Ten-year experience with transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valve: lessons learned and future perspectives

Extracellular Vesicles to Predict Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation - a Prospective, Multicenter Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment for aortic stenosis (AS) in patients at intermediate and high surgical risk. Circulating extracellular vesicles (EVs) are nanoparticles involved in cardiovascular diseases. We aimed to (i) determine the effect of TAVI on plasma concentrations of five EV subtypes and (ii) evaluate the predictive value of EVs for post-TAVI outcomes.

METHODS

Blood samples were collected 1 day before TAVI and at hospital discharge. Concentrations of EVs were evaluated using flow cytometry.

RESULTS

Concentration of leukocytes EVs decreased after TAVI, compared to the measurement before (p = 0.008). Among 123 patients discharged from the hospital, 19.5% experienced MACCE during the median of 10.3 months. Increased pre-TAVI concentration of phosphatidylserine-exposing EVs was an independent predictor of MACCE in multivariable analysis (OR 5.313, 95% CI 1.164-24.258, p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with increased pre-TAVI concentration of procoagulant, PS-exposing EVs have over fivefold higher odds of adverse outcomes.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis with "down-size" interventional valves: procedural and mid-term follow-up

Background

Due to the influence of anatomical structure, replacing the bicuspid valve using transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) would increase the risk of perivalvular leakage and conduction block, affecting the hemodynamic effect of the interventional valve. In this study, for bicuspid and tricuspid valves, we implemented different valve selection strategies to explore the safety and effectiveness of TAVR in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis with "down-size" interventional valves using the VenusA-valve system.

Methods

The operation was performed with the VenusA-valve via transfemoral approach. The selected valves were appropriately sized based on the results of transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), and the morphology of intraoperative pre-dilation balloons. For tricuspid valve cases, the VenusA valve is usually larger than the annulus diameter, whereas the "down-size" approach was adopted for bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) cases. The shape of the pre-dilation balloon allowed further sizing of the annulus diameter by the degree of lumbar constriction of the balloon, aiding in intervention valve size selection, particularly in cases of BAVs.

Results

A total of 65 patients underwent TAVR for aortic stenosis with VenusA-valve systems. Of these, 29 cases had a BAV and 36 cases had a tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). The distribution of VenusA-valve sizes differed between TAV and BAV cases (P=0.007). Furthermore, there was a significant decrease in the average mean gradient in TAV patients from 54.7 to 12.2 mmHg (P<0.001), and in BAV patients from 61.6 to 14.3 mmHg (P<0.001). The percentage of paravalvular leakage greater than mild was 6.90% in the BAVs and 5.56% in the TAVs at procedural outcomes (P=0.955). The mean follow-up period was 22.23 months (range, 12 to 39 months). The proportion of New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV decreased from 78.5% preoperatively to 11.3% at the last follow-up (P<0.001). A total of 27 patients with TAV and 19 patients with BAV underwent TTE at 1-year follow-up after operation. There was no significant contrast in the average pressure difference between TAVs and BAVs at 1-year follow-up (11.9 vs. 14.3 mmHg, P=0.18).

Conclusions

The VenusA-valve for TAVR produced positive clinical outcomes and valve functionality in both BAVs and TAVs. In the case of BAVs, selecting a smaller interventional valve size was deemed viable.

Long-term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis in immunosuppression-treated patients: a propensity-matched multicentre retrospective registry-based analysis

Introduction

Data regarding patients with a previous medical record of immunosuppression treatment who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are limited and extremely inconclusive. Available studies are mostly short term observations; thus there is a lack of evidence on efficacy and safety of TAVI in this specific group of patients.

Aim

To compare the in-hospital and long-term outcomes between patients with or without a medical history of immunosuppressive treatment undergoing TAVI for aortic valve stenosis (AS).

Material and methods

We conducted a retrospective registry-based analysis including patients undergoing TAVI for AS at 5 centres between January 2009 and August 2017. The primary endpoint was long-term all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints comprised major vascular complications, life-threatening or disabling bleeding, stroke and new pacemaker implantation.

Results

Of 1451 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI, two propensity-matched groups including 25 patients with a history of immunosuppression and 75 patients without it were analysed. No differences between groups in all-cause mortality were found in a median follow-up time of 2.7 years following TAVI (p = 0.465; HR = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.30-1.77). The rate of major vascular complications (4.0% vs. 5.3%) was similar in the two groups (p = 1.000). There were no statistically significant differences in the composite endpoint combining life-threatening or disabling bleeding, major vascular complications, stroke and new pacemaker implantation (40.0% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.218).

Conclusions

Patients who had undergone TAVI for AS had similar long-term mortality regardless of whether they had a previous medical record of immunosuppression. Procedural complication rates were comparable between the groups.

Mid-term outcomes of patients with Lotus and Evolut transcatheter valves

Introduction

Long-term data on the Lotus^® (Boston Scientific, USA) valve are lacking.

Aim

To evaluate mid-term outcomes of aortic stenosis patients treated with either Lotus or Evolut R^® valves (Medtronic, USA).

Material and methods

Our study sample comprised 190 patients (71 Lotus and 119 Evolut valves). The mean clinical follow-up was 2.0 ±0.9 years. Information on mortality was obtained from the National Institutes of Health Information and Statistics.

Results

No significant differences existed in baseline characteristics between the groups. The rate of procedural complications was low and without significant differences between groups. The log rank test showed higher mortality in the Lotus group for cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.02; RR = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.123–5.075). Multivariable analysis revealed that the Lotus valve was independently associated with cardiovascular mortality (p = 0.03). At the end of echocardiography follow-up (4.1 ±0.9 years), we found a significantly higher mean aortic valve gradient (AVGm) in the Lotus group than in the Evolut group (17.9 ±9.5 vs. 10.2 ±3.5 mm Hg; p = 0.0006), and 3 (10%) patients from the Lotus group suffered from symptomatic re-stenosis requiering re-intervention.

Conclusions

The results of our study suggest that higher cardiovascular mortality rates during mid-term follow-up were associated with Lotus compared with Evolut valves. Higher AVGm in the Lotus valves suggests the possibility of accelerated prosthesis degeneration.