Comparing the Procedural and Clinical Outcomes of Sapien XT and Sapien 3 Valves in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Korean Patients

Predicted prosthesis-patient mismatch and long-term clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A SWEDEHEART study

BACKGROUND

The impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is uncertain. This study was performed to investigate the risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and aortic valve reintervention in patients with and without predicted PPM after TAVR.

METHODS

This nationwide, population-based cohort study included all patients who underwent transfemoral primary TAVR in Sweden from 2008 to 2022 in the SWEDEHEART register. PPM was defined according to published effective orifice areas for each valve model and size. The patients were divided into those with and without PPM. Additional baseline characteristics and outcome data were obtained from other national health data registers. Regression standardization was used to adjust for intergroup differences.

RESULTS

Of 8485 patients, 7879 (93%) had no PPM and 606 (7%) had PPM. The crude cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality at 1, 5, and 10 years in patients with versus without PPM was 7% versus 9%, 40% versus 44%, and 80% versus 85%, respectively. After regression standardization, there was no between-group difference in long-term mortality, and the absolute difference at 10 years was 1.5% (95% confidence interval, -2.9%-6.0%). The mean follow-up was 3.0 years (maximum, 14 years). There was no difference in the risk of heart failure hospitalization or aortic valve reintervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, or aortic valve reintervention was not higher in patients with than without predicted PPM following TAVR. Furthermore, PPM was present in only 7% of patients, and severe PPM was almost nonexistent.

Real-World Comparison of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the Era of Current-Generation Devices

Few studies have reported comparisons of out-of-hospital clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) in the era of current-generation valves that reflect the real-world situation. Data on patients with severe AS aged 65 years or older who underwent TAVR or SAVR between 2015 and 2018 were obtained from the National Health Insurance Service in Korea and clinical event rate was analyzed. The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 1 year. The cohort included a total of 4623 patients over 65 years of age, of whom 1269 (27.4%) were treated with TAVR. After 1:1 propensity score matching, 2120 patients were included in the study. TAVR was associated with reduced 1-year mortality (hazard ratio (HR): 0.55; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42−0.70; p < 0.001). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of ischemic stroke (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.43−1.20; p = 0.21) and intracranial hemorrhage (HR: 1.10; p = 0.74). Permanent pacemaker insertion was observed more frequently in the TAVR cohort (9.4% vs. 2.5%, HR: 3.95, 95% CI: 2.57−6.09; p < 0.001), whereas repeat procedures were rare in both treatments (0.5% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.499). In the nation-wide real-world data analysis, TAVR with current-generation devices showed significantly lower 1-year mortality compared to SAVR in severe AS patients.

The Presence of Calcified Raphe Is an Independent Predictor of Adverse Long-Term Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objective

Current guidelines recommend that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) with aortic stenosis (AS) should only be performed in selected patients. However, we consider it even more crucial to identify what the really important factors are while determining long-term outcomes in patients with BAV undergoing TAVR, which is precisely the aim of this study.

Methods

We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with balloon-expandable Sapien XT or Sapien 3 valves (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) for the treatment of severe bicuspid AS. The primary end points were major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE), that is, mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), disabling stroke, valve failure needing reintervention, or clinically relevant valve thrombosis during follow-up.

Results

A total of 56 patients who underwent TAVR with Sapien XT (n = 20) or Sapien 3 (n = 36) were included. The device and procedural success rates were similar between the two TAVR valves; however, the newer-generation Sapien 3 yielded a trend toward better long-term clinical outcomes than the early-generation Sapien XT did (MACCE rates 35 vs. 11%, p = 0.071). In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards analyses, the presence of calcified raphe > 4 mm was the only independent predictor of long-term MACCE (hazard ratio: 6.76; 95% confidence interval: 1.21–37.67, p = 0.029).

Conclusion

TAVR performed by a skilled heart team, while using newer-generation balloon-expandable Sapien 3 valve, may yield better long-term clinical outcomes compared to TAVR using early-generation Sapien XT valve. Moreover, the presence of calcified raphe >4 mm is an independent determinant of adverse clinical outcomes.