Impact of access on TAVI procedural and midterm follow-up: a meta-analysis of 13 studies and 10,468 patients

Alternative access in transcatheter aortic valve replacement-an updated focused review

Aortic Stenosis (AS) is a common condition with an estimated pooled prevalence of all AS in the elderly population at around 12.4%, with that of severe AS estimated to be around 3.4%. In the past, surgical aortic valve replacement was the primary treatment option for severe AS for decades. However, with the compelling evidence on the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), it has become the gold standard treatment option for many patients with symptomatic severe AS. Transfemoral access has been the preferred method for transcatheter heart valve delivery. However, the prevalent use of TAVR on a diverse patient profile with different risk factors, such as peripheral artery disease, precluded the possibility of a transfemoral approach despite the improvement of valves and delivery systems technology. Therefore, alternative TAVR approaches have gained increasing utility in cases where transfemoral access is unfavorable. We review the journey, evolution, and techniques for different approaches of percutaneous TAVR, including transfemoral, transcarotid, transsubclavian/transaxillary, and transcaval approaches, in addition to the traditional "surgical" transaortic and transapical accesses. Consolidating these data highlights each approach's practicality and limitations, providing additional grounding for case-by-case utilization and future clinical research.

Extrathoracic Against Intrathoracic Vascular Accesses for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review With Meta-Analysis

Alternative vascular accesses to transfemoral access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) can be divided into intrathoracic (IT)-transapical and transaortic- and extrathoracic (ET)-transcarotid, transsubclavian, and transaxillary. This study aimed to compare the outcomes and safety of IT and ET accesses for TAVR as alternatives to transfemoral access. A systematic review with meta-analysis was performed by searching PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE databases for all studies comparing IT-TAVR with ET-TAVR published until April 2023. Outcomes included in-hospital or 30-day all-cause mortality (ACM), 1-year ACM, postoperative and 30-day complications. A total of 18 studies with 6,800 IT-TAVR patients and 5,032 ET-TAVR patients were included. IT accesses were associated with a significantly higher risk of in-hospital or 30-day ACM (relative risk 1.99, 95% confidence interval 1.67 to 2.36, p <0.001), and 1-year ACM (relative risk 1.31, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.42, p <0.001). IT-TAVR patients presented more often with postoperative life-threatening bleeding, 30-day new-onset atrial fibrillation or flutter, and 30-day acute kidney injury needing renal replacement therapy. The risks of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation and significant paravalvular leak were lower with IT-TAVR. ET-TAVR patients were more likely to be directly discharged home. There was no statistically significant difference regarding the 30-day risk of stroke. Compared with ET-TAVR, IT-TAVR was associated with higher risks of in-hospital or 30-day ACM, 1-year ACM and higher risks for some critical postprocedural and 30-day complications. Our results suggest that ET-TAVR could be considered as the first-choice alternative approach when transfemoral access is contraindicated.

Clinical outcomes following transapical TAVR with ACURATE neo in the CHANGE neo TA study

Background

A transapical (TA) approach to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be used when a transfemoral (TF) approach is not feasible. The CHANGE neo TA study evaluated patients treated in routine clinical practice via TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo bioprosthetic aortic valve.

Methods and results

This single-arm post-market study had a planned enrolment of 200 subjects; enrolment was terminated early due to declining TA-TAVR procedures at participating centers. Final enrolment was 107 patients (mean age: 79.3 years; 54.2% female; mean STS score at baseline: 6.2%). The mortality rate in the intent-to-treat population was 11.2% at 30 days (primary endpoint) and 25.6% at 12 months. The VARC-2 composite endpoint for 30-day safety occurred in 24.3% of patients. Six patients (5.6%) received a permanent pacemaker within 30 days. Site-reported echocardiographic data showed early improvements in mean aortic valve gradient (baseline: 38.8 [SD 13.1] mmHg, discharge: 6.7 [SD 3.7] mmHg) and effective orifice area (baseline: 0.7 [SD 0.2] cm², discharge: 1.9 [SD 0.6] cm²), and the discharge rate of paravalvular regurgitation was low (74.7% none/trace, 24.2% mild, 1.1% severe).

