Short-Term Outcome and Hemodynamic Performance of Next-Generation Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valves in Patients With Small Aortic Annulus: A Multicenter Propensity-Matched Comparison

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Small and Very Small Aortic Valve Annuli: A Propensity-Matched Analysis Between Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valves

BACKGROUND

The management of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA) postures a substantial challenge, increasing the risk of patient- prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and overall mortality.

AIMS

This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic and clinical outcomes of transcatheter balloon-expandable valve (BEV) versus transcatheter self-expandable valve (SEV) in SAA.

METHODS

We conducted propensity score matching (PSM) of severe AS patients with SAA who underwent trans-femoral TAVR and enrolled to the Israeli TAVR registry between the years 2008 and 2023. SAA was defined as an aortic-valve annulus area ≤ 430 mm2. Since the BEV used have a smaller size cut-off, an additional analysis on very small aortic annulus (vSAA) as defined as aortic-valve annulus area ≤ 345 mm2 was performed.

RESULTS

The study included 1364 consecutive patients with SAA of (BEV n = 485; SEV n = 879) at a mean age of 82 ± 7 years, of whom the vast majority were female (83%). Propensity-matched groups comprised of 329 and 122 paired for the SAA and vSAA patients, respectively. As compared to BEV in the SAA and vSAA analyses, SEV showed lower rates of postprocedural of LBBB (32% vs. 22% and 41% vs. 22%; both p < 0.01, respectively), however, higher rates of major vascular complications (2% vs. 7% and 2% vs. 12%; both p < 0.01, respectively) and major or life-threatening bleeding but only in vSAA group (17% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.009). One-month mortality was higher in the SEV versus BEV in both SAA and vSAA comparisons (2% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.048 and 3% vs. 0%, p = 0.018; respectively). A nonsignificant trend of higher 5-year mortality was observed in univariate models, noted mainly in vSAA patients (22% vs. 19%, p = 0.385; 24% vs. 15%, p = 0.073).

CONCLUSIONS

The present analysis observed higher rates of major vascular complications and 1-month mortality in SAA and vSAA treated with SEV. A similar nonsignificant trend toward long-term mortality for the vSAA group was observed and should be evaluated in larger cohorts.

Morphological Characteristics Following Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve Implantation and Implications for Hypoattenuating Leaflet Thickening

BACKGROUND

Hypoattenuating leaflet thickening (HALT) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may compromise valve durability, posing a significant barrier to the broader adoption of this technology among younger patients. Self-expanding valves (SEVs) are the most commonly used transcatheter heart valves (THVs) among Chinese patients with aortic stenosis. Understanding the potential mechanisms underlying HALT is, therefore, critical to guide future THV design and development.

AIMS

Identify morphological factors associated with HALT Unidentified after SEVs implantation.

METHODS

This study included 195 consecutive patients from Fuwai Hospital who underwent TAVR with SEVs. All participants underwent their first postoperative 4D-CT scan within 6 months of the procedure. Key parameters following THV implantation were measured and recorded using 3mensio software. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were applied to identify associations between variables and HALT. Discriminatory ability was assessed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis, followed by bootstrap validation for model robustness.

RESULTS

HALT was observed in 36.4% of patients (71 out of 195 patients). New sinus height (NSH) and leaflet outflow area were identified as independent risk factors for HALT. The areas under the curve (AUC) for NSH and leaflet outflow area were 0.689 (95% CI: 0.612-0.767) and 0.602 (95% CI: 0.521-0.683), respectively, with no significant difference between them (p = 0.082). Bootstrap validation confirmed the robustness of both NSH and leaflet outflow area, showing performance comparable to the initial stepwise model.

CONCLUSION

NSH and leaflet outflow area were identified as critical post-THV implantation parameters associated with HALT in TAVR patients treated with SEVs. These findings provide valuable insights that could inform the future design and optimization of SEVs.

Self-Expandable Versus Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Treatment of Patients With Small Aortic Annulus: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Individual Patient Data

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement has emerged as an effective alternative to surgery in selected patients with aortic stenosis. It needs to be made clear which type of valve has better results in patients with small aortic annulus. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. A total of 27 articles were included, including 10,378 patients [5989 in balloon-expanding valve (BEV) and 4389 in the self-expanding valve (SEV) groups] with small aortic annulus. Our meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference between SEVs and BEVs for 1-year all-cause mortality. There was a statistically significant increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) within 30 days and ischemic stroke at 1 year with SEVs [risk ratio (RR) = 1.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.18-2.42, P < 0.01, and RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.03-3.26, P = 0.04, respectively]. Our meta-analysis showed that SEVs are favored over BEVs in terms of 1-year change from baseline in effective orifice area (mean difference = 0.45, 95% CI = 0.19-0.71, P < 0.01). Moreover, after 1-year follow-up, severe patient-prosthesis mismatch was significantly lower in the SEV group (RR = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.11-0.53, P < 0.01). In conclusion, SEVs were associated with better echocardiographic outcomes from baseline. Patients with SEVs were more likely to develop stroke and require PPI but were less likely to have patient-prosthesis mismatch. The benefit of a larger effective aortic valve area with SEVs has to be balanced against higher PPI and stroke rates.

Hemodynamic and clinical outcomes with balloon-expandable valves versus self-expanding valves in patients with small aortic annulus undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and propensity score matched studies

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is considered more effective than surgical aortic valve implantation for patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA), however, the comparative efficacy of different transcatheter heart valves (THVs) remains uncertain. A literature search was performed across databases from their inception until June 2024 to identify eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity-score matched (PSM) studies. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using a random-effects model to pool risk ratios (RRs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). The analysis included 10 studies with 2,960 patients. BEVs were associated with a significantly smaller indexed effective orifice area (MD: -0.18, 95 % CI: -0.27 to -0.10), and a higher transvalvular mean pressure gradient (MD: 5.07, 95 % CI 3.43 to 6.71) than SEVs. The risk for prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (RR = 1.89, 95 % CI: 1.42 to 2.51) and severe PPM (RR = 2.80, 95 % CI: 1.96 to 4.0) was significantly higher for patients receiving BEVs than those receiving SEVs. Although nonsignificant differences were observed between BEVs and SEVs regarding 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality, 30-day stroke rates, vascular complication, paravalvular leak, and permanent pacemaker implantation (p > 0.05), patients receiving BEVs were associated with a significantly increased risk of 1-year cardiovascular mortality (RR = 1.61, 95 % CI: 1.05 to 2.47) compared to those receiving SEVs. In patients with SAA, BEVs demonstrated worse hemodynamic performance as determined by the higher risk of moderate and severe PPM compared to SEVs. Moreover, the use of BEVs was associated with a higher risk of 1-year cardiovascular mortality.

Left Ventricular Hypertrophy Regression Following Transcatheter Aortic Replacement: A Comparison of Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Prostheses

There are limited reports on the impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) on the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We compared the relative effects of supra-annular, self-expanding (SE) versus intra-annular, balloon-expandable (BE) prostheses on TAVR LVH regression. Regression of left ventricular mass index (LVMi) was evaluated in 168 consecutive TAVR patients, including 60 treated with SE valves (Evolut series) and 108 treated with BE valves (Sapien 3). All patients had LVH determined at baseline by echocardiography and had repeat LVMi measurements at a mean follow-up time of 707 ± 528 days. SE patients were more likely female (68.3% vs 46.3%, p = 0.007), but otherwise, the 2 cohorts did not differ with respect to baseline demographics and Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score. SE patients had a higher effective orifice area indexed to body surface area after TAVR (0.98 ± 0.29 vs 0.86 ± 0.25 cm²/m², p = 0.006), with lower mean aortic valve gradients (9.9 ± 6.5 vs 12.8 ± 5.8 mm Hg, p = 0.003) and a lower prevalence of moderate/severe PPM (33.3% vs 49.1%, p = 0.049). On follow-up, changes in LVMi were similar between the SE and BE groups, with similar absolute changes in LVMi (19.2 ± 26.8 vs 21.9 ± 31.7 g/m2, p = 0.578) and relative LVMi decrease (14.0 ± 19.5 vs 16.2% ± 24.2%, p = 0.547). No difference in LVMi regression was also noted comparing combined SE/BE patients with moderate/severe PPM versus those without PPM. In conclusion, despite differences in effective orifice area indexed to body surface area, mean aortic valve gradient, and PPM after TAVR, the degree of LVH regression during intermediate follow-up did not differ between patients receiving supra-annular SE and intra-annular BE prostheses.

