Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis and large aortic annulus, using the self-expanding 31-mm Medtronic CoreValve prosthesis: First clinical experience

Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation in aortic valve diseases after TAVI with vitaFlow liberty system

Introduction

Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is a known complication in patients with aortic stenosis following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, there is limited research on TAVI for pure aortic regurgitation (PAR), and more investigation is needed to determine the occurrence of postoperative cardiac conduction block and the need for PPI in this population. Therefore, this retrospective analysis aimed to evaluate the incidence of cardiac conduction block and the necessity of PPI after TAVI in patients with different types of aortic valve disease, including pure aortic stenosis (PAS), aortic stenosis with regurgitation (ASR), and PAR.

Methods

Clinical data of 100 patients who TAVI were analyzed retrospectively. The incidence of conduction block was assessed, and clinical factors were examined to predict the necessity of PPI.

Results

Cardiac conduction block was found to be a common complication following TAVI, particularly in patients with PAR. PAR was identified as an independent risk factor for requiring PPI. Additionally, first-degree atrioventricular block emerged as a sensitive predictor for PPI in patients with PAR.

Discussion

These findings provide valuable insights into the safety and effectiveness of TAVI, which can help enhance patient management and reduce complications.

Early clinical and procedural outcomes in large series of 34-mm self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate early clinical and procedural outcomes with the 34-mm Evolut R transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) prosthesis.

BACKGROUND

The 34-mm Evolut R (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) self-expanding TAVR prosthesis was designed to treat patients with larger annuli.

METHODS

Clinical, demographic, procedural, and echocardiographic data on consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with a 34-mm Evolut R prosthesis at our institution were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-six patients underwent TAVR with this prosthesis from November 2016 to July 2018, a majority (n = 188, 96%) through transfemoral access and with conscious sedation (n = 182, 93%). Mean age, Society of Thoracic Surgery risk score, and follow-up were 82 ± 8 years, 5.4 ± 5%, and 8.2 ± 5.3 months, respectively. Mean aortic valve (AV) peak velocity was 4.0 ± 0.6 m/s, mean AV gradient was 38 ± 13 mmHg, AV area was 0.79 ± 0.23 cm² ; calcium score was 3,503 ± 1,970 Agatston units, and perimeter was 85 ± 4.3 mm. Device implantation was successful in all but one patient. Postprocedure mean AV peak velocity, AV mean gradient, and AV area were 1.9 ± 0.4 m/s, 7 ± 3 mmHg, and 2.6 ± 0.7 cm² , respectively. New pacemaker requirement rate was 16%, and moderate paravalvular leak was present in six patients (3%), which improved to mild in three patients at 6-month follow-up. In-hospital, 30-day, 6-month, and 12-month survival rates were 98%, 96% (hospital discharge), 96% (30-day), 89% (6-month), and 83% (12-month).

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate high success and good procedural, echocardiographic, and clinical outcomes of 34-mm Evolut R in patients with large annuli.

Third-Generation Balloon and Self-Expandable Valves for Aortic Stenosis in Large and Extra-Large Aortic Annuli From the TAVR-LARGE Registry

Background:

Currently, 2 third-generation transcatheter valves, 29-mm Sapien-3 and 34-mm Evolut-R (ER), are indicated for large sized aortic annuli. We analyzed short and 1-year performance of these valves in patients with large (area ≥575 mm 2 or perimeter ≥85 mm) and extra-large (≥683 mm 2 or ≥94.2 mm) aortic annuli undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Methods:

A total of 833 patients across 12 centers with symptomatic aortic stenosis and large aortic annuli underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with 29-mm Sapien-3 (n=640) or 34-mm ER (n=193). Clinical, anatomic, and procedural characteristics were collected, and Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 outcomes were reported.

