From the Evolut Pro to the Evolut FX self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement systems: current status and future perspectives

Temporal trends with the Evolut family of self-expanding transcatheter heart valves: A single-center experience

BACKGROUND

The Evolut self-expanding valve (SEV) systems (Medtronic), were designed to accommodate varying valve sizes and reduce paravalvular leak (PVL) while maintaining a low delivery profile. These systems have evolved between product generations, alongside valve deployment techniques changing over time.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine whether these changes impacted clinical outcomes.

METHODS

EPROMPT is a prospective, investigator-initiated, postmarketing registry of consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the Evolut PRO/PRO+ SEV system. A total of 300 patients were divided into three consecutive cohorts of 100 patients according to implantation date (January to October 2018, November 2018 to July 2020, and August 2020 to November 2021). Procedural and clinical outcomes over these time periods were compared.

RESULTS

Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 device implantation success improved over time (70.0% vs. 78.0% vs. 88.8%, p = 0.01), with a similar trend for VARC-3 device success (94.7% vs. 81.7% vs. 96.8%, p < 0.001). PVL (all degrees) frequency was likewise reduced over time (31.0% vs. 17.0% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.04). Furthermore, a trend was noticed toward shorter procedure times and shorter length of stay. However, postprocedural pacemaker implantation rates did not significantly differ (15.2% vs. 21.1% vs. 14.0%, p = 0.43).

CONCLUSION

During a 3-year period, we demonstrated better TAVR outcomes with newer SEV iterations, alongside changes in implantation techniques, which might result in better procedural and clinical outcomes. However, we did not see a significant change in peri-procedural pacemaker rates for SEV.

Neo-Commissural Alignment by Withdrawing and Readvancing the Delivery System during Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with Self-Expanding Prosthesis

Objective

To investigate the feasibility of obtaining neo-commissural alignment by withdrawing and readvancing the delivery system during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with self-expanding prosthesis.

Methods

TAVR was performed in five patients with severe aortic valve stenosis by the femoral approach. The delivery catheter was withdrawn and readvanced with the opposite orientation when the Venus-A plus transcatheter heart valve (THV) centre marker was found to be overlapped with or close to the left marker at the aortic annulus level on the fluoroscopic image at the projection of the right and left coronary cusps superimposing. Neo-commissural alignment was evaluated by comparing the aortic computed tomography before TAVR with it after TAVR.

Results

The THV centre marker was overlapped with or close to the right marker at the aortic annulus level on the fluoroscopic image at the projection of the right and left coronary cusps superimposed in all the present five patients after withdrawing and readvancing the delivery system. The commissural angle deviation before vs. post TAVR was 12.3° ± 7.0°. Three of five patients had neo-commissural alignment. Two of the five patients had mild neo-commissural misalignment.

Conclusions

It is possible to obtain the neo-commissural alignment by controlling delivery catheter insertion orientation using the markers on the inflow of the Venus-A plus valve.

Early experience with the Evolut FX self-expanding valve vs. Evolut PRO+ for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR

BACKGROUND

The Evolut FX system is the most recent generation of self-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) technology. This study aims to report the early experience and outcomes associated with this system.

METHODS

Our analysis included 200 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement at our center from 2022 to 2023. The first cohort comprised the last 100 patients who received the Evolut PRO+ THV, while the second cohort included the first 100 patients who received the Evolut FX THV. The primary endpoints of the study were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria, which included technical success (at exit from procedure), device success (at discharge or at 30 days), and early safety (at 30 days).

RESULTS

The study groups demonstrated no significant differences in baseline characteristics, including co-morbidities, pre-procedural imaging, and echocardiography. VARC-3 technical success rate was 99 % for both valves. The VARC-3 device success rate for the Evolut FX was 92 % compared to 97 % for the Evolut PRO+ (p = 0.12), and VARC-3 early safety rate was 80.1 % for the Evolut PRO+ vs. 81.5 % for the Evolut FX (p = 0.82). The in-hospital permanent pacemaker implantation rate for the Evolut FX was 12 % compared to 9 % for the Evolut PRO+ (p = 0.21). There were no differences in clinical outcomes, such as mortality or stroke, between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The Evolut FX THV performed well when used for patients with severe aortic stenosis, demonstrating high success with low complication rates when compared to an earlier generation of self-expanding THV.

Predictors of Conduction Disturbances Requiring New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using the Evolut Series

(1) Background: Conduction disturbance requiring a new permanent pacemaker (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has traditionally been a common complication. New implantation techniques with self-expanding platforms have reportedly reduced the incidence of PPM. We sought to investigate the predictors of PPM at 30 days after TAVI using Evolut R/PRO/PRO+; (2) Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent TAVI with the Evolut platform between October 2019 and August 2022 at University Hospital Galway, Ireland, were included. Patients who had a prior PPM (n = 10), valve-in-valve procedures (n = 8) or received >1 valve during the index procedure (n = 3) were excluded. Baseline clinical, electrocardiographic (ECG), echocardiographic and multislice computed tomography (MSCT) parameters were analyzed. Pre-TAVI MSCT analysis included membranous septum (MS) length, a semi-quantitative calcification analysis of the aortic valve leaflets, left ventricular outflow tract, and mitral annulus. Furthermore, the implantation depth (ID) was measured from the final aortography. Multivariate binary logistic analysis and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis were used to identify independent predictors and the optimal MS and ID cutoff values to predict new PPM requirements, respectively; (3) Results: A total of 129 TAVI patients were included (age = 81.3 ± 5.3 years; 36% female; median EuroSCORE II 3.2 [2.0, 5.4]). Fifteen patients (11.6%) required PPM after 30 days. The patients requiring new PPM at 30 days were more likely to have a lower European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, increased prevalence of right bundle branch block (RBBB) at baseline ECG, have a higher mitral annular calcification severity and have a shorter MS on preprocedural MSCT analysis, and have a ID, as shown on the final aortogram. From the multivariate analysis, pre-TAVI RBBB, MS length, and ID were shown to be predictors of new PPM. An MS length of <2.85 mm (AUC = 0.85, 95%CI: (0.77, 0.93)) and ID of >3.99 mm (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.79, (95% confidence interval (CI): (0.68, 0.90)) were found to be the optimal cut-offs for predicting new PPM requirements; (4) Conclusions: Membranous septum length and implantation depth were found to be independent predictors of new PPM post-TAVI with the Evolut platform. Patient-specific implantation depth could be used to mitigate the requirement for new PPM.

Emerging transcatheter heart valve technologies for severe aortic stenosis

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is the standard of care for selected patients with severe aortic stenosis, irrespective of the surgical risk. Over the last two decades of TAVI practice, multiple limitations were identified. In addition, the extension of TAVI into a wider patient spectrum created new challenges.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an overview of emerging transcatheter heart valves (THVs) beyond the approved contemporary THVs for the treatment of aortic stenosis.

EXPERT OPINION

The incidence of degenerative aortic stenosis is expected to increase with more aging of the population. Therefore, TAVI needs to meet this increase in the number of patients indicated for aortic valve replacement alongside a wide and complex anatomical variability. An increasing number of Aortic THVs are available in the market. This includes upgraded iterations of contemporary devices and innovative devices developed by emerging manufacturers. The new devices aim for the reduction or elimination of undesirable outcomes like paravalvular leakage and conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker implantation. Alternatively, emerging THVs should provide feasibility regarding yet unproven TAVI indications like Bicuspid aortic valve, aortic regurgitation, or very large anatomy. Furthermore, some of the emerging THVs are designed to tackle the long-term durability issue of biological valves.

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.

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.