Treatment of aortic stenosis with a self-expanding transcatheter valve: the International Multi-centre ADVANCE Study.

AIM Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has become an alternative to surgery in higher risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. The aim of the ADVANCE study was to evaluate outcomes following implantation of a self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve system in a fully monitored, multi-centre 'real-world' patient population in highly experienced centres. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients with severe aortic stenosis at a higher surgical risk in whom implantation of the CoreValve System was decided by the Heart Team were included. Endpoints were a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or reintervention) and mortality at 30 days and 1 year. Endpoint-related events were independently adjudicated based on Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions. A total of 1015 patients [mean logistic EuroSCORE 19.4 ± 12.3% [median (Q1,Q3), 16.0% (10.3, 25.3%)], age 81 ± 6 years] were enrolled. Implantation of the CoreValve System led to a significant improvement in haemodynamics and an increase in the effective aortic valve orifice area. At 30 days, the MACCE rate was 8.0% (95% CI: 6.3-9.7%), all-cause mortality was 4.5% (3.2-5.8%), cardiovascular mortality was 3.4% (2.3-4.6%), and the rate of stroke was 3.0% (2.0-4.1%). The life-threatening or disabling bleeding rate was 4.0% (2.8-6.3%). The 12-month rates of MACCE, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke were 21.2% (18.4-24.1%), 17.9% (15.2-20.5%), 11.7% (9.4-14.1%), and 4.5% (2.9-6.1%), respectively. The 12-month rates of all-cause mortality were 11.1, 16.5, and 23.6% among patients with a logistic EuroSCORE ≤10%, EuroSCORE 10-20%, and EuroSCORE >20% (P< 0.05), respectively. CONCLUSION The ADVANCE study demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of the CoreValve System with low mortality and stroke rates in higher risk real-world patients with severe aortic stenosis.

European experience with the second-generation Edwards SAPIEN XT transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis: 1-year outcomes from the SOURCE XT Registry

OBJECTIVES The SOURCE XT Registry (Edwards SAPIEN XT Aortic Bioprosthesis Multi-Region Outcome Registry) assessed the use and clinical outcomes with the SAPIEN XT (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) valve in the real-world setting. BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is an established treatment for high-risk/inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis. The SAPIEN XT is a balloon-expandable valve with enhanced features allowing delivery via a lower profile sheath. METHODS The SOURCE XT Registry is a prospective, multicenter, post-approval study. Data from 2,688 patients at 99 sites were analyzed. The main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, stroke, major vascular complications, bleeding, and pacemaker implantations at 30-days and 1 year post-procedure. RESULTS The mean age was 81.4 ± 6.6 years, 42.3% were male, and the mean logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) was 20.4 ± 12.4%. Patients had a high burden of coronary disease (44.2%), diabetes (29.4%), renal insufficiency (28.9%), atrial fibrillation (25.6%), and peripheral vascular disease (21.2%). Survival was 93.7% at 30 days and 80.6% at 1 year. At 30-day follow-up, the stroke rate was 3.6%, the rate of major vascular complications was 6.5%, the rate of life-threatening bleeding was 5.5%, the rate of new pacemakers was 9.5%, and the rate of moderate/severe paravalvular leak was 5.5%. Multivariable analysis identified nontransfemoral approach (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.84; p < 0.0001), renal insufficiency (HR: 1.53; p < 0.0001), liver disease (HR: 1.67; p = 0.0453), moderate/severe tricuspid regurgitation (HR: 1.47; p = 0.0019), porcelain aorta (HR: 1.47; p = 0.0352), and atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.41; p = 0.0014), with the highest HRs for 1-year mortality. Major vascular complications and major/life-threatening bleeding were the most frequently seen complications associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS The SOURCE XT Registry demonstrated appropriate use of the SAPIEN XT THV in the first year post-commercialization in Europe. The safety profile is sustained, and clinical benefits have been established in the real-world setting. (SOURCE XT Registry; NCT01238497).

Gender differences in clinical presentation and surgical outcome of aortic stenosis

Little is known about the gender differences of patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR) for isolated severe aortic stenosis.

