Impact of High Implantation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve on Subsequent Conduction Disturbances and Coronary Access

Prognosis and Predictor Factors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Retrospective Analysis of the Post-Transcatheter Aortic Replacement Clairval Hospital Registry

Background/Objectives: Despite procedural improvements, post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) conduction disorders remain high. Analyzing the data from a monocentric TAVR registry, this study aims to determine predictive factors for PPI (primary outcome), the indication for PPI, and long-term outcomes among these patients (secondary outcomes). Methods: Conducted at Clairval Hospital in Marseille, France, this retrospective study included all consecutive patients from June 2012 to June 2019. Clinical, electrocardiographic, echocardiographic, and procedural data were collected, with outcomes assessed annually. Logistic regression identified PPI predictors and survival analyses were performed. Results: Of the 1458 patients initially considered, 1157 patients were included. PPI was needed in 21.5% of patients, primarily for third-degree atrioventricular block (46.4%). Predictor factors for PPI included baseline right bundle branch block (ORadj 2.49, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.30; p = 0.001), longer baseline QRS duration (ORadj 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to1.02, p = 0.002), and self-expandable valves (ORadj 1.82, 95% CI, 1.09 to 3.03; p = 0.021). Seven-year estimated mortality was higher in PPI (43.3%) vs. non-PPI patients (30.9%) (log rank p = 0.048). PPI was an independent predictive factor of death (ORadj 2.49, 95% CI 1.4 to 4.3; p = 0.002). Conclusions: This study reveals elevated rates of PPI post-TAVR associated with increased mortality. These results underscore the pressing necessity to refine our practices, delineate precise indications, and enhance the long-term prognosis for implanted patients.

The Application of Precision Medicine in Structural Heart Diseases: A Step towards the Future

The personalized applications of 3D printing in interventional cardiology and cardiac surgery represent a transformative paradigm in the management of structural heart diseases. This review underscores the pivotal role of 3D printing in enhancing procedural precision, from preoperative planning to procedural simulation, particularly in valvular heart diseases, such as aortic stenosis and mitral regurgitation. The ability to create patient-specific models contributes significantly to predicting and preventing complications like paravalvular leakage, ensuring optimal device selection, and improving outcomes. Additionally, 3D printing extends its impact beyond valvular diseases to tricuspid regurgitation and non-valvular structural heart conditions. The comprehensive synthesis of the existing literature presented here emphasizes the promising trajectory of individualized approaches facilitated by 3D printing, promising a future where tailored interventions based on precise anatomical considerations become standard practice in cardiovascular care.

Redo-TAVR Feasibility After SAPIEN 3 Stratified by Implant Depth and Commissural Alignment: A CT Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

Redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can pin the index transcatheter heart valve leaflets open leading to sinus sequestration and restricting coronary access. The impact of initial implant depth and commissural alignment on redo-TAVR feasibility is unclear. We sought to determine the feasibility of redo-TAVR and coronary access after SAPIEN 3 (S3) TAVR stratified by implant depth and commissural alignment.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with native valve aortic stenosis were evaluated using multidetector computed tomography. S3 TAVR simulations were done at 3 implant depths, sizing per manufacturer recommendation and assuming nominal expansion in all cases. Redo-TAVR was deemed unfeasible based on valve-to-sinotubular junction distance and valve-to-sinus height <2 mm, while the neoskirt plane of the S3 transcatheter heart valve estimated coronary access feasibility.

RESULTS

Overall, 1900 patients (mean age, 80.2±8 years; STS-PROM [Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Operative Mortality], 3.4%) were included. Redo-TAVR feasibility reduced significantly at shallower initial S3 implant depths (2.3% at 80:20 versus 27.5% at 100:0, P<0.001). Larger S3 sizes reduced redo-TAVR feasibility, but only in patients with a 100:0 implant (P<0.001). Commissural alignment would render redo-TAVR feasible in all patients, assuming the utilization of leaflet modification techniques to reduce the neoskirt height. Coronary access following TAV-in-TAV was affected by both index S3 implant depth and size.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the critical impact of implant depth, commissural alignment, and transcatheter heart valve size in predicting redo-TAVR feasibility. These findings highlight the necessity for individualized preprocedural planning, considering both immediate results and long-term prospects for reintervention as TAVR is increasingly utilized in younger patients with aortic stenosis.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in heart failure

Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) may develop heart failure (HF), the presence of which has traditionally been deemed as a final stage in AS progression with poor outcomes. The use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred therapy for most patients with AS and concomitant HF. With its instant afterload reduction, TAVR offers patients with HF significant haemodynamic benefits, with corresponding changes in left ventricular structure and improved mortality and quality of life. The prognostic covariates and optimal timing of TAVR in patients with less than severe AS remain unclear. The purpose of this review is to describe the association between TAVR and outcomes in patients with HF, particularly in the setting of left ventricular systolic dysfunction, acute HF, and right ventricular systolic dysfunction, and to highlight areas for future research.