Conclusions

TA-TAVR with the ACURATE neo valve system yields acceptable clinical outcomes, providing an alternative for patients with aortic stenosis who are not candidates for TF-TAVR.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Young Low-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Review

In the last decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) revolutionized the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. The efficacy and safety of TAVR were first proven in inoperable and high-risk patients. Then, subsequent randomized clinical trials showed non-inferiority of TAVR as compared to surgical aortic valve replacement also in intermediate- and low-risk populations. As TAVR was progressively studied and clinically used in lower-risk patients, issues were raised questioning its opportunity in a younger population with a longer life-expectancy. As long-term follow-up data mainly derive from old studies with early generation devices on high or intermediate surgical risk patients, results can hardly be extended to most of currently treated patients who often show a low surgical risk and are treated with newer generation prostheses. Thus, in this low-risk younger population, decision making is difficult due to the lack of supporting data. The aim of the present review is to revise current literature regarding TAVR in younger patients.

Comparison of surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement for patients with aortic stenosis at low-intermediate risk

Background

To compare safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at low-intermediate risk, given the paucity of robust data.

Methods

We performed an aggregate data meta-analysis of 7 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6,778 patients comparing TAVR with SAVR for aortic stenosis (AS) in low-intermediate risk patients (Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk-score ≤8%) using the random-effects model. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30-day, 1-year and 2-year of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included cardiac-mortality, stroke, acute kidney injury (AKI), atrial fibrillation (AF), permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, major-bleeding, moderate-severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) and rehospitalization.

Results

All-cause mortality, cardiac-mortality and stroke were comparable between the two groups. AF was higher with SAVR at 30-day [odds ratio (OR) 0.17, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.12-0.24] thorough to 2-year (OR 0.34, 95% CI: 0.21-0.55), while PPM implantation was higher with TAVR (30-day: OR 3.31, 95% CI: 1.64-6.66, 2-year: OR 3.17, 95% CI: 1.02-9.86). Moderate-severe PVR was more prevalent with TAVR at all follow-ups. On inter-group comparison, patients in the low-risk group had an even lower risk of AF, but a higher risk of PPM implantation as compared to the patients in the intermediate-risk group undergoing TAVR.

Conclusions

Compared to SAVR, TAVR had comparable all-cause mortality and stroke, lower-risk of AF, but was associated with a higher risk of PPM implantation and moderate-severe PVR in low-intermediate-risk patients. Thus, highlighting the need for longer-term follow-up before robust inferences are drawn.

Which is the best antiaggregant or anticoagulant therapy after TAVI? A propensity-matched analysis from the ITER registry. The management of DAPT after TAVI

AIMS

The safety and efficacy of single vs. dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing TAVI remain to be addressed. The aim of our study was to evaluate the usefulness of a DAPT compared to a single platelet therapy in patients undergoing TAVI with a balloon-expandable prosthesis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All consecutive patients enrolled in the ITER registry were included. Patients undergoing TAVI discharged with aspirin alone were compared to those taking DAPT before and after selection using propensity score with matching. Subgroup analysis was performed for those on OAT. Prosthetic heart valve dysfunction at follow-up was the primary endpoint, whereas all-cause death, cardiovascular death, bleedings, vascular complications and cerebrovascular accidents were the secondary ones. From 1,364 patients, after propensity score with matching, 605 were selected for each group (aspirin alone vs. DAPT). At 30 days, rates of VARC mortality were lower in patients with aspirin alone (1.5% vs. 4.1%, p=0.003), mainly driven by a reduction of major vascular complications (5.3% vs. 10.7%, p<0.001) and of major bleedings (6.6% vs. 11.5%, p<0.001), without a difference in prosthetic heart valve dysfunction after 45±14 months (2.8% vs. 3.0%, p=0.50). These results were confirmed on multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

After TAVI with a balloon-expandable prosthesis, aspirin alone does not increase the risk of prosthetic valve dysfunction, and reduces the risk of periprocedural complications and of 30-day all-cause death.

Transfemoral, transapical and transcatheter aortic valve implantation and surgical aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of direct and adjusted indirect comparisons of early and mid-term deaths