Results:

Median aortic annulus area and perimeter were 617 mm 2 (591–657) and 89.1 mm (87.0–92.1), respectively (704 mm 2 [689–743] and 96.0 mm [94.5–97.9] in the subgroup of 124 patients with extra-large annuli). Overall device success was 94.3% (Sapien-3, 95.8% and ER, 89.3%; P =0.001), with a higher rate of significant paravalvular leak ( P =0.004), second valve implantation ( P =0.013), and valve embolization ( P =0.009) in the ER group. Thirty-day and 1-year mortality was 2.4% and 9.2%, respectively, without differences between groups. Valve hemodynamics were excellent (mean gradient, 8.8±3.6 mm Hg; 3.3% rate of moderate-severe paravalvular leak) in the extra-large annulus, without differences compared with the large annulus group.

Conclusions:

In patients with large and extra-large aortic annuli, transcatheter aortic valve replacement using 29-mm Sapien-3 and 34-mm ER is safe and feasible. Observed differences in clinical outcomes and hemodynamic performance may guide valve choice in this cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

The hemodynamics of transcatheter aortic valves in transcatheter aortic valves

BACKGROUND

The durability of transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) remains their greatest disadvantage, given that fixed tissue leaflets are not immune to structural degeneration from calcification and thrombosis. Therefore, a second intervention is necessary, especially given that TAV in low-risk patients has shown noninferior outcomes compared with surgery. This study aimed to assess the hemodynamic and turbulent properties of the flow downstream with different TAV-in-TAV configurations, to offer basic hemodynamic guidance for future interventions when currently implanted valves structurally degrade.

METHODS

Six TAV-in-TAV configurations were chosen: 23 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut, 23 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3, 26 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut, 26 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3, 23 mm SAPIEN3-in-26 mm Evolut, and 23 mm SAPIEN3-in-23 mm SAPIEN 3. Their hemodynamic performance was assessed in a pulse duplicator for 100 cycles. High-speed imaging and particle image velocimetry were performed to assess turbulence. Effective orifice area (EOA), pinwheeling index (PI), and Reynolds shear stress (RSS) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The largest mean EOA was obtained with 23 mm SAPIEN-in-26 mm Evolut (2.07 ± 0.06 cm²), and the smallest was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-23 mm SAPIEN (1.50 ± 0.04 cm²) (P < .001). The highest mean PI was obtained with SAPIEN-in-SAPIEN (26.5 ± 2.00%), and the lowest was obtained with 26 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut (7.5 ± 1.6%) (P < .01). At peak systole, the least detrimental RSS range was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-26 mm Evolut (up to ∼340 Pa), and the most detrimental RSS range was obtained with 23 mm Evolut-in-SAPIEN (∼900 Pa) (P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that best hemodynamic parameters are TAV-specific (implanted and to be implanted). In addition, it shows that RSS levels, which are indicative of turbulence levels and associated with blood damage, are 2- to 3-fold higher after TAV-in-TAV.

Outcome of implantation of a second self-expanding valve for the treatment of residual significant aortic regurgitation

BACKGROUND

Residual aortic regurgitation (AR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with adverse outcome. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of second CoreValve (CV) implantation to treat residual AR following the initial CV deployment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

TAVR patients treated with a second CV due to moderate and above residual AR were compared to single device implantation. Valvular function parameters were compared at baseline, post procedure, and 30 days. Among 172 CV TAVR patients, 11 required a second device (6%) due to significant residual AR. The main differences between the groups were higher rates of low ejection fraction in patients with 2 CV implanted and higher annular diameter (27 [29-25] vs. 25 [26-24] mm, P = 0.03), requiring a larger device. Although two patients in the two CV group had high initial implantation, low implantation was similar between the groups. A second CV achieved adequate reduction in residual AR in six patients (55%), while an additional four patients had moderate residual AR. Only one remained with moderate to severe AR after 30 days follow-up. There were no cases of peri-procedural stroke or mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Second implantation of self-expanding valve can successfully reduce residual significant AR following initial CV implantation and should be considered as therapeutic option for this population. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.