Clinical outcomes of patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased surgical risk according to treatment modality

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the role of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) compared with medical treatment (MT) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at increased surgical risk. Background Elderly patients with comorbidities are at considerable risk for SAVR. Methods Since July 2007, 442 patients with severe AS (age: 81.7 ± 6.0 years, mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation: 22.3 ± 14.6%) underwent treatment allocation to MT (n = 78), SAVR (n = 107), or TAVI (n = 257) on the basis of a comprehensive evaluation protocol as part of a prospective registry. Results Baseline clinical characteristics were similar among patients allocated to MT and TAVI, whereas patients allocated to SAVR were younger (p < 0.001) and had a lower predicted peri-operative risk (p < 0.001). Unadjusted rates of all-cause mortality at 30 months were lower for SAVR (22.4%) and TAVI (22.6%) compared with MT (61.5%, p < 0.001). Adjusted hazard ratios for death were 0.51 (95% confidence interval: 0.30 to 0.87) for SAVR compared with MT and 0.38 (95% confidence interval: 0.25 to 0.58) for TAVI compared with MT. Medical treatment (<0.001), older age (>80 years, p = 0.01), peripheral vascular disease (<0.001), and atrial fibrillation (p = 0.04) were significantly associated with all-cause mortality at 30 months in the multivariate analysis. At 1 year, more patients undergoing SAVR (92.3%) or TAVI (93.2%) had New York Heart Association functional class I/II as compared with patients with MT (70.8%, p = 0.003). Conclusions Among patients with severe AS with increased surgical risk, SAVR and TAVI improve survival and symptoms compared with MT. Clinical outcomes of TAVI and SAVR seem similar among carefully selected patients with severe symptomatic AS at increased risk.

Clinical outcome of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction undergoing medical treatment or TAVI

Introduction Reduced left ventricular function in patients with severe symptomatic valvular aortic stenosis is associated with impaired clinical outcome in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) has been shown non-inferior to SAVR in high-risk patients with respect to mortality and may result in faster left ventricular recovery. Methods We investigated clinical outcomes of high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing medical treatment (n = 71) or TAVI (n = 256) stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in a prospective single center registry. Results Twenty-five patients (35%) among the medical cohort were found to have an LVEF≤30% (mean 26.7±4.1%) and 37 patients (14%) among the TAVI patients (mean 25.2±4.4%). Estimated peri-interventional risk as assessed by logistic EuroSCORE was significantly higher in patients with severely impaired LVEF as compared to patients with LVEF>30% (medical/TAVI 38.5±13.8%/40.6±16.4% versus medical/TAVI 22.5±10.8%/22.1±12.8%, p <0.001). In patients undergoing TAVI, there was no significant difference in the combined endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, major stroke, life-threatening bleeding, major access-site complications, valvular re-intervention, or renal failure at 30 days between the two groups (21.0% versus 27.0%, p = 0.40). After TAVI, patients with LVEF≤30% experienced a rapid improvement in LVEF (from 25±4% to 34±10% at discharge, p = 0.002) associated with improved NYHA functional class at 30 days (decrease ≥1 NYHA class in 95%). During long-term follow-up no difference in survival was observed in patients undergoing TAVI irrespective of baseline LVEF (p = 0.29), whereas there was a significantly higher mortality in medically treated patients with severely reduced LVEF (log rank p = 0.001). Conclusion TAVI in patients with severely reduced left ventricular function may be performed safely and is associated with rapid recovery of systolic left ventricular function and heart failure symptoms.

Predictors of Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing TAVI: A Multistate Analysis

Patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased surgical risk continue to experience compromised long-term survival despite successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation. We used time-related pathways in a multistate analysis to identify predictors of adverse long-term outcome in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

The SURTAVI model: proposal for a pragmatic risk stratification for patients with severe aortic stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a less invasive alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) and a high operative risk. Risk stratification plays a decisive role in the optimal selection of therapeutic strategies for AS patients. The accuracy of contemporary surgical risk algorithms for AS patients has spurred considerable debate especially in the higher risk patient population. Future trials will explore TAVI in patients at intermediate operative risk. During the design of the SURgical replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (SURTAVI) trial, a novel concept of risk stratification was proposed based upon age in combination with a fixed number of predefined risk factors, which are relatively prevalent, easy to capture and with a reasonable impact on operative mortality. Retrospective application of this algorithm to a contemporary academic practice dealing with clinically significant AS patients allocates about one-fourth of these patients as being at intermediate operative risk. Further testing is required for validation of this new paradigm in risk stratification. Finally, the Heart Team, consisting of at least an interventional cardiologist and cardiothoracic surgeon, should have the decisive role in determining whether a patient could be treated with TAVI or SAVR.