Efficacy and safety of TAVR versus SAVR in patients with small aortic annuli: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients with a small aortic annulus (SAA) undergoing aortic valve replacement are at increased risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM), which adversely affects outcomes. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has shown promise in mitigating PPM compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines to compare clinical outcomes, mortality, and PPM between SAA patients undergoing TAVR and SAVR. Eligible studies were identified through comprehensive literature searches and assessed for quality and relevance.

RESULTS

Nine studies with a total of 2476 patients were included. There was no significant difference in 30-day Mortality between TAVR vs SAVR groups (OR = 0.65, 95% CI [ 0.09-4.61], P = 0.22). There was no difference between both groups regarding myocardial infarction at 30 days (OR = 0.63, 95% CI [0.1-3.89], P = 0.62). TAVR was associated with a significantly lower 30-day major bleeding and 2-year major bleeding, Pooled studies were homogeneous (OR = 0.44, 95% CI [0.31-0.64], P < 0.01, I2 = 0, P = 0.89), (OR = 0.4 ,95% CI [0.21-0.77], P = 0.03, I2 = 0%, P = 0.62) respectively. TAVR was associated with a lower rate of moderate PPM (OR = 0.6, 95% CI [ 0.44-0.84], p value = 0.01, i2 = 0%, p value = 0.44). The overall effect estimate did not favor any of the two groups regarding short-term Mild AR (OR = 5.44, 95% CI [1.02-28.91], P = 0.05) and Moderate/severe AR (OR = 4.08, 95% CI [ 0.79-21.02], P = 0.08, I2 = 0%, P = 0.59).

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that both TAVR and SAVR are viable options for treating AS in patients with a small aortic annulus. TAVR offers advantages in reducing PPM and major bleeding, while SAVR performs better in terms of pacemaker implantation. Future studies should focus on comparing newer generation TAVR techniques and devices with SAVR. Consideration of patient characteristics is crucial in selecting the optimal treatment approach for AS.

Hemodynamic effect of supra-annular implantation of SAPIEN 3 balloon expandable valve

The hemodynamic impact of the implantation depth for balloon-expandable valves is under-investigated, especially with higher implantation techniques. We assessed the hemodynamic performance of supra-annular SAPIEN 3 valve implantation. This retrospective study involved consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the SAPIEN 3. The device implantation depth and transcatheter heart valve (THV) leaflet-nadir position were angiographically analyzed, and supra-annular implantation was defined as a higher leaflet-nadir position than the original annular line. The Doppler hemodynamic status was evaluated at patient discharge. Among 184 patients, 120 (65%) underwent supra-annular implantation, and their mean implantation depth was significantly lower than that of intra-annular implantation (1.1 vs. 5.2 mm, p < 0.001). No patients developed valve embolization or coronary occlusion, and none required the TAV-in-TAV procedure. Two (1.6%) patients in the supra-annular implantation group had a mild or greater paravalvular leak. Echocardiography demonstrated that supra-annular implantation had better hemodynamic performance, showing a larger indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) compared with intra-annular implantation (1.09 vs. 0.97 cm2/m2, p < 0.01). There was a weak but negative correlation between the implantation depth and iEOA (r =  - 0.27, p < 0.01). Moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) was found in 35.9% of the intra-annular group and 9.2% of supra-annular of the supra-annular group (p < 0.01). In the multivariable analysis, supra-annular implantation was an independent predictor of better THV function (iEOA > 0.85). Supra-annular SAPIEN 3 implantation provides beneficial hemodynamic effects and reduces the PPM risk.

Late Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation with Balloon-Versus Self-Expandable Valves: Meta-Analysis of Reconstructed Time-To-Event Data

Self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV) for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have their own features. There is a growing interest in long-term outcomes with the adoption of lifetime management in younger patients. To evaluate late outcomes in TAVI with SEV versus BEV, we performed a study-level meta-analysis of reconstructed time-to-event data published by May 31, 2023. We found no statistically significant difference in all-cause death after TAVI with SEV versus BEV. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to validate our results.

Sutureless Aortic Valve Replacement vs. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients with Small Aortic Annulus: Clinical and Hemodynamic Outcomes from a Multi-Institutional Study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to compare hemodynamic performances and clinical outcomes of patients with small aortic annulus (SAA) who underwent aortic valve replacement by means of sutureless aortic valve replacement (SUAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

METHODS

From 2015 to 2020, 622 consecutive patients with SAA underwent either SUAVR or TAVI. Through a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis, two homogeneous groups of 146 patients were formed. Primary endpoint: all cause-death at 36 months. Secondary endpoints: incidence of moderate to severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs).

RESULTS

All-cause death at three years was higher in the TAVI group (SUAVR 12.2% vs. TAVI 21.0%, P=0.058). Perioperatively, comparable hemodynamic performances were recorded in terms of indexed effective orifice area (SUAVR 1.12 ± 0.23 cm2/m2 vs. TAVI 1.17 ± 0.28 cm2/m2, P=0.265), mean transvalvular gradients (SUAVR 12.9 ± 5.3 mmHg vs. TAVI 12.2 ± 6.2 mmHg, P=0.332), and moderate-to-severe PPM (SUAVR 4.1% vs. TAVI 8.9%, P=0.096). TAVI group showed a higher cumulative incidence of MACCEs at 36 months (SUAVR 18.1% vs. TAVI 32.6%, P<0.001). Pacemaker implantation (PMI) and perivalvular leak ≥ 2 were significantly higher in TAVI group and identified as independent predictors of mortality (PMI: hazard ratio [HR] 3.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-6.94, P=0.008; PPM: HR 2.72, 95% CI 1.25-5.94, P=0.012).

CONCLUSION

In patients with SAA, SUAVR and TAVI showed comparable hemodynamic performances. Moreover, all-cause death and incidence of MACCEs at follow-up were significantly higher in TAVI group.

Comparing outcomes of balloon-expandable vs. self-expandable valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Aortic stenosis (AS) is a common heart condition categorized into congenital and acquired forms. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an innovative method for AS management, and two valve types, self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV), are used in TAVR. The objective of this study is to compare the clinical outcomes associated with balloon-expandable and self-expandable valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Methods

The researchers conducted a comprehensive meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines and AMSTAR-2 tool. The methodology involved a systematic literature search, strict eligibility criteria, unbiased study selection, meticulous data extraction, quality assessment, and rigorous statistical analysis.

Results

Our analysis included twenty-six papers and 26 553 patients. BEV exhibited significant advantages over SEV in overall mortality across 21 studies, particularly in perioperative and 30-day assessments. However, no substantial disparities emerged between the two valve types in stroke incidence. BEV demonstrated notable benefits in reducing hospitalization rates across 6 studies and significantly fewer instances of permanent pacemaker implantations across 19 studies, particularly evident in the perioperative setting. Other secondary outcomes like bleeding, acute kidney injury, and myocardial infarction showcased non-significant differences between BEV and SEV.

Conclusion

The analysis indicates that BEV may offer benefits in specific aspects of TAVR outcomes, but further research is needed to fully understand the factors influencing patient outcomes and mortality in TAVR procedures.

ACURATE neo2 Versus SAPIEN 3 Ultra Transcatheter Heart Valve in Severe Aortic Valve Calcification: A Propensity-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Comparative data on transcatheter self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (NEO2) and balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra prostheses in technically challenging anatomy of severe aortic valve calcified aortic annuli are scarce.

METHODS

A total of 1987 patients with severe native aortic stenosis treated with the self-expanding NEO2 (n=1457) or balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (n=530) from January 2017 to April 2023 were evaluated. The primary end point was procedural outcome according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 definitions. Propensity matching defined 219 pairs with severe calcification (calcium density cutoff, 758 AU/cm2) of the native aortic valve.

