The Transaxillary Route as a Second Access Option in TAVI Procedures: Experience of a Single Centre

Background: The aim of our study was to determine the feasibility and efficacy of transaxillary (TAX) TAVI in patients not eligible for the transfemoral route. Methods: This is a retrospective study of a single center. We analysed 262 patients treated with TAVI. In 17 patients (6.5%), the procedure was performed with the TAX approach. Procedural and hospital data, 30-day safety, and clinical efficacy were assessed and compared between the transfemoral and TAX groups. Results: In the TAX groups, we found a higher prevalence of men (p = 0.001), smokers (p = 0.033), and previous strokes (p = 0.02). The EUROSCORE II was higher in the TAX group (p = 0.014). The success rate of the device was 100%. TAX was associated with a longer procedure time (p = 0.001) and shorter median device time (p = 0.034) in minutes. Patients treated with TAX had a longer hospital stay (p = 0.005) and higher overall bleeding rate (p = 0.001). Peripheral neurological complications were more frequent with TAX (p = 0.001), which almost completely resolved by 30 days. Conclusions: TAX TAVI is safe and effective and should be considered as a second choice when transfemoral TAVI is not feasible due to severe comorbidities.

Procedural outcomes of the 34 mm EvolutR Transcatheter valve in a real-world population insights from the HORSE multicenter collaborative registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of real-world patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the 34 mm Evolut R (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota).

BACKGROUND

Larger aortic annulus has been associated with increased incidence of paravalvular leaks (PVLs) after TAVR. However, little is known, so far, about the performance of the 34 mm Evolut R in this setting.

METHODS

From the multicenter, international, retrospective Horizontal Aorta in Transcatheter Self-expanding Valves (HORSE) registry, including patients who underwent TAVR for native severe AS, we selected patients treated with the 34 mm Evolut R evaluating procedural characteristics and VARC-2 defined device success. We also compared 34 mm Evolut R with other Evolut R sizes.

RESULTS

Among the 4434 patients included in the registry, 572 (13%) received the 34 mm Evolut R valve. Mean age was 80.8 ± 6.5 years and the median STS PROM score was 4 [interquartile range 2-6]. Device success was achieved in 87.4% with 7.7% of PVLs; moreover, the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) was 22.4%. Patients who underwent 34 mm Evolut R implantation experienced more in-hospital permanent pacemaker implantation (22.4% vs. 15%; p < 0.001). At multivariate analysis, 34 mm Evolut R did not affect device success (OR: 0.81 [0.60-1.09]; p = 0.151). Device success was consistent with other THVs sizes (87.4% vs. 89.6%; p = 0.157).

CONCLUSIONS

THV replacement in patients requiring 34 mm Evolut R has an acceptable performance. Compared to other Medtronic sizes it demonstrated to be comparable in terms of device success, despite an increased rate of pacemaker implantation.

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

Background:

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

Methods:

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

Results:

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

Conclusions:

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