98Mitral annular calcification, mitral valve diseases and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis

Background

Mitral annular calcification (MAC) and mitral valve diseases (MVD) have been identified as strong predictors of mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, the association between MAC and MVD, and the prognostic implications in these patients remain unclear.

Purpose

This study sought to investigate the association between severity of MAC and the prevalence of MVD as well as to assess the prognostic impact of MAC depending on the presence or absence of MVD in patients undergoing TAVR.

Methods

We identified 967 patients who have comprehensive echocardiographic and computed tomographic assessment of MVD and MAC from our institutional registry that is a part of the Swiss TAVI registry (NCT01368250) between August 2007 and June 2017.

Results

Among these patients, mild or moderate MAC was present in 45.2% and severe MAC was present in 17.8%. The prevalence of MVD was significantly higher in severe MAC patients, while the prevalence in patients with mild and moderate MAC was similar to patients without MAC. Compared to patients without severe MAC and MVD, an increased risk of all-cause death at 1 year was observed in patients with severe MAC and MVD (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.81, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.72–4.59, p<0.001) as well as in patients with non-severe MAC and MVD (HR: 2.80, 95% CI: 1.87–4.20, p<0.001) but not in patients with severe MAC and non-MVD (HR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.27–1.70, p=0.409). In a multivariable analysis, severe MAC concomitant with MVD was found to be an independent predictor of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR (Odds ratio: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.27–3.41, p=0.004).

Conclusions

Severe MAC was associated with higher prevalence of MVD. Severe MAC concomitant with MVD was associated with increased risks of mortality at 1 year and conduction abnormalities after TAVR, whereas severe MAC without MVD was not.

P1968Five-year outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus treated with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents

Background

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remain at higher risk for adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with non-diabetic individuals. Among available drug-eluting stents (DES), thin-strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) were shown to provide the best safety and efficacy profile in diabetics. Whether biodegradable polymer DES provide additional long-term clinical benefit compared with DP-EES among diabetic patients remains uncertain.

Purpose

To compare the long-term performance of ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) versus DP-EES for PCI in patients with insulin-requiring and non-insulin-requiring DM.

Methods

We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority BIOSCIENCE trial (NCT01443104). Patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned to treatment with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES. Patients were further divided according to diabetic status. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR), within 12 months.

Results

Among 2'119 patients enrolled between March 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) presented with DM (insulin-requiring, 33.1%). Compared with non-diabetics, patients with DM were older and had a greater baseline cardiac risk profile, including higher prevalence of hypertension, hypercholesterolaemia, peripheral artery disease, chronic renal failure and prior PCI, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or stroke. At 5 years, TLF occurred similarly in 74 patients (cumulative incidence, 31.0%) treated with BP-SES and 57 patients (25.8%) treated with DP-EES (RR 1.23; 95% CI 0.87–1.73; p=0.24) in diabetics, and in 124 patients (16.8%) treated with BP-SES and 132 patients (16.8%) treated with DP-EES (RR 0.98; 95% CI 0.77–1.26; p=0.90) in non-diabetics (p for interaction=0.31). Cumulative incidences of cardiac death (14.9% vs. 9.5%; p=0.10), target-vessel MI (11.4% vs. 11.0%; p=0.81), clinically-indicated TLR (16.9% vs. 15.8%; p=0.68), and definite thrombosis (3.0% vs. 2.5%; p=0.63) at 5 years were similar among diabetic patients treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES. Overall, there was no interaction between diabetic status and treatment effect of BP-SES versus DP-EES.

Conclusion

In a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, we found no difference in clinical outcomes throughout five years between diabetic patients treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES.

Acknowledgement/Funding

BIOSCIENCE was an investigator-initiated trial supported by a dedicated research grant from Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland

Infective endocarditis after transcatheter or surgical aortic valve implantation: pooled results from three randomized controlled trials

Background

Infective endocarditis is a rare complication of aortic valve replacement with high morbidity and mortality. Data of randomized trials comparing the incidence and outcomes between surgical (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are scarce.

Purpose

To compare the frequency, timing and outcomes of infective endocarditis after TAVR and SAVR from 3 prospective randomized trials and examine the clinical outcomes.

Methods

Clinical data from the CoreValve Pivotal High-Risk, the intermediate-risk SURTAVI and the Evolut Low Risk randomized trials, which compared TAVR with a supra-annular, self-expanding transcatheter valve to SAVR, was pooled. Cases of infective endocarditis were independently adjudicated based on Duke's criteria necessitating 2 major criteria, or 1 major and 3 minor criteria, or 5 minor criteria. Baseline clinical and procedural characteristics for patients with and without endocarditis were obtained. The cumulative incidence of endocarditis through 5 years after TAVR or SAVR was determined using death as a competing risk. Kaplan-Meier estimates of all-cause mortality and the composite of all-cause mortality or stroke through 2 years were calculated for both treatment groups.

Results

Among 2249 TAVR patients, 12 cases of endocarditis (0.5%) were documented and among 1828 SAVR patients, 21 (1.1%) over a mean follow-up time of 2.25±1.58 years. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between the TAVR and SAVR patients with endocarditis. The cumulative incidence of endocarditis at 5 years was significantly different between the two groups (figure). The prevalence of diabetes was significantly higher in patients with endocarditis than in those without (57.6% vs. 34.2%, p=0.005). In endocarditis patients the rate of all-cause mortality was 39.4% for TAVR patients and 67.8% for SAVR patients at 2 years (log-rank p=0.133). The rates of all-cause mortality or stroke were 55.0% for TAVR and 64.6% for SAVR patients (log-rank p=0.078).

Conclusions

In this pooled analysis of three randomized trials comparing TAVR with a supra-annular, self-expanding bioprosthesis to SAVR, overall rates of endocarditis were low. The cumulative incidence of infective endocarditis at 5 years was lower in the TAVR group. Mortality after endocarditis was high.

Figure 1

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding source: Private company. Main funding source(s): Medtronic