RESULTS

Technical success (90.4% versus 91.8%; risk difference, 1.4% [95% CI, -4.4 to -7.2]; P=0.737) and device success at 30 days (80.8% versus 75.8%; risk difference, -5.0% [95% CI, -13.2 to 3.1]; P=0.246) were comparable between NEO2 and SAPIEN 3 Ultra. The rate of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (1.1% versus 10.1%; risk difference, 10.0% [95% CI, 4.0-13.9]; P<0.001) and mean transvalvular gradient ≥20 mm Hg (2.8% versus 14.3%; risk difference, 11.5% [95% CI, 5.8-17.1]; P<0.001) was lower with NEO2. The rate of more-than-mild paravalvular leakage or valve-in-valve due to paravalvular leakage was significantly higher (6.2% versus 0.0%; risk difference, 6.2% [95% CI, -10.1 to -2.7]; P=0.002), and there was a tendency for a higher rate of device embolization or migration (1.8% versus 0.0%; risk difference, -1.8% [95% CI, -4.1 to 0.4]; P=0.123) with NEO2. Multivarate regression revealed no independent impact of transcatheter heart valve selection on device success (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.48-1.77]; P=0.817).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severely calcified annuli, supraannular implantation of NEO2 showed hemodynamic advantages. Nevertheless, NEO2 was associated with a higher incidence of relevant paravalvular leakage and a numerically higher rate of device embolization than SAPIEN 3 Ultra in this particular patient group.

Experience with the ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves in Spain. The PRECISA (PRospective Evaluation Complementing Investigation with ACURATE devices) registry

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have documented a high rate of implantation success with the ACURATE neo2 valve, as well as a reduction in paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to its predecessor, the ACURATE neo. However, there are no studies that have reviewed and compared the long-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of these patients.

AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the results of the ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve in a real-world context, and to compare the results of the outcomes of both generations of this device (ACURATE neo and ACURATE neo2), with a specific focus on procedural success, safety, and long-term effectiveness.

METHODS

A prospective study including all consecutive patients treated with the ACURATE neo device in seven hospitals was conducted (Clinical Trials Identification Number: NCT03846557). The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of adverse events, including mortality, aortic insufficiency, and other procedural complications. As the second-generation device (ACURATE neo2) replaced the ACURATE neo during the study period, hemodynamic and clinical results before admission, at 30 days, and at 1 year of follow-up were compared between the two generations.

RESULTS

A total of 296 patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the ACURATE device, with 178 patients receiving the ACURATE neo and 118 patients receiving the ACURATE neo2. In the overall population, the absence of device success occurred in 14.5%. The primary reason for the absence of device success was the presence of para-valvular regurgitation ≥ 2. There were no instances of coronary occlusions, valve embolization, annulus rupture, or procedural deaths. ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significantly higher device success rate (91.7% vs. 82%, p = 0.04), primarily due to a significantly lower rate of para-valvular regurgitation, which remained significant at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

The use of ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves is associated with satisfactory clinical results and an extremely low rate of complications. The ACURATE neo2 enables a significantly higher device success rate, primarily attributed to a significant reduction in the rate of PVL.

Comparison of contemporary transcatheter heart valve prostheses: data from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY)

BACKGROUND

Various second-generation transcatheter heart valve (THV) prostheses with high clinical efficacy and safety are available, but there is limited large-scale data available comparing their hemodynamic performance and clinical implications.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the hemodynamic performance and short-term clinical outcome of four second-generation THV prostheses.

METHODS

24,124 patients out of the German Aortic Valve Registry who underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) (Evolut™ R n = 7028, Acurate neo™ n = 2922, Portico n = 878 and Sapien 3 n = 13,296) were included in this analysis. Propensity-score weighted analysis was performed to control for differences in age, left ventricular function, STS score and sex. Primary endpoint was survival at one-year, secondary endpoints were 30 days survival, pre-discharge transvalvular gradients, paravalvular leakage and peri-procedural complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-day and one-year survival were not significantly different between the four patient groups. Transvalvular gradients in Evolut™ R and Acurate neo™ were significantly lower as compared to Portico and Sapien 3 at hospital discharge. This difference exists across all annulus sizes. Paravalvular leakage ≥ II occurred significantly less often in the Sapien 3 group (1.2%, p < 0.0001). Rate of severe procedural complications was low and comparable in all groups. Permanent pacemaker implantation rate at one year was lowest in the ACUARATE neo group (13.0%) and highest in the Evolut™ R group (21.9%).

CONCLUSION

Albeit comparable short-term clinical outcomes there are certain differences regarding hemodynamic performance and permanent pacemaker implantation rate between currently available THV prostheses which should be considered for individual prosthesis selection.

Valve Hemodynamics by Valve Size and 1-Year Survival Following Implantation of the Portico Valve in the Multicenter CONFIDENCE Registry

Background

The CONtrolled delivery For ImproveD outcomEs with cliNiCal Evidence registry was initiated to characterize the clinical safety and device performance from experienced transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) centers in Europe and Australia that use the Portico valve to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis. We herein report for the first time the valve performance at 30-day across all implanted valve sizes and the 1-year survival from this registry.

Methods

This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm observational clinical investigation of patients clinically indicated for implantation of a Portico valve in experienced TAVI centers. Patients were treated with a commercially available valve (size 23, 25, 27, or 29 mm) using either the first-generation delivery system (DS) (n = 501) or the second-generation (FlexNav) DS (n = 500). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. Echocardiographic outcomes were assessed at 30 days by an independent core laboratory, and a survival check was performed at 1 year.

Results

We enrolled 1001 patients (82.0 years, 62.5% female, 63.7% New York Heart Association functional class III/IV at baseline) from 27 clinical sites in 8 countries across Europe and one site in Australia. Implantation of a single valve was successful in 97.5% of subjects. Valve hemodynamics at 30 days were substantially improved relative to baseline, with large aortic valve areas and low mean gradients across all implanted valve sizes (aortic valve areas were 1.7 ± 0.4, 1.7 ± 0.5, 1.8 ± 0.5, and 2.0 ± 0.5 cm2, and mean gradients were 7.0 ± 2.7, 7.5 ± 4.7, 7.3 ± 3.3, and 6.4 ± 3.3 mmHg for 23, 25, 27, and 29 mm valve sizes, respectively). Across all implanted valve sizes, most patients (77.1%) had no patient-prosthesis mismatch. Death from any cause within 1 year occurred in 13.7% of the patients in the first-generation DS group as compared with 11.0% in the second-generation DS group (p = 0.2).

Conclusions

The Portico valve demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance across all valve sizes in a large cohort of subjects implanted in experienced TAVI centers. One-year survival rates were favorable when using both the first-generation and second-generation (FlexNav) DSs in this high-risk cohort.

ClinicalTrialsgov Identifier

NCT03752866.

Optimizing Valve Selection in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Case Study on Addressing Patient-Prosthesis Mismatch and Early Structural Valve Deterioration in a Morbidly Obese Patient

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has increasingly become a fundamental approach for treating aortic valve stenosis (AVS), especially in high surgical risk patients. This case study underscores the criticality of meticulous procedural planning and precise valve selection in patients with severe AVS compounded by obesity. We report a case of a patient who, after receiving a 26 mm Edwards Sapiens 3 valve, presented with worsening exertional dyspnea and a declining indexed effective orifice area (EOAi). This deterioration indicated early structural valve deterioration (SVD), presumably due to patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM). A subsequent valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR using a 29 mm Medtronic Evolut Fx valve was successfully executed, leading to a notable improvement in EOAi. This case study emphasizes the complexities inherent in valve choice and sizing in TAVR, particularly highlighting the impact of PPM on obese patients and its potential to precipitate early SVD. The report further explores the emerging strategies in addressing TAVR valve dysfunctions via ViV interventions, shedding light on the nuanced and dynamic nature of TAVR management in obese patients. It advocates for tailored treatment strategies in managing such intricate cases, demonstrating the evolving landscape of TAVR procedures.

Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valves Optimize Transvalvular Hemodynamics Independent of Intra- Versus Supra-Annular Design

This study sought to characterize transvalvular hemodynamics during the first 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) across various transcatheter heart valves (THVs), while adjusting for annular dimensions. This was an observational study of TAVIs from September 2021 to October 2022. The primary outcome was mean transvalvular pressure gradient (TVPG), measured using transthoracic echocardiography at day 0, day 1, and day 30 post-TAVI, and were compared across 3 THV, including the self-expandable intra-annular Portico (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) valve, the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California), and the self-expandable supra-annular Evolut Pro+ (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). A total of 560 patients who underwent TAVI were identified, of which 106 (18.9%) received a Portico THV, 176 (31.4%) received a SAPIEN THV, and 278 (49.6%) received an Evolut THV. For Portico THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.0 (4.7 to 9.0) to 7.0 (6.0 to 10.0) by day 30 (p = 0.009). For SAPIEN THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.5 (5.0 to 8.0) to 12.0 (9.0 to 15.0) by day 30 (p <0.001). For Evolut THV, the TVPG on day 0 increased from 6.0 (5.0 to 9.0) to 7.2 (5.0 to 10.0) by day 30 (p = 0.001). Adjusting for time and annular diameter in a multivariable mixed effects model, the SAPIEN group had a significantly greater increase in TVPG over time than the Evolut reference group (p <0.001), while there was no difference in the change of TVPG over time for the Portico group vs. the Evolut group (p = 0.874). In conclusion, compared with balloon-expandable valves, self-expanding THV may optimize transvalvular hemodynamics across all annular diameters, independent of their supra-annular and intra-annular design.

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annulus: A Meta-Analysis

Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a superior option to surgery in patients with small aortic annulus (SAA), it is not clear which type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) has better results in terms of echocardiographic hemodynamics and clinical outcomes. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) and self-expanding valves (SEVs) in patients with SAA who underwent TAVI regarding their impact on hemodynamic and clinical outcomes at short- and midterm follow-up. Relative risk (RR) and mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were measured for the outcomes, as appropriate. Subgroup analyses were performed based on the generation type of devices and study designs. A total of 16 articles comprising 1 randomized trial, 3 propensity-matched studies, and 12 observational studies including 4,341 patients (1,967 in BEV and 2,374 in the SEV group) with SAA were included. The implantation of BEVs correlated with a lower indexed effective orifice area (MD -0.19 [-0.25 to -0.13]) and higher transvalvular mean pressure gradient (MD 3.91, 95% CI 2.96 to 4.87). Compared with SEVs, BEVs had increased risk of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM; RR 2.09, 95% CI 1.79 to 2.45) and severe PPM (RR 2.16, 95% CI 1.48 to 3.15). However, BEV had lower moderate and severe paravalvular leak (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.69), risk of stroke (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.76), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.91). The 1-year all-cause mortality (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49) and cardiac-related mortality (RR 1.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 9.81) were not different between the 2 groups. In conclusion, SEVs were associated with larger indexed effective orifice area and lower PPM but higher paravalvular leak. In contrast, patients with SEVs were more likely to develop stroke and required permanent pacemaker implantation. Both THVs did not show difference in terms of early and midterm all-cause and cardiac mortality. Because both types of THVs show similar results regarding mortality data, hemodynamics should be among the factors considered in decision making for patients with SAA who underwent TAVI.

Case report: Self-expanding transcatheter valve implantation (Acurate Neo 2) in a very small native aortic annulus

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) and intermediate-to-high surgical risk. The presence of a small aortic annulus (SAA) has been associated with a higher incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) when surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) is performed. TAVR might be a treatment option offering better hemodynamics with a lower incidence of PPM. When a severe AS with a SAA is treated, TAVR-related risk as the coronary obstruction and the annulus rupture, must be also prevented. We present a case of a TAVR in a very small aortic annulus; to our knowledge, this is the smallest native aortic annulus treated percutaneously in a tricuspid stenotic aortic valve with a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve (THV) Acurate Neo 2.

The Evolving Role of Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Transcatheter Valvular Procedures

Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has long been the standard treatment for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). However, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a minimally invasive alternative; it was initially intended for high-risk patients and has now expanded its use to patients of all risk groups. While TAVR has demonstrated promising outcomes in diverse patient populations, uncertainties persist regarding its long-term durability and potential complications, raising the issue of the ideal lifetime management strategy for patients with AS. Therefore, SAVR continues to play an important role in clinical practice, particularly in younger patients with longer life expectancies, those with complex aortic anatomy who are unsuitable for TAVR, and those requiring concomitant surgical procedures. The choice between TAVR and SAVR warrants personalized decision-making, considering patient characteristics, comorbidities, anatomical considerations, and overall life expectancy. A multidisciplinary approach involving an experienced heart team is crucial in the preoperative evaluation process. In this review, we aimed to explore the current role of surgical management in addressing aortic valve stenosis amidst the expanding utilization of less invasive transcatheter procedures.

Self-expanding vs. balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in small aortic annuli

Background

Clinical consequences of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is currently in the focus of clinical research. Patients with small aortic annulus are at higher risk to display PPM. Data on incidence and clinical consequences of PPM after TAVR with either balloon-expandable (BEV) or self-expanding (SEV) transcatheter heart valves in small aortic annulus are sparse.

Methods

Patients with small aortic annulus (perimeter < 72 mm or aortic annulus area < 400 mm2) who underwent BEV or SEV with contemporary transcatheter heart valve types were identified from the institutional TAVR database. Propensity score matching was applied for imbalanced baseline characteristics between patients undergoing BEV or SEV. Echocardiography and clinical follow-up beyond 3 years was reported following VARC-3 recommendations. Primary endpoint was the incidence of pre-discharge PPM and its association with 3-year mortality.

Results

From a total of 507 patients with small aortic annulus, 192 matched patient pairs with SEV or BEV were identified. Mean age was 81 ± 7 (SEV) vs. 81 ± 6 (BEV) years (p = 0.5), aortic annulus perimeter was 69 ± 3 vs.69 ± 3 mm, (p = 0.8), annulus area was 357 ± 27 vs.357 ± 27 mm2 (p = 0.8), and EuroScore II was 5.8 ± 6.6 vs.5.7 ± 7.2 (p = 0.9). SEV resulted in less moderate (20% vs. 31%, p < 0.001) and severe pre-discharge PPM (9% vs.18%, p < 0.001) compared to BEV. At discharge (7 ± 4 vs. 12 ± 9 mmHg, p = 0.003) and at 1-year follow-up (7 ± 5 vs.13 ± 3 mmHg, p < 0.001), SEV displayed lower mean gradients compared to BEV. Estimated survival after SEV was 85% (95% confidence interval (CI): 80%-90%) at 1 year, 80% (95% CI: 75%-86%) at 2 years, and 71% (95% CI: 65%-78%) at 3 years; estimated survival after BEV was 87% (95% CI: 82%-92%) at 1 year, 81% (95% CI: 75%-86%) at 2 years, and 72% (95% CI: 66%-79%) at 3 years, with no significant difference among the groups (p = 0.9) Body surface area (OR: 1.35, p < 0.001), implantation of BEV (odds ratio (OR): 3.32, p < 0.001), and the absence of postdilatation (OR: 2.16, p < 0.001) were independent risk factors for any PPM. At 3 years, patients without PPM had a higher 3-year survival compared with patients with ≥moderate PPM (77% vs. 67%, p = 0.03).

Conclusion

BEV implantation in patients with small annulus was associated with a twofold higher incidence of pre-discharge severe PPM compared to SEV implantation. Survival at 3 years after TAVR was similar after BEV and SEV. However, patients with the absence of pre-discharge PPM had a higher 3-year survival compared to patients with ≥moderate PPM.

The Early neo2 Registry: Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With ACURATE neo2 in a European Population

Background ACURATE neo2 is a transcatheter aortic valve implantation system consisting of a self-expanding bioprosthetic valve with supra-annular leaflet position and featuring innovations to facilitate placement accuracy and reduce paravalvular regurgitation. Methods and Results The goal of the Early neo2 (Early neo2 Registry of the ACURATE neo2 TAVI Prosthesis) was to gather real-life data on safety and efficacy in a European transcatheter aortic valve implantation population treated with ACURATE neo2. Data were collected from 554 consecutive patients treated with ACURATE neo2 at 12 European sites (mean age, 82 years; 66% women; mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II, 4.5%±3.8%) between September 2020 and March 2021. The composite primary end point was the occurrence of any of the following: postoperative (in-hospital) paravalvular regurgitation grade ≥2, in-hospital acute kidney injury stage 3, postoperative pacemaker implantation, 30-day death, and 30-day stroke. The primary end point occurred in 12.6% of patients. The 30-day rates for all-cause death and all stroke were 1.3% and 2.7%, respectively, and 1.5% of patients exhibited stage 3 acute kidney injury. A total of 34 patients (6.2%) received a postoperative permanent pacemaker. Per core laboratory-adjudicated echocardiographic analysis, mean postoperative aortic valve gradient was 7.6±3.3 mm Hg, and 2.8% of patients exhibited paravalvular regurgitation grade ≥2. Conclusions In this report of postmarket use of the ACURATE neo2 valve in a real-world transcatheter aortic valve implantation population, patients exhibited favorable postoperative hemodynamics and clinical outcomes and a low rate of postoperative pacemaker implantation.