Transapical valve-in-valve implantation for regurgitant stented aortic bioprostheses

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is rapidly evolving as an alternative treatment option for elderly patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and excessive risk for surgical intervention. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation is an alternative approach to redo-surgery for patients with degeneration of a bioprosthetic valve. Herein are reported three cases of successful transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation for severely regurgitant bioprosthetic valves with a clinical follow up of more than 12 months.

Persistent diastolic dysfunction late after valve replacement in severe aortic regurgitation

BACKGROUND: Regression of left ventricular (LV) hypertrophy with normalization of diastolic function has been reported in patients with aortic stenosis late after aortic valve replacement (AVR). The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the effect of AVR on LV function and structure in chronic aortic regurgitation early and late after AVR. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were included in the present analysis. Eleven patients with severe aortic regurgitation were studied before, early (21 months) and late (89 months) after AVR through the use of LV biplane angiograms, high-fidelity pressure measurements, and LV endomyocardial biopsies. Fifteen healthy subjects were used as controls. LV systolic function was determined from biplane ejection fraction and midwall fractional shortening. LV diastolic function was calculated from the time constant of LV relaxation, peak filling rates, and myocardial stiffness constant. LV structure was assessed from muscle fiber diameter, interstitial fibrosis, and fibrous content. LV muscle mass decreased significantly by 38% early and 55% late after surgery. Ejection fraction was significantly reduced preoperatively and did not change after AVR (P=NS). LV relaxation was significantly prolonged before surgery (89+/-28 ms) but was normalized late after AVR (42+/-14 ms). Early and late peak filling rates were increased preoperatively but normalized postoperatively. Diastolic stiffness constant was increased before surgery (22+/-6 versus 9+/-3 in control subjects; P=0.0003) and remained elevated early and late after AVR (23+/-4; P=0.002). Muscle fiber diameter decreased significantly after AVR but remained increased at late follow-up. Interstitial fibrosis was increased preoperatively and increased even further early but decreased late after AVR. Fibrosis was positively linearly correlated to myocardial stiffness and inversely correlated to LV ejection fraction. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with aortic regurgitation show normalization of macroscopic LV hypertrophy late after AVR, although fiber hypertrophy persists. These changes in LV myocardial structure late after AVR are accompanied by a change in passive elastic properties with persistent diastolic dysfunction.

Severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease

Coronary artery disease (CAD) and aortic stenosis (AS) share pathophysiological mechanisms and risk factors. Moreover, the prevalence of CAD increases among elderly patients with severe AS since disease progression is strongly associated with age for both CAD and AS. These factors contribute to the frequent coexistence of CAD and AS. Patients with concomitant AS and CAD are characterised by higher baseline risk profiles with a larger number of comorbidities as compared to patients with isolated AS. Therefore, adequate therapeutic strategies are crucial for the treatment of these patients. The number of patients undergoing concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) doubled during the last decade. Moreover, the development and rapid integration of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) into clinical practice in western European countries has further extended invasive treatment of AS to elderly high-risk patients not considered suitable candidates for SAVR, frequently presenting with CAD. The aim of this review article is to provide an overview on CAD prevalence, impact on clinical outcomes, and treatment strategies in patients with severe AS requiring SAVR or TAVI.

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing TAVR

Background Atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation may complicate transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Available evidence on predictors of PPM is sparse and derived from small studies. Objectives The objective of this study was to provide summary effect estimates for clinically useful predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. Methods We performed a systematic search for studies that reported the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR and that provided raw data for the predictors of interest. Data on study, patient, and procedural characteristics were abstracted. Crude risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals for each predictor were calculated by use of random effects models. Stratified analyses by type of implanted valve were performed. Results We obtained data from 41 studies that included 11,210 TAVR patients, of whom 17% required PPM implantation after intervention. The rate of PPM ranged from 2% to 51% in individual studies (with a median of 28% for the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving System [MCRS] and 6% for the Edwards SAPIEN valve [ESV]). The summary estimates indicated increased risk of PPM after TAVR for men (RR: 1.23; p < 0.01); for patients with first-degree AV block (RR: 1.52; p < 0.01), left anterior hemiblock (RR: 1.62; p < 0.01), or right bundle branch block (RR: 2.89; p < 0.01) at baseline; and for patients with intraprocedural AV block (RR: 3.49; p < 0.01). These variables remained significant predictors when only patients treated with the MCRS bioprosthesis were considered. The data for ESV were limited. Unadjusted estimates indicated a 2.5-fold higher risk for PPM implantation for patients who received the MCRS than for those who received the ESV. Conclusions Male sex, baseline conduction disturbances, and intraprocedural AV block emerged as predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. This study provides useful tools to identify high-risk patients and to guide clinical decision making before and after intervention.