Clinical outcomes of transfemoral-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transapical (TA)-TAVI are limited to a few randomized clinical trials (RCTs). Because previous meta-analyses only included a limited number of adjusted studies or several non-adjusted studies, our goal was to compare and summarize the outcomes of TF-TAVI vs SAVR and TF-TAVI vs TA-TAVI exclusively with the RCT and propensity-matched cohort studies with direct and adjusted indirect comparisons to reach more precise conclusions. We hypothesized that TF-TAVI would offer surgical candidates a better outcome compared with SAVR and TA-TAVI because of its potential for fewer myocardial injuries. A literature search was conducted through PUBMED and EMBASE through June 2016. Only RCTs and propensity-matched cohort studies were included. A direct meta-analysis of TF-TAVI vs SAVR, TA-TAVI vs SAVR and TF-TAVI vs TA-TAVI was conducted. Then, the effect size of an indirect meta-analysis was calculated from the direct meta-analysis. The effect sizes of direct and indirect meta-analyses were then combined. A random-effects model was used to calculate the hazards ratio and the odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Early (in-hospital or 30 days) and mid-term (≥1 year) all-cause mortality rates were assessed. Our search resulted in 4 RCTs (n = 2319) and 14 propensity-matched cohort (n = 7217) studies with 9536 patients of whom 3471, 1769 and 4296 received TF, TA and SAVR, respectively. Direct meta-analyses and combined direct and indirect meta-analyses of early and mid-term deaths with TF-TAVI and SAVR were similar. Early deaths with TF-TAVI vs TA-TAVI were comparable in direct meta-analyses (odds ratio 0.64, P = 0.35) and direct and indirect meta-analyses combined (odds ratio 0.73, P = 0.24). Mid-term deaths with TF-TAVI vs TA-TAVI were increased (hazard ratio 0.83, P = 0.07) in a direct meta-analysis and became significant after addition of the indirect meta-analysis (hazard ratio 0.78, 95% confidence interval 0.67-0.92, P = 0.003). In conclusion, TF-TAVI was associated with similar early and mid-term deaths compared with SAVR. The number of early deaths was not significantly different between TF-TAVI and TA-TAVI, whereas there were fewer mid-term deaths with TF-TAVI than with TA-TAVI.

A New Experimental Device for Transapical Access of the Aortic and Mitral Valves as well as the Aorta in its Various Segments

Objective

To present the results of a new experimental device developed to facilitate the transapical access in endovascular treatment of structural heart diseases. It aims to reduce the risk of bleeding and complications in this type of access and demonstrate the device as a safe, fast and effective alternative.

Methods

CorPoint is composed of three parts: introducer, base with coiled spring, and closing capsule. By rotating movements, the spring is introduced into the myocardium and progressively approaches the base to the surface of the heart. Guidewires and catheters are inserted through the hollow central part and, at the end of the procedure, the capsule is screwed over the base, therefore stopping any bleeding.

Results

The device was implanted in 15 pigs, weighing 60 kg each, through an anterolateral thoracotomy, while catheters were introduced and guided by fluoroscopy. All animals had minimal bleeding; introducers with diameter up to 22 Fr were used and various catheters and guidewires were easily handled. After finishing the procedure, the closing capsule was attached and no bleeding was observed at the site.

Conclusion

This new device has proved effective, fast and secure for the transapical access. This shows great potential for use, especially by ensuring an easier and direct access to the mitral and aortic valves; the shortest distance to be traveled by catheters; access to the ascending and descending aorta; decreased bleeding complications; decreased surgical time; and the possibility of allowing the technique to evolve and become totally percutaneous.

Bending the Rules in Transfemoral TAVI With the SAPIEN 3: Overcoming Severe Iliac Tortuosity

Whilst the worldwide uptake of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) over the last 10 years has been dramatic, iliac tortuosity remains a potential barrier to the most commonly chosen access route via the femoral artery. We describe the challenges posed by severe iliac tortuosity during transfemoral TAVI and contrast a difficult procedure - at the limit of the capability of current device delivery technology - with a straightforward implantation. The use of pre-procedural multi-detector computed tomography to assess the vasculature and a bilateral stiff wire technique for managing iliofemoral tortuosity are discussed.

Impact of clinical and procedural factors upon C reactive protein dynamics following transcatheter aortic valve implantation

AIM: To determine the effect of procedural and clinical factors upon C reactive protein (CRP) dynamics following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS: Two hundred and eight consecutive patients that underwent transfemoral TAVI at two hospitals (Imperial, College Healthcare NHS Trust, Hammersmith Hospital, London, United Kingdom and San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy) were included. Daily venous plasma CRP levels were measured for up to 7 d following the procedure (or up to discharge). Procedural factors and 30-d safety outcomes according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 definition were collected.