Comparisons of different new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation devices for patients with severe aortic stenosis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether there are differences among the new-generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices for patients with aortic stenosis remains unclear. The aim of the study was to compare the efficiency and safety of different new-generation TAVI devices for patients with aortic stenosis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase and Web of Science from their inception to 1 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies that compared two or more different TAVI devices were enroled. Pairwise meta-analysis and frequentist network meta-analysis were conducted to pool the outcome estimates of interest.

RESULTS

A total of 79 studies were finally included. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking, the top two ranked valves for lower rates of events were as follows: direct flow medical (DFM) (4.6%) and Lotus (48.8%) for lower rate of device success; Sapien 3 (16.8%) and DFM (19.7%) for lower mortality; DFM (8.6%) and Sapien 3 (25.5%) for lower rates of stroke; Evolut (27.6%) and DFM (35.8%) for lower rates of major and life-threatening bleeding; Portico (22.6%) and Sapien 3 (41.9%) for lower rates of acute kidney injury; Acurate (8.6%) and DFM (13.2%) for lower rates of permanent pacemaker implantation; Lotus (0.3%) and Sapien 3 (22.7%) for lower rates of paravalvular leak; Evolut (1.4%) and Portico (29.1%) for lower rates of mean aortic valve gradients.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of the present study suggested that the device success rates were comparable among these new-generation valves except for DFM. After excluding DFM, Sapien 3 might be the best effective for decreased mortality and stroke; Lotus might be the best effective for decreased paravalvular leak; Evolut might be the best effective for decreased major and life-threatening bleeding and mean aortic valve gradients; Acurate and Portico might be the best effective for decreased permanent pacemaker implantation and acute kidney injury, respectively.

Comparison of outcomes of self-expanding versus balloon-expandable valves for transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis of randomized and propensity-matched studies

BACKGROUND

The postoperative outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the new generation of self-expanding valves (SEV) and balloon-expandable valves (BEV) remain uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score-matched (PSM) studies to evaluate the performance of the new generation TAVR devices, with a focus on Edwards SAPIEN 3/Ultra BEV, Medtronic Evolut R/PRO SEV, and Boston ACURATE neo SEV. Our primary endpoints were mortality and complications at both 30 days and one year post-operation.

RESULTS

A total of 4 RCTs and 14 PSM studies were included. Our findings showed no significant difference between SEV and BEV regarding 30-day and 1-year mortality rates. ACURATE SEV required less permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) at 30-day as compared to SAPIEN BEV, while Evolut SEV required a higher rate of PPI than SAPIEN BEV. The incidence of stroke, major or life-threatening bleeding (MLTB), major vascular complications (MVC), coronary artery obstruction (CAO) and acute kidney injury (AKI) did not differ significantly between the two groups. SEV had a larger effective orifice area (EOA) and lower mean transvalvular gradients (MPG) compared to BEV. However, there was an increased risk of paravalvular leakage (PVL) associated with SEV.

CONCLUSIONS

In terms of 30-day mortality, stroke, bleeding, MVC, AKI, CAO, and one-year mortality, there was comparability between the two valve types following TAVR. SEV was associated with better hemodynamic outcomes, except for a higher incidence of PVL. Compared to SAPIEN BEV, ACURATE SEV had a lower risk of PPI at 30 days, while Evolut SEV was associated with a higher risk of PPI. These findings underscore the importance of personalized valve selection.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with extra-small aortic annuli

BACKGROUND

A small aortic annulus (SAA) is a risk factor for prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in patients undergoing surgical or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Data regarding TAVI in patients with extra-SAA are scarce.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to analyse the safety and efficacy of TAVI in patients with extra-SAA.

METHODS

A multicentre registry study including patients with extra-SAA (defined as an aortic annulus area <280 mm2 and/or perimeter <60 mm) undergoing TAVI was established. Primary efficacy and safety endpoints were defined as device success and early safety at 30 days, respectively, using the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria, and were analysed according to valve type: self-expanding (SEV) versus balloon-expandable (BEV).

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients were included, of which 139 (92.7%) were women, and 110 (73.3%) received an SEV. Intraprocedural technical success was 91.3%, with a higher rate in patients receiving an SEV (96.4% vs 77.5% with BEV; p=0.001). Overall, 30-day device success was 81.3%, (85.5% with SEV vs 70.0% with BEV; p=0.032). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 72.0% of patients (with no difference between groups; p=0.118). Severe PPM occurred in 12% (9.0% with SEV and 24.0% with BEV; p=0.039), with no impact on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or heart failure readmission at 2-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

TAVI is a safe and feasible treatment in patients with extra-SAA with a high rate of technical success. The use of SEV was associated with a lower rate of intraprocedural complications, higher device success at 30 days and better haemodynamic outcomes compared to BEV.

Managing the challenge of a small aortic annulus in patients with severe aortic stenosis

INTRODUCTION

Small aortic annulus (SAA) poses a challenge in the management of patients with severe aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve replacement - both surgical and transcatheter - since it has been associated with worse clinical outcomes.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to comprehensively summarize the available evidence regarding the management of aortic stenosis in patients with SAA and discuss the current controversies as well as future perspectives in this field.

EXPERT OPINION

It is paramount to agree in a common definition for diagnosing and properly treating SAA patients, and for that purpose, multidetector computer tomography is essential. The results of recent trials led to the expansion of transcatheter aortic valve replacement among patients of all the surgical-risk spectrum, and the choice of treatment (transcatheter, surgical) should be based on patient comorbidities, anatomical characteristics, and patient preferences.

Hemodynamic Performance of Transcatheter Aortic Valves: A Comprehensive Review

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a widely adopted treatment option for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Its popularity has grown significantly in recent years due to advancements in technology and imaging. As TAVI use is increasingly expanded to younger patients, the need for long-term assessment and durability becomes paramount. This review aims to provide an overview of the diagnostic tools to evaluate the hemodynamic performance of aortic prosthesis, with a special focus on the comparison between transcatheter and surgical aortic valves and between self-expandable and balloon-expandable valves. Moreover, the discussion will encompass how cardiovascular imaging can effectively detect long-term structural valve deterioration.

Intermediate Follow-Up of Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Small Aortic Annuli

The clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in patients with small aortic annuli who underwent transcatheter aortic valve (AV) implantation with either balloon-expandable (BE) or self-expanding (SE) valves remains controversial. We assessed in-hospital and intermediate clinical outcomes in 573 patients with transfemoral transcatheter AV implantation with a small AV annulus, defined as an AV annulus area ≤430 mm². A total of 337 patients treated with a 23-mm BE valve (SAPIEN 3, Ultra) were compared with 236 patients treated with a 26-mm SE valve (Evolut series). Valve-in-valve cases were excluded, and late echo follow-up (mean 674 ± 438 days) was assessed in a subset of 292 patients (51.0%). Well-matched BE and SE cohorts did not differ with respect to major in-hospital outcomes, other than a borderline increase in vascular complications and composite bleeding in patients with SE. Patients with BE had a higher incidence of severe PPM on discharge echocardiography (16.9% vs 6.8%, p <0.002). The mean AV gradient at 30 days was higher for patients with BE (12.2 ± 4.2 vs 6.2 ± 7.9 mm Hg, p <0.001) and at late follow-up (14.0 ± 8.2 vs 7.2 ± 3.5 mm Hg, p <0.001). The follow-up left ventricular ejection fraction and incidence of >mild aortic insufficiency were similar. All-cause mortality for the 2 cohorts was similar, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 61.2 months (57.8 to 64.5; p = 0.98). There were no significant survival differences between combined patients with BE and SE with no, moderate, or severe PPM, with an overall mean (95% confidence interval) survival time of 32.5 (30.5 to 34.5) months combining valve types (p = 0.23). In conclusion, despite an increased incidence of PPM with higher mean AV gradients that persist on late echocardiography in the BE cohort, patients with BE and SE with small aortic annuli have similar clinical outcomes at intermediate follow-up. Moderate and severe PPM had no impact on survival at a mean follow-up of 32.5 months.