Long-term outcome of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis as a function of treatment modality

OBJECTIVE To assess long-term clinical outcomes of consecutive high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis according to treatment allocation to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or medical treatment (MT). METHODS Patients with severe aortic stenosis were consecutively enrolled into a prospective single centre registry. RESULTS Among 442 patients (median age 83 years, median STS-score 4.7) allocated to MT (n=78), SAVR (n=107), or TAVI (n=257) all-cause mortality amounted to 81%, 37% and 43% after a median duration of follow-up of 3.9 years (p<0.001). Rates of major adverse cerebro-cardiovascular events were lower in patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI as compared with MT (SAVR vs MT: HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.46) (TAVI vs MT: HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.46), with no significant difference between SAVR and TAVI (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.25). Whereas SAVR (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.61), TAVI (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.52), and female gender (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.99) were associated with improved survival, body mass index ≤20 kg/m(2) (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.47), diabetes (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.12), peripheral vascular disease (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.81), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.37) and pulmonary hypertension (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.00) were identified as independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS Among high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, long-term clinical outcome through 5 years was comparable between patients allocated to SAVR or TAVI. In contrast, patients with MT had a dismal prognosis.

Assessment of low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis: an invasive evaluation is required for decision making.

Low-flow, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis (AS) is characterised by a small aortic valve area (AVA) and low mean gradient (MG) secondary to a low cardiac output and may occur in patients with either a preserved or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Symptomatic patients presenting with low-flow, low-gradient severe AS have a dismal prognosis independent of baseline LVEF if managed conservatively and should therefore undergo aortic valve replacement if feasible. Transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) is the first-line investigation for the assessment of AS haemodynamic severity. However, when confronted with guideline-discordant AVA (small) and MG (low) values, there are several reasons other than severe AS combined with a low cardiac output which may lead to such a situation, including erroneous measurements, small body size, inherent inconsistencies in the guidelines' criteria, prolonged ejection time and aortic pseudostenosis. The distinction between these various entities poses a diagnostic challenge. However, it is important to make a distinction because each has very different implications in terms of risk stratification and therapeutic management. In such instances, cardiac catheterisation forms an integral part of the work-up of these patients in order to confirm or refute the echocardiographic findings to guide management decisions appropriately.

Three-dimensional printing of models for preoperative planning and simulation of transcatheter valve replacement

In this study, we show the use of three-dimensional printing models for preoperative planning of transcatheter valve replacement in a patient with an extreme porcelain aorta. A 70-year-old man with severe aortic stenosis and a porcelain aorta was referred to our center for transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Unfortunately, the patient died after the procedure because of a potential ischemic event. Therefore, we decided to fabricate three-dimensional models to evaluate the potential effects of these constructs for previous surgical planning and simulation of the transcatheter valve replacement.

In Vitro Testing of a Temporary Catheter-Based Aortic "Parachute" Valve

Recently developed technologies allow aortic valve implantation off-pump in a beating heart. In this procedure, the native, stenotic aortic valve is not removed, but simply crushed by a pressure balloon mounted on a percutaneous catheter. Removal of the native aortic cusps before valve replacement may reduce the incidence of annular or cuspal calcium embolization and late perivalvular leaks and increase implantable valve size. However, a temporary valve system in the ascending aorta may be necessary to maintain hemodynamic stability by reducing acute aortic regurgitation and left ventricular volume overload. This study evaluates the hemodynamic effects of a wire-mounted, monoleaflet, temporary valve apparatus in a mechanical cardiovascular simulator. Aortic flow, systemic pressure and left ventricular pressure were continuously monitored. An intraluminal camera obtained real-time proximal and distal images of the valve in operation. Insertion of the parachute valve in the simulator increased diastolic pressure from 7 to 38 mm Hg. Cardiac output increased from 2.08 to 4.66 L/min and regurgitant volume decreased from 65 to 23 mL. In conclusion, placement of a temporary valve in the ascending aorta may help maintain hemodynamic stability and improve off-pump aortic valve replacement.