RESULTS: Following TAVI, CRP significantly increased reaching a peak on day 3 of 87.6 ± 5.5 mg/dL, P < 0.001. Patients who developed clinical signs and symptoms of sepsis had significantly increased levels of CRP (P < 0.001). The presence of diabetes mellitus was associated with a significantly higher peak CRP level at day 3 (78.4 ± 3.2 vs 92.2 ± 4.4, P < 0.001). There was no difference in peak CRP release following balloon-expandable or self-expandable TAVI implantation (94.8 ± 9.1 vs 81.9 ± 6.9, P = 0.34) or if post-dilatation was required (86.9 ± 6.3 vs 96.6 ± 5.3, P = 0.42), however, when pre-TAVI balloon aortic valvuloplasty was performed this resulted in a significant increase in the peak CRP (110.1 ± 8.9 vs 51.6 ± 3.7, P < 0.001). The development of a major vascular complication did result in a significantly increased maximal CRP release (153.7 ± 11.9 vs 83.3 ± 7.4, P = 0.02) and there was a trend toward a higher peak CRP following major/life-threatening bleeding (113.2 ± 9.3 vs 82.7 ± 7.5, P = 0.12) although this did not reach statistical significance. CRP was not found to be a predictor of 30-d mortality on univariate analysis.

CONCLUSION: Careful attention should be paid to baseline clinical characteristics and procedural factors when interpreting CRP following TAVI to determine their future management.

An up-to-date overview of the most recent transcatheter implantable aortic valve prostheses

Over the past decade transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has evolved towards the routine therapy for high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. Technical refinements in TAVI are rapidly evolving with a simultaneous expansion of the number of available devices. This review will present an overview of the current status of development of TAVI-prostheses; describes the technical features and applicability of each device and the clinical data available.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation--update and evidence

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (T-AVI) has become the standard of care for high-risk patients suffering from severe aortic valve stenosis. More than 60,000 implants have been performed to date. While the first-generation T-AVI devices had some specific issues, the advancements in these first-generation devices and the development of second-generation devices significantly reduced the incidence of peri-procedural complications. The two major access routes are the transfemoral (TF) and the transapical (TA) approach. Both approaches have their advantages and should be considered equal alternatives for finding the best treatment option for the individual patient. Currently there are discussions about extending the indication to patients with lower risk profiles. However, there is no real evidence to justify an expansion, as results of surgical aortic valve replacement in low and intermediate risk patients are excellent.

Indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation--now and next?

Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common valvular pathology and its prevalence is expected to increase rapidly in coming decades as a consequence of the increasingly elderly population. Without treatment, severe symptomatic AS has a very poor prognosis with a mortality of 50% at two years. Whilst surgical aortic valve replacement is the gold standard treatment, a significant minority of patients are deemed inoperable and declined surgery due to prohibitively high risk. The advent of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionised their treatment. In this review, we discuss current indications for TAVI, other applications of this technology and future indications.

Usefulness and validation of the survival posT TAVI score for survival after transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis

Surgical risk scores fail to accurately predict mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to develop and validate a dedicated risk score for accurate estimation of mortality risk in these patients. All consecutive patients who underwent TAVI at 6 international institutions were enrolled. Predictors for 1-year all-cause mortality were identified by means of Cox multivariate analysis and incorporated in a prediction score. Accuracy of the score was derived and externally validated for 30-day and 1-year mortality. The net classification improvement compared with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was appraised. A total of 1,064 patients constituted the derivation cohort and 180 patients constituted the external validation cohort. A total of 165 patients (15%) died at 1-year follow-up. Previous stroke (odds ratio [OR] 1.80, 1.4 to 3), inverse of renal clearance (OR 8, 6 to 14), and systolic pulmonary arterial pressure ≥50 mm Hg (OR 2.10, 1.5 to 3) were independently related to 1-year mortality. Area under the curve (AUC) of the survival post TAVI (STT) for 1-year mortality was 0.68 (0.62 to 0.71). At 30 days, 65 patients (7%) had died and the AUC for the STT at this time point was 0.66 (0.64 to 0.75). In the external validation cohorts, the AUC of the STT were 0.66 (0.56 to 0.7) for 30-day and 0.67 (0.62 to 0.71) for 1-year mortality. Net reclassification improvement for STT compared with STS was 31% (p <0.001) for 30-day mortality and 14% (p <0.001) for 1-year mortality. In conclusion, the STT score represents an easy and accurate tool to assess the risk of short-term and mid-term mortality in patients undergoing TAVI.

[Transcatheter aortic valve implantation]

As the French population is aging, a growing number of elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis are going to require therapeutic management. Approximately 30 to 40 % of these patients do not undergo surgical treatment and a high proportion is considered to be at high risk for surgery. The transluminal aortic valve implantation technique has been increasingly used over the past few years, thus providing a solution to a major therapeutic issue in our industrialized countries. Thanks to major randomized studies such as the PARTNER US trial, this treatment has been approved for high-risk patients. Expertise and new devices are now opening the way to intermediate risk population.