Contemporary issues and lifetime management in patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Latest clinical trials have indicated favorable outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. However, there are unanswered questions particularly in younger patients with longer life expectancy. While current evidence are limited to short duration of clinical follow-up, there are certain factors which may impair patients clinical outcomes and quality-of-life at long-term. Contemporary issues in the current TAVR era include prosthesis-patient mismatch, heart failure hospitalization, subclinical thrombosis, future coronary access, and valve durability. In this review, the authors review available evidence and discuss each remaining issues and theoretical treatment strategies in lifetime management of TAVR patients.

Three-Year Outcomes of Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation According to Annular Size

Data on the association between annular size and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) outcomes beyond 1 year are limited. The present study assessed the association between the aortic annulus size and TAVI clinical and hemodynamic outcomes at 3 years of follow-up. Patients were classified according to the aortic annulus size as having small, intermediate, and large annuli (size <400, 400 to 574, and ≥575 mm², respectively). The co-primary endpoints were all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization. Further, the changes in hemodynamic outcomes over the follow-up period (median 37, interquartile range: 26 to 45 months) were assessed. The present analysis included 850 patients, with 182 patients (21.4%), 538 patients (63.3%), and 130 patients (15.3%) in the small, intermediate, and large-sized aortic annulus groups, respectively. The groups had comparable age and pre-TAVI pressure gradients; however, patients with small annuli had higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk scores. Adjusted Cox regression analysis showed that compared to patients with intermediate-sized annuli, patients with small and large annuli had similar all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 1.69 and HR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.48 to 1.16, respectively) and heart failure hospitalization rates (HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.69 and HR = 1.26, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.17, respectively). However, patients with small annuli had consistently higher mean and peak pressure gradients and a higher risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch. The risks of moderate-to-severe regurgitation and structural valve deterioration were similar between the three groups. In conclusion, although patients with small annuli had higher transvalvular gradients, there was no significant association between the aortic annulus size and TAVI clinical outcomes at 3 years of follow-up. Future studies should compare the performance of transcatheter valve types in patients with different aortic annulus sizes.

Study Level Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With the ACURATE neo Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve

The ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve is a self-expanding device. Several studies have investigated safety and efficacy, but meta-analysis and pooled data are lacking. We aimed to provide a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis on the clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the ACURATE neo valve. A systematic literature search for eligible records was conducted. The primary endpoint was device success as designated by Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. The secondary endpoints (time frame: 30 days) were all-cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, need for new permanent pacemaker, major vascular complications, major bleeding, acute kidney injury stage II or III, and paravalvular regurgitation grade moderate or severe (II or III). Our search yielded a total of 355 records, 20 of those (n = 5858 ACURATE neo receivers) were included in our meta-analysis. Device success was achieved in 94.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 91.4-96.5%) of the patients. The 30-day all-cause mortality incidence proportion was 1.8% (95% CI, 1.3-2.4%). New pacemaker implantation was required in 7.7% (95% CI, 6.4-9.2%) of the patients, stroke occurred in 1.9% (95% CI, 1.6-2.3%), myocardial infarction in 0.5% (95% CI, 0.3-0.7%), major bleeding in 5.0% (95% CI, 3.9-6.5%), major vascular complication in 5.6% (95% CI, 4.0-7.8%), acute kidney injury stage ≥2 in 2.5% (95% CI, 1.8-3.4%), and paravalvular leak grade ≥moderate was observed in 4.3% (95% CI, 3.0-6.2%). Balloon predilatation and postdilatation incidence was 93.9% (95% CI, 87.0-97.3%) and 43.2% (95% CI, 37.9-48.6%), respectively. ACURATE neo appears to be safe and effective in our analysis with high device success incidence, low mortality, and low new pacemaker implantations.

ACURATE neo2 versus SAPIEN 3 Ultra for transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND

No comparative data exist with the latest generation self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (Neo2) and the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 Ultra (Ultra) transcatheter heart valves (THV).

AIMS

We aimed to compare the outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the Neo2 and the Ultra THV.

METHODS

A total of 1,356 patients at 4 centres were treated either with the Neo2 (n=608) or the Ultra (n=748). The primary endpoint was device success according to the latest Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions. The association of the THV used and the primary endpoint was assessed using inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) and 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM), which identified 472 matched pairs.  Results: After PSM, there were no relevant differences between the groups. While rates of moderate to severe paravalvular leakage (PVL) were overall low (0.6% vs 1.1%; p=0.725), elevated transvalvular gradients (≥20 mmHg) were less frequent with the Neo2 (2.4% vs 7.7%; p<0.001), which translated into a significantly higher rate of device success with the Neo2 compared with the Ultra (91.9% vs 85.0%; p<0.001). Consistently, the Neo2 was associated with higher rates of device success in the IPTW analysis (odds ratio [OR] 1.961, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.269-3.031; p=0.002). Rates of mild PVL were significantly lower with the Ultra compared with the Neo2 (20.0% vs 32.8%; p<0.001). Clinical events at 30 days were comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes after TAVI using the Neo2 or Ultra THV were excellent and, overall, comparable. However, transvalvular gradients were lower with the Neo2, which translated into higher rates of device success. Rates of mild PVL were significantly lower with the Ultra THV.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with different self-expanding devices-a propensity score-matched multicenter comparison

OBJECTIVE

Several supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter systems are commercially available for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Comparative data in large-scale multicenter studies are scant.

METHODS

This study included a total of 5175 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI with the ACURATE neo (n = 1095), Evolut R (n = 3365), or Evolut PRO (n = 715) by a transfemoral approach at five high-volume centers. Propensity score matching resulted in 654 triplets. Outcomes are reported according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) consensus.

RESULTS

Moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) occurred significantly more often in the ACURATE neo group (5.2%) than in the Evolut R (1.8%) and Evolut PRO (3.3%) groups (p = 0.003). The rates of major vascular-/access-related complications (4.6%, 3.8%, and 5.0%; p = 0.56), type 3 or 4 bleeding (3.2%, 2.1%, and 4.1%; p = 0.12), and 30-day mortality (2.4%, 2.6%, and 3.7%; p = 0.40) were comparable. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) was significantly lower in the ACURATE neo group (9.5%, 17.6%, and 16.8%; p < 0.001). Independent predictors for 2-year survival were a Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score ≥5%, diabetes mellitus, a glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min, baseline mean transvalvular gradient ≤ 30 mm Hg, treating center, and relevant PVR.

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter study, TAVI with the ACURATE neo, Evolut R, or Evolut PRO was feasible and safe. The rate of relevant PVR was more frequent after the ACURATE neo implantation, with, however, lower rates of PPI. Two-year survival was mainly driven by baseline comorbidities.

Clinical outcomes of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve: a prospective, multicenter, observational, post-market surveillance study

BACKGROUND

The next-generation ACURATE neo2 transcatheter aortic valve was designed for simplified implantation and to mitigate the risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to the earlier device.

AIMS

To collect clinical outcomes and device performance data, including echocardiography and 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) data, with the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS).

METHODS

ACURATE neo2 PMCF is a single-arm, multicentre study of patients with severe AS treated in routine clinical practice. The primary safety endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30-days. The primary imaging endpoint was hypo-attenuated leaflet thickening (HALT), measured by core laboratory-adjudicated 4D-CT at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included VARC safety endpoints, procedural success, and evaluation of valve performance via core laboratory-adjudicated echocardiography.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 250 patients at 18 European centres (mean age: 80.8 years; 63.6% female; mean STS score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 (98.4%) were successfully treated with ACURATE neo2. The 30-day rates for mortality and disabling stroke were 0.8% and 0%, respectively. The new permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 6.5%. HALT >50% was present in 9.3% of patients at 30 days. Valve haemodynamics improved from baseline to 30 days (mean aortic valve gradient: from 47.6±14.5 mmHg to 8.6±3.9 mmHg; mean aortic valve area: from 0.7±0.2 cm2 to 1.6±0.4 cm2). At 30 days, PVL was evaluated as none/trace in 79.2% of patients, mild in 18.9%, moderate in 1.9%, and severe in 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

The study results support the safety and efficacy of TAVI with ACURATE neo2 in patients in routine clinical practice.

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.

Haemodynamic performance and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the ACURATE neo device has been associated with a non-negligible incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR). The new-generation ACURATE neo2 has been designed to mitigate this limitation.

