Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Anticoagulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The Randomized BRAVO-3 Trial.

BACKGROUND Anticoagulation is required during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures. Although an optimal regimen has not been determined, heparin is mainly used. Direct thrombin inhibition with bivalirudin may be an effective alternative to heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent in this setting. OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to determine whether bivalirudin offers an alternative to heparin as the procedural anticoagulant agent in patients undergoing TAVR. METHODS A total of 802 patients with aortic stenosis were randomized to undergo transfemoral TAVR with bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin during the procedure. The 2 primary endpoints were major bleeding within 48 h or before hospital discharge (whichever occurred first) and 30-day net adverse clinical events, defined as the combination of major adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major bleeding. RESULTS Anticoagulation with bivalirudin versus heparin did not meet superiority because it did not result in significantly lower rates of major bleeding at 48 h (6.9% vs. 9.0%; relative risk: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.48 to 1.23; p = 0.27) or net adverse cardiovascular events at 30 days (14.4% vs. 16.1%; relative risk: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.24; risk difference: -1.72; 95% CI: -6.70 to 3.25; p = 0.50); regarding the latter, the prespecified noninferiority hypothesis was met (pnoninferiority < 0.01). Rates of major adverse cardiovascular events at 48 h were not significantly different (3.5% vs. 4.8%; relative risk: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.37 to 1.43; p = 0.35). At 48 h, the bivalirudin group had significantly fewer myocardial infarctions but more acute kidney injury events than the heparin group; at 30 days, these differences were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized trial of TAVR procedural pharmacotherapy, bivalirudin did not reduce rates of major bleeding at 48 h or net adverse cardiovascular events within 30 days compared with heparin. Although superiority was not shown, the noninferiority hypothesis was met with respect to the latter factor. Given the lower cost, heparin should remain the standard of care, and bivalirudin can be an alternative anticoagulant option in patients unable to receive heparin in TAVR. (International, Multi-center, Open-label, Randomized Controlled Trial in Patients Undergoing TAVR to Determine the Treatment Effect [Both Safety and Efficacy] of Using Bivalirudin Instead of UFH [BRAVO-2/3]; NCT01651780).

A non-contrast self-navigated 3-dimensional MR technique for aortic root and vascular access route assessment in the context of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: proof of concept.

OBJECTIVES: Due to the high prevalence of renal failure in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) candidates, a non-contrast MR technique is desirable for pre-procedural planning. We sought to evaluate the feasibility of a novel, non-contrast, free-breathing, self-navigated three-dimensional (SN3D) MR sequence for imaging the aorta from its root to the iliofemoral run-off in comparison to non-contrast two-dimensional-balanced steady-state free-precession (2D-bSSFP) imaging. METHODS: SN3D [field of view (FOV), 220-370 mm(3); slice thickness, 1.15 mm; repetition/echo time (TR/TE), 3.1/1.5 ms; and flip angle, 115°] and 2D-bSSFP acquisitions (FOV, 340 mm; slice thickness, 6 mm; TR/TE, 2.3/1.1 ms; flip angle, 77°) were performed in 10 healthy subjects (all male; mean age, 30.3 ± 4.3 yrs) using a 1.5-T MRI system. Aortic root measurements and qualitative image ratings (four-point Likert-scale) were compared. RESULTS: The mean effective aortic annulus diameter was similar for 2D-bSSFP and SN3D (26.7 ± 0.7 vs. 26.1 ± 0.9 mm, p = 0.23). The mean image quality of 2D-bSSFP (4; IQR 3-4) was rated slightly higher (p = 0.03) than SN3D (3; IQR 2-4). The mean total acquisition time for SN3D imaging was 12.8 ± 2.4 min. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that a novel SN3D sequence allows rapid, free-breathing assessment of the aortic root and the aortoiliofemoral system without administration of contrast medium. KEY POINTS: • The prevalence of renal failure is high among TAVR candidates. • Non-contrast 3D MR angiography allows for TAVR procedure planning. • The self-navigated sequence provides a significantly reduced scanning time.

Costs of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers a new treatment option for patients with aortic stenosis, but costs may play a decisive role in decision making. Current studies are evaluating TAVR in an intermediate-risk population. We assessed the in-hospital and 1-year follow-up costs of patients undergoing TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) at intermediate operative risk and identified important cost components.

Performance of Surgical Risk Scores to Predict Mortality after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

AbstractBackground:Predicting mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains a challenge.Objectives:To evaluate the performance of 5 risk scores for cardiac surgery in predicting the 30-day mortality among patients of the Brazilian Registry of TAVI.Methods:The Brazilian Multicenter Registry prospectively enrolled 418 patients undergoing TAVI in 18 centers between 2008 and 2013. The 30-day mortality risk was calculated using the following surgical scores: the logistic EuroSCORE I (ESI), EuroSCORE II (ESII), Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, Ambler score (AS) and Guaragna score (GS). The performance of the risk scores was evaluated in terms of their calibration (Hosmer–Lemeshow test) and discrimination [area under the receiver–operating characteristic curve (AUC)].Results:The mean age was 81.5 ± 7.7 years. The CoreValve (Medtronic) was used in 86.1% of the cohort, and the transfemoral approach was used in 96.2%. The observed 30-day mortality was 9.1%. The 30-day mortality predicted by the scores was as follows: ESI, 20.2 ± 13.8%; ESII, 6.5 ± 13.8%; STS score, 14.7 ± 4.4%; AS, 7.0 ± 3.8%; GS, 17.3 ± 10.8%. Using AUC, none of the tested scores could accurately predict the 30-day mortality. AUC for the scores was as follows: 0.58 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49 to 0.68, p = 0.09] for ESI; 0.54 (95% CI: 0.44 to 0.64, p = 0.42) for ESII; 0.57 (95% CI: 0.47 to 0.67, p = 0.16) for AS; 0.48 (95% IC: 0.38 to 0.57, p = 0.68) for STS score; and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.42 to 0.62, p = 0.64) for GS. The Hosmer–Lemeshow test indicated acceptable calibration for all scores (p > 0.05).Conclusions:In this real world Brazilian registry, the surgical risk scores were inaccurate in predicting mortality after TAVI. Risk models specifically developed for TAVI are required.