Risk of Sinus Sequestration During Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: The Prevalence, Predictors, and Risk Stratification

The number of patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the potential for reintervention is steadily increasing; however, there is a risk of sinus sequestration (SS) during a redo TAVI. The prevalence, predictors, and risk stratification of the risk for SS remain uncertain. We analyzed computed tomography acquired from 263 patients who underwent TAVI between 2021 and 2022: balloon-expandable valve (BEV) (71%) and self-expandable valve (SEV) (29%). Patients were considered at risk for SS if they met the following: (1) BEV frame > sinotubular junction (STJ) or SEV neocommissure greater than the STJ and (2) valve-to-STJ <2 mm. The risk of left, right, and any SS in 51%, 50%, and 65%, respectively, did not differ between BEV and SEV. The predictors of any SS were the height of the left and right coronary cusp (odds ratio [OR] 0.81 and 0.71, cutoff 18.6 and 19.2 mm, respectively) and STJ minus the annulus diameter (OR 0.65, cutoff 3.7 mm) in BEV, and STJ diameter (OR 0.47, cutoff 27.6 mm) in SEV. The number of predictors stratified the risk of any SS: low risk with BEV at 0 predictors (14% at risk of SS), intermediate risk at 1 predictor (65%), high risk at 2 or 3 predictors (81% and 95%), and low risk with SEV at 0 predictors (33%) versus high risk at 1 predictor (91%). In conclusion, 2/3 of patients who underwent TAVI were at risk of SS. The height of the coronary cusp and the STJ diameter were associated with and adequately stratified the risk of SS.

Assessing Potential Risks of Future Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Asian Patients

Background

In the Asian cohort, data are limited on the risk for coronary obstruction due to sinus of Valsalva (SOV) sequestration in redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess the potential risk for coronary obstruction in simulated redo TAVR in Asian patients.

Methods

Post-TAVR computed tomographic data from 788 patients who received balloon-expandable (BE) SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) and 334 patients who received self-expanding (SE) Evolut R or Evolut PRO TAVs were analyzed. The risk for coronary obstruction due to SOV sequestration in redo TAVR, defined as the TAV commissure level above the sinotubular junction (STJ) and a TAV-to-STJ distance <2.0 mm in each coronary sinus, was retrospectively evaluated.

Results

The potential risks for coronary obstruction due to SOV sequestration at 1 or both coronary arteries were identified in 52.1% of the BE TAV group and 71.3% of the SE TAV group (P < 0.001). After adjusting for multiple covariates, STJ diameter, STJ height, TAV oversizing degree by area, and implantation depth were independently associated with SOV sequestration risk in the BE TAV group, whereas STJ diameter and implantation depth were independently associated with SOV sequestration risk in the SE TAV group.

Conclusions

Coronary obstruction due to SOV sequestration in redo TAVR may occur in a substantial number of Asian patients. This finding suggests the importance of considering the structural feasibility of future redo TAVR when implanting the first TAV, especially in Asian patients with long life expectancy.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation and Conduction Disturbances: Focus on Clinical Implications

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established alternative to surgery in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and has expanded its indications to even low-surgical-risk patients. Conduction abnormalities (CA) and permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantations remain a relatively common finding post TAVI due to the close proximity of the conduction system to the aortic root. New onset left bundle branch block (LBBB) and high-grade atrioventricular block are the most commonly reported CA post TAVI. The overall rate of PPM implantation post TAVI varies and is related to pre- and intra-procedural factors. Therefore, when screening patients for TAVI, Heart Teams should take under consideration the various anatomical, pathophysiological and procedural conditions that predispose to CA and PPM requirement after the procedure. This is particularly important as TAVI is being offered to younger patients with longer life-expectancy. Herein, we highlight the incidence, predictors, impact and management of CA in patients undergoing TAVI.

Feasibility of Redo-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Sapien Valves Based on In Vivo Computed Tomography Assessment

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to assess the feasibility of repeat transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement for degenerated Sapien3 (S3) prostheses by simulating subsequent implantation of S3 or Evolut, using in vivo computed tomography-based sizing and the impact on coronary and patient-prosthesis mismatch risks.

METHODS

Computed tomography scans from 356 patients with prior S3 TAV replacement implantation were analyzed. The in vivo sizing for second TAV based on averaged area of 3 levels of outflow, mid (narrowest) and inflow, was compared with in vitro recommendations, that is, same size as index S3 for second S3 and 1 size larger for Evolut. Risks of coronary obstruction and patient-prosthesis mismatch were determined by valve-to-aorta distance and estimated effective orifice area, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, the majority of patients (n=328; 92.1%) had underexpanded index S3 with an expansion area of 94% (91%-97%), leading to significant differences in size selection of the second TAV between in vivo and in vitro sizing strategies. Expansion area <89% served as a threshold, resulting in 1 size smaller than the in vitro recommendations were selected in 45 patients (13%) for S3-in-S3 and 13 (4%) for Evolut-in-S3, while the remaining patients followed in vitro recommendations (P<0.01, in vivo versus in vitro sizing). Overall, 57% of total patients for S3-in-S3 simulation and 60% for Evolut-in-S3 were considered low risk for coronary complications. Deep index S3 implantation (odds ratio, 0.76 [interquartile range, 0.67-0.87]; P<0.001) and selecting Evolut as the second TAV (11% risk reduction in intermediate- or high-risk patients) reduced coronary risk. Estimated moderate or severe patient-prosthesis mismatch risk was 21% for S3-in-S3 and 1% for Evolut-in-S3, assuming optimal expansion of the second TAV.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo-TAV replacement with S3-in-S3 and Evolut-in-S3 could be feasible with low risk to coronaries in ≈60% of patients, while the remaining 40% will be at intermediate or high risk. The feasibility of redo-TAV replacement is influenced by sizing strategy, type of second TAV, native annular anatomy, and implant depth.