AIMS

The aim of the study was to compare TAVR with the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices.

METHODS

The NEOPRO and NEOPRO-2 registries retrospectively included patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with self-expanding valves at 24 and 20 centres, respectively. Patients receiving the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices (from January 2012 to December 2021) were included in this study. Predischarge and 30-day VARC-3 defined outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR. Subgroup analyses per degree of aortic valve calcification were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 2,026 patients (neo: 1,263, neo2: 763) were included. Predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR was less frequent for the neo2 group (2% vs 5%; p<0.001), resulting in higher VARC-3 intended valve performance (96% vs 90%; p<0.001). Furthermore, more patients receiving the neo2 had none/trace paravalvular AR (59% vs 38%; p<0.001). The reduction in paravalvular AR with neo2 was mainly observed with heavy aortic valve calcification. New pacemaker implantation and VARC-3 technical and device success rates were similar between the 2 groups; there were more frequent vascular and bleeding complications for the neo device. Similar 1-year survival was detected after TAVR (neo2: 90% vs neo: 87%; p=0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

TAVR with the ACURATE neo2 device was associated with a lower prevalence of moderate or severe paravalvular AR and more patients with none/trace paravalvular AR. This difference was particularly evident with heavy aortic valve calcification.

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.

Impact of aortic annular size and valve type on haemodynamics and clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Introduction: Data on patients with small aortic annuli (SAA) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are limited. We aim to describe the impact of aortic annular size, particularly SAA and TAVI valve type on valve haemodynamics, durability and clinical outcomes. Method: All patients in National Heart Centre Singapore who underwent transfemoral TAVI for severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis from July 2012 to December 2019 were included. Outcome measures include valve haemodynamics, prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), structural valve degeneration (SVD) and mortality. Results: A total of 244 patients were included. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.22±6.08, with 52.5% patients with small aortic annulus (<23mm), 33.2% patients with medium aortic annulus (23–26mm) and 14.3% patients with large aortic annulus (>26mm). There were more patients with self-expanding valve (SEV) (65.2%) versus balloon-expandable valve (BEV) (34.8%). There were no significant differences in indexed aortic valve area (iAVA), mean pressure gradient (MPG), PPM, SVD or mortality across all aortic annular sizes. However, specific to the SAA group, patients with SEV had larger iAVA (SEV 1.19±0.35cm2/m2 vs BEV 0.88±0.15cm2/m2, P<0.01) and lower MPG (SEV 9.25±4.88 mmHg vs BEV 14.17±4.75 mmHg, P<0.01) at 1 year, without differences in PPM or mortality. Aortic annular size, TAVI valve type and PPM did not predict overall mortality up to 7 years. There was no significant difference in SVD between aortic annular sizes up to 5 years. Conclusion: Valve haemodynamics and durability were similar across the different aortic annular sizes. In the SAA group, SEV had better haemodynamics than BEV at 1 year, but no differences in PPM or mortality. There were no significant differences in mortality between aortic annular sizes, TAVI valve types or PPM. Keywords: Aortic stenosis, small aortic annulus, transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Procedural Outcomes of a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve in Small Annuli

BACKGROUND

Self-expanding transcatheter valves (THV) seem superior to balloon-expanding valves in regard to the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM). Data on the occurrence of PPM with the ACURATE neo/neo2 system as a representative of self-expanding prostheses in very small annuli, even below the applicable instructions for use (IFU), are scarce.

METHODS

Data from 654 patients with severe native aortic stenosis treated with the smallest size ACURATE neo/neo2 valve (size S, 23 mm) at two German high-volume centers from 06/2012 to 12/2021 were evaluated. We compared clinical and hemodynamic outcomes among patients with implantation in adherence to the recommended sizing (on-label n = 529) and below the recommended sizing range (off-label n = 125) and identified predictors for PPM in the overall population. BMI-adjusted PPM was defined according to VARC-3 recommendations.

RESULTS

Post-procedure, the mean gradient (10.0 mmHg vs. 9.0 mmHg, p = 0.834) and the rate of paravalvular leakage (PVL) ≥ moderate (3.2% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.770) were similar between on-label and off-label implantations. The rate of moderate to severe PPM (24%) was comparably low in ACURATE neo/neo2 S, with a very low proportion of severe PPM whether implanted off- or on-label (4.9% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.552). Thirty-day all-cause mortality was higher among patients with off-label implantations (6.5% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.036). In the subgroup of these patients, no device-related deaths occurred, and cardiac causes did not differ (each 5). Besides small annulus area and high BMI, a multivariate analysis identified a greater cover index (OR 3.26), deep implantation (OR 2.25) and severe calcification (OR 2.07) as independent predictors of PPM.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACURATE neo/neo2 S subgroup shows a convincing hemodynamic outcome according to low mean gradient even outside the previous IFUs without a relevant increase in the rate of PVL or PPM. In addition to known factors such as annulus area and BMI, potential predictors for PPM are severe annulus calcification and implantation depth. Nevertheless, the ACURATE neo/neo2 system seems to be a reliable option in patients with very small annuli.

Technical Aspects and Development of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Aortic stenosis is the most common valve disease requiring surgery or percutaneous treatment. Since the first-in-man implantation in 2002 we have witnessed incredible progress in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In this article, we review the technical aspects of TAVI development with a look at the future. Durability, low thrombogenicity, good hydrodynamics, biocompatibility, low catheter profile, and deployment stability are the attributes of an ideal TAVI device. Two main design types exist-balloon-expandable and self-expanding prostheses. Balloon-expandable prostheses use a cobalt-chromium alloy frame providing high radial strength and radiopacity, while the self-expanding prostheses use a nickel-titanium (Nitinol) alloy frame, which expands to its original shape once unsheathed and heated to the body temperature. The valve is sewn onto the frame and consists of the porcine or bovine pericardium, which is specially treated to prevent calcinations and prolong durability. The lower part of the frame can be covered by polyethylene terephthalate fabric or a pericardial skirt, providing better sealing between the frame and aortic annulus. The main future challenges lie in achieving lower rates of paravalvular leaks and new pacemaker implantations following the procedure, lower delivery system profiles, more precise positioning, longer durability, and a good hemodynamic profile. Patient-specific design and the use of autologous tissue might solve these issues.

Hemodynamic Performance of Two Current-Generation Transcatheter Heart Valve Prostheses in Severely Calcified Aortic Valve Stenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of severely calcified aortic valve stenosis is associated with a higher rate of paravalvular leakage (PVL) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI). We hypothesized that the self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) prostheses Evolut Pro (EPro) is comparable to the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 (S3) regarding hemodynamics, PPI, and clinical outcome in these patients.

METHODS

From 2014 to 2019, all patients with very severe calcification of the aortic valve who received an EPro or an S3 THV were included. Propensity score matching was utilized to create two groups of 170 patients.

RESULTS

At discharge, there was significant difference in transvalvular gradients (EPro vs. S3) (dPmean 8.1 vs. 11.1 mmHg, p ≤ 0.001) and indexed effective orifice area (EOAi) (1.1 vs. 0.9, p ≤ 0.001), as well as predicted EOAi (1 vs. 0.9, p ≤ 0.001). Moderate patient prosthesis mismatch (PPM) was significantly lower in the EPro group (17.7% vs. 38%, p ≤ 0.001), as well as severe PPM (2.9% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.03). PPI and the PVL rate as well as stroke, bleeding, vascular complication, and 30-day mortality were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with severely calcified aortic valves, both THVs performed similarly in terms of 30-day mortality, PPI rate, and PVL occurrence. However, patient prothesis mismatch was observed more often in the S3 group, which might be due to the intra-annular design.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation with ACURATE neo: Results from the PROGRESS PVL Registry

Objectives

The PROGRESS PVL registry evaluated transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients treated with ACURATE neo, a supra-annular self-expanding bioprosthetic aortic valve.

Background

While clinical outcomes with TAVI are comparable with those achieved with surgery, residual aortic regurgitation (AR) and paravalvular leak (PVL) are common complications. The ACURATE neo valve has a pericardial sealing skirt designed to minimize PVL.

Methods

The primary endpoint was the rate of total AR over time, as assessed by a core echocardiographic laboratory. The study enrolled 500 patients (mean age: 81.8 ± 5.1 years; 61% female; mean baseline STS score: 6.0 ± 4.5%) from 22 centers in Europe and Canada; 498 patients were treated with ACURATE neo.

