortic stenosis (AS). However, there are still differences in the procedural process and outcome of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) treated with TAVI compared with tricuspid aortic valve.

AREAS COVERED

This review paper aims to summarize the main characteristics and clinical evidence of TAVI in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves and compare the outcomes of TAVI procedure.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of TAVI in patients with BAV has shown similar clinical outcomes compared with tricuspid aortic valve. The efficacy of TAVI for challenging BAV anatomies remains a concern due to the lack of randomized trials. Detailed preprocedural planning is of great importance in low-surgical-risk BAV patients. A better understanding of which subtypes of BAV anatomy are at greater risk for adverse outcomes can potentially benefit the selection of TAVI or open-heart surgery in low surgical risk AS patients.

Ongoing experience with patient-specific computer simulation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly being used to treat younger, lower-risk patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV). Patient-specific computer simulation may identify patients at risk for developing paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) and major conduction disturbance. Only limited prospective experience of this technology exist. We wished to describe our ongoing experience with patient-specific computer simulation.

METHODS

Patients who were referred for consideration of TAVR with a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) and had BAV identified on pre-procedural cardiac computed tomography imaging underwent patient-specific computer simulation. The computer simulations were reviewed by the Heart Team and used to guide surgical or transcatheter treatment approaches and to aid in THV sizing and positioning. Clinical outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Between May 2019 and May 2021, 16 patients with BAV were referred for consideration of TAVR with a self-expanding THV. Sievers Type 1 morphology was present in 15 patients and Type 0 in the remaining patient. Two patients were predicted to develop moderate-to-severe PVR with a TAVR procedure and these patients underwent successful surgical aortic valve replacement. In the remaining 14 patients, computer simulation was used to optimize THV sizing and positioning to minimise PVR and conduction disturbance. One patient with a low valve implantation depth developed moderate PVR and this complication was correctly predicted by the computer simulations. No patient required insertion of a new permanent pacemaker.

CONCLUSION

Patient-specific computer simulation may be used to guide the most appropriate treatment modality for patients with BAV. The usage of computer simulation to guide THV sizing and positioning was associated with favourable clinical outcomes.

Aortic valve morphology and paravalvular leak regression after a self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Aims: The study aimed to compare paravalvular leak (PVL) changes after a transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expandable prosthesis between different aortic valve morphologies and evaluate the impact of paravalvular leak regression on clinical prognosis. Methods: Patients with aortic stenosis (AS) successfully treated with a self-expandable TAVR who were followed up for at least 1 year at our centre were consecutively enrolled from January 2016 to August 2019. Paired serial changes in paravalvular leak and other haemodynamic parameters by echocardiography were collected and compared between the bicuspid valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). A logistic regression model was used to explore the predictors of paravalvular leak regression (<1 grade) 1 year after transcatheter aortic valve replacement, while its impact on subsequent clinical outcomes (all-cause mortality and rehospitalisation for heart failure (HF)) was further evaluated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: A total of 153 bicuspid valve and 114 tricuspid aortic valve patients were finally enrolled; haemodynamic parameters and paravalvular leak severity were comparable before the discharge between the two groups. The peak transaortic velocity, mean transvalvular gradient, and effective orifice area all significantly improved (p < 0.05) without intergroup differences at all follow-up timepoints. Significant paravalvular leak reduction was observed only in the TAV group (1.75% vs. 4.39%, p = 0.029), while moderate paravalular leak was still more prevalent in BAV (7.19% vs. 1.75%, p = 0.041) at the 1-year follow-up. Multivariable analyses identified the bicuspid valve, asymmetric calcification, and undersizing as independent predictors of failure of the 1-year paravalvular leak reduction in patients with mild or moderate paravalvular leak after discharge. Patients without a paravalvular leak reduction within 1 year showed a relatively higher 2-year all-cause mortality and HF (HR: 5.994, 95% CI: 1.691-21.240, and p = 0.053) rates thereafter. Conclusion: In AS patients after self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement, paravalvular leak regression within 1 year was less prevalent in bicuspid valve morphology. The failure of paravalvular leak reduction might lead to an increased risk of poorer prognosis in the long run.

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.

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.

2-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND

The Evolut Low Risk Trial (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients) showed that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a supra-annular, self-expanding valve was noninferior to surgery for the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. This finding was based on a Bayesian analysis performed after 850 patients had reached 1 year of follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to report the full 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes for patients enrolled in the Evolut Low Risk Trial.

METHODS

A total of 1,414 low-surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis were randomized to receive TAVR or surgical AVR. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated adverse events, and a central echocardiographic core laboratory assessed hemodynamic endpoints.

RESULTS

An attempted implant was performed in 730 TAVR and 684 surgical patients from March 2016 to May 2019. The Kaplan-Meier rates for the complete 2-year primary endpoint of death or disabling stroke were 4.3% in the TAVR group and 6.3% in the surgery group (P = 0.084). These rates were comparable to the interim Bayesian rates of 5.3% with TAVR and 6.7% with surgery (difference: -1.4%; 95% Bayesian credible interval: -4.9% to 2.1%). All-cause mortality rates were 3.5% vs 4.4% (P = 0.366), and disabling stroke rates were 1.5% vs 2.7% (P = 0.119), respectively. Between years 1 and 2, there was no convergence of the primary outcome curves.

CONCLUSIONS

The complete 2-year follow-up from the Evolut Low Risk Trial found that TAVR is noninferior to surgery for the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke, with event rates that were slightly better than those predicted by using the Bayesian analysis. (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients [Evolut Low Risk Trial]; NCT02701283).