Results

The rate of ≥ moderate AR was 4.6% at discharge and 3.1% at 12 months; the rate of ≥ moderate PVL was 4.6% at discharge and 2.6% at 12 months. Paired analyses showed significant improvement in overall PVL between discharge and 12 months (P < 0.001); 64.6% of patients had no change in PVL grade, 24.9% improved, and 10.5% worsened. Patients also exhibited significant improvement in transvalvular gradient (P < 0.001) and effective orifice area (P=0.01). The mortality rate was 2.2% at 30 days and 11.3% at 12 months. The permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rate was 10.2% at 30 days and 12.2% at 12 months.

Conclusions

Results from PROGRESS PVL support the sustained safety and performance of TAVI with the ACURATE neo valve, showing excellent valve hemodynamics, good clinical outcomes, and significant interindividual improvement in PVL from discharge to 12-month follow-up.

Hemodynamics of self-expanding versus balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in relation to native aortic annulus anatomy

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare hemodynamic characteristics of different self-expanding (SE) and balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THV) in relation to native aortic annulus anatomy.

BACKGROUND

A patient centered THV selection becomes increasingly important as indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are extended towards lower risk populations.

METHODS

Hemodynamic parameters including mean gradient (MG), effective orifice area (EOA), Doppler velocity index (DVI), degree of paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) and patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) were compared by valve type, label size and in relation to quintiles of native aortic annulus area.

RESULTS

2609 patients were treated at 3 centers in Germany with SAPIEN 3 (n = 1146), ACURATE Neo (n = 649), Evolut R (n = 546) or Evolut Pro (n = 268) THV. SE THVs provided superior hemodynamics in terms of larger EOA, higher DVI and lower MG compared to BE THV, especially in patients with small aortic annuli. Severe PPM was less frequent in SE treated patients. The rate of PVR ≥ moderate was comparable for SE and BE devices in smaller annular dimensions, but remarkably lower for BE TAVR in large aortic annular dimensions (> 547.64 mm²) (2% BE THV vs. > 10% for SE THV; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with small aortic annular dimensions may benefit hemodynamically from SE THV. With increasing annulus size, BE THV may have advantages since PVR ≥ moderate occurs less frequently.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Self-Expanding ACURATE neo2: Postprocedural Hemodynamic and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The first-generation ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) (Boston Scientific) was associated with a non-negligible occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. To overcome this issue, the ACURATE neo2 iteration, which incorporates a taller outer skirt aimed at reducing the occurrence of paravalvular AR, has recently been developed.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the ACURATE neo2 (Boston Scientific) THV in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.

METHODS

ITAL-neo was an observational, retrospective, multicenter registry enrolling consecutive patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, treated with first- and second-generation ACURATE neo THVs, via transfemoral and trans-subclavian access, in 13 Italian centers. One-to-one propensity score matching was applied to account for baseline characteristics unbalance. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular AR on predischarge echocardiographic assessment. Secondary endpoints included postprocedural technical success and 90-day device success and safety.

RESULTS

Among 900 patients included in the registry, 220 received the ACURATE neo2 THV, whereas 680 were treated with the first-generation device. A total of 410 patients were compared after 1:1 propensity score matching. The ACURATE neo2 THV was associated with a 3-fold lower frequency of postprocedural moderate or greater paravalvular AR (11.2% vs 3.5%; P < 0.001). No other hemodynamic differences were observed. Postprocedural technical success was similar between the 2 cohorts. Fewer adverse events were observed in patients treated with the ACURATE neo2 at 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significant lower frequency of moderate or greater paravalvular AR compared with the earlier generation ACURATE neo device, with encouraging short-term safety and efficacy.

Contemporary Outcome Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-Valve Implantation Versus Redo Aortic Valve Replacement

As valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation is still an evolving method, we evaluated the development of early and midterm outcomes after ViV and conventional redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) over the past 2 decades. In-hospital databases were retrospectively screened for patients ≥60 years treated for failing bioprosthetic aortic valves at our center. Clinical and follow-up characteristics were compared between patients who underwent ViV or redo-SAVR according to valve academic research consortium-2 (VARC-2) definitions. The comparison of outcome parameters was adjusted for baseline differences between groups. Between June 2002 and April 2020, 209 patients with ViV and 65 redo-SAVR patients met inclusion criteria. No significant differences were found in 30 days (ViV 3.8%, SAVR 3.1%, p = 0.778) or 6-month mortality (ViV 14.0%, SAVR 7.5%, p = 0.283). As patients with ViV less frequently experienced acute kidney injury (stage II or III) and life-threatening bleeding, they more frequently reached the 30-day VARC-2 combined safety end point (79.2% vs 61.5%, odds ratio [OR] 2.540, p = 0.023). Patients with ViV less frequently reached clinical efficacy (68.3% vs 84.6%, OR 0.408, p = 0.041) and device success (79.9% vs 92.3%, OR 0.311, p = 0.040) end points, because of higher frequency of postprocedural transvalvular gradients >20 mm Hg. However, over the past decade, VARC-2 clinical efficacy and device success rates continuously increased in ViV cases. In conclusion, ViV and SAVR were associated with similar acute mortality and different beneficial and adverse outcome profiles in this single-center cohort. Results after ViV procedures have continuously improved over the past years.

Patient Prosthesis Mismatch After SAVR and TAVR

Patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) remains one out of many factors to be considered during decision-making for the treatment of aortic valve pathologies. The idea of adequate sizing of a prosthetic heart valve was established by Rahimtoola already in 1978. In this article, the author described the phenomenon that the orifice area of a prosthetic heart valve may be too small for the individual patient. PPM is assessed by measurement or projection of the prosthetic effective orifice area indexed to body surface area (iEOA), while it is recommended to use different cut point values for non-obese and obese patients for the categorization of moderate and severe PPM. Several factors influence the accuracy of both the projected and the measured iEOA for PPM assessment, which leads to a certain number of false assignments to the PPM or no PPM group. Despite divergent findings on the impact of PPM on clinical outcomes, there is consensus that PPM should be avoided to prevent sequelae of increased prosthetic gradients after aortic valve replacement. To prevent PPM, it is required to anticipate the iEOA of the prosthesis prior to the procedure. The use of adequate reference tables, derived from echocardiographically measured mean effective orifice area (EOA) values from preferably large numbers of patients, is most appropriate to predict the iEOA. Such tables should be used also for transcatheter heart valves in the future. During the decision-making process, all available options should be taken into account for the individual patient. If the predicted size and type of a surgical prosthesis cannot be implanted, additional surgical procedures, such as annular enlargement with the Manougian technique, or alternative procedures, such as transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) can prevent PPM. PPM prevention for TAVI patients is a new field of interest and includes anticipation of the iEOA, prosthesis selection, and procedural strategies.

TAVI for Pure Non-calcified Aortic Regurgitation Using a Self-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valve

Objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is routinely performed in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). For patients with pure non-calcified aortic regurgitation (AR) who are not suitable for open heart surgery no clear recommendations exist and use of TAVI has been largely off-label. We herein report a series of patients treated with the self-expandable AcurateNeo and Neo2 (Boston Scientific Co., Marlborough, MS, USA) transcatheter heart valve (THV) for pure AR.

Methods: Between 05/2017 and 03/2021, 9 patients (88.8% female, 74.4 ± 7.1 years, logEuroSCORE II 5.5 ± 3.6%, STS PROM 6.2 ± 3.0%) received transfemoral (TF) TAVI for pure non-calcified AR following an adjusted valve sizing algorithm. Data were retrospectively analyzed according to updated Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) definitions.

Results: Device success was 100%. Early safety was 77.7% (7/10), due to two (22.2%) cases of acute kidney injury. Thirty-day mortality was 0%, in seven (77.7%) patients no or trace paravalvular leakage (PVL) was seen and mild PVL in two (22.2%) patients at 30-day follow-up. No permanent pacemaker (PPM) was required during 30-day follow-up.

Conclusion: In this series of selected patients using the Acurate neo THV for pure non-calcified AR, safety and efficacy were demonstrated. Thirty-day mortality as well as PPM implantation and PVL rates showed excellent results in this high-risk patient cohort. These results will have to be confirmed in larger patient cohorts.