Transapical aortic valve replacement through a chronic apical aneurysm.

Transapical aortic valve replacement through an apical aneurysm is traditionally contraindicated because of the risk of severe systemic embolization when thrombi are present. However, a chronic fibrotic aneurysm without apical thrombi carries a low risk of distal embolization and can be safely employed for a transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement in case of absence of an alternative access site (severe vascular disease, small vascular sizes and diseased calcified aorta). We illustrate our experience with a 73-year-old patient suffering from symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, coronary artery disease with occluded left anterior descending artery, left ventricular apical aneurysm and severe peripheral vascular disease, who successfully underwent a transapical 26 mm Sapien? XT stent-valve implantation through the fibrotic thin akinetic apical wall.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a lung transplant recipient.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a feasible therapeutic option for selected patients with severe aortic stenosis and high or prohibitive risk for standard surgery. Lung transplant recipients are often considered high-risk patients for heart surgery because of their specific transplant-associated characteristics and comorbidities. We report a case of successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a lung transplant recipient with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, severe left ventricular dysfunction, and end-stage renal failure 9 years after bilateral lung transplantation.

Transapical aortic valve replacement in extreme-risk patients: outcome, risk factors and mid-term results.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) provides good results in selected high-risk patients. However, it is unclear whether this procedure carries advantages in extreme-risk profile patients with logistic EuroSCORE above 35%. METHODS: From January 2009 to July 2011, of a total number of 92 transcatheter aortic valve procedures performed, 40 'extreme-risk' patients underwent transapical TAVR (TA-TAVR) (EuroSCORE above 35%). Variables were analysed as risk factors for hospital and mid-term mortality, and a 2-year follow-up (FU) was obtained. RESULTS: The mean age was: 81 ± 10 years. Twelve patients (30%) had chronic pulmonary disease, 32 (80%) severe peripheral vascular disease, 14 (35%) previous cardiac surgery, 19 (48%) chronic renal failure (2 in dialysis), 7 (17%) previous stroke (1 with disabilities), 3 (7%) a porcelain aorta and 12 (30%) were urgent cases. Mean left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) was 49 ± 13%, and mean logistic EuroSCORE was 48 ± 11%. Forty stent-valves were successfully implanted with six Grade-1 and one Grade-2 paravalvular leakages (success rate: 100%). Hospital mortality was 20% (8 patients). Causes of death following the valve academic research consortium (VARC) definitions were: life-threatening haemorrhage (1), myocardial infarction (1), sudden death (1), multiorgan failure (2), stroke (1) and severe respiratory dysfunction (2). Major complications (VARC definitions) were: myocardial infarction for left coronary ostium occlusion (1), life-threatening bleeding (2), stroke (2) and acute kidney injury with dialysis (2). Predictors for hospital mortality were: conversion to sternotomy, life-threatening haemorrhage, postoperative dialysis and long intensive care unit (ICU) stay. Variables associated with hospital mortality were: conversion to sternotomy (P = 0.03), life-threatening bleeding (P = 0.02), acute kidney injury with dialysis (P = 0.03) and prolonged ICU stay (P = 0.02). Mean FU time was 24 months: actuarial survival estimates for all-cause mortality at 6 months, 1 year, 18 months and 2 years were 68, 57, 54 and 54%, respectively. Patients still alive at FU were in good clinical condition, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class 1-2 and were never rehospitalized for cardiac decompensation. CONCLUSIONS: TA-TAVR in extreme-risk patients carries a moderate risk of hospital mortality. Severe comorbidities and presence of residual paravalvular leakages affect the mid-term survival, whereas surviving patients have an acceptable quality of life without rehospitalizations for cardiac decompensation.

Prevention and management of potential adverse events during transapical aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND AND AIM OF THE STUDY: Transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a new minimally invasive technique with a known risk of unexpected intra-procedural complications. Nevertheless, the clinical results are good and the limited amount of procedural adverse events confirms the usefulness of a synergistic surgical/anesthesiological management in case of unexpected emergencies. METHODS: A review was made of the authors' four-year database and other available literature to identify major and minor intra-procedural complications occurring during transapical TAVR procedures. All implants were performed under general anesthesia with a balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien stent-valve, and followed international guidelines on indications and techniques. RESULTS: Procedural success rates ranged between 94% and 100%. Life-threatening apical bleeding occurred very rarely (0-5%), and its incidence decreased after the first series of implants. Stent-valve embolization was also rare, with a global incidence ranging from 0-2%, with evidence of improvement after the learning curve. Rates of valve malpositioning ranged from 0% to < 3%, whereas the risk of coronary obstruction ranged from 0% to 3.5%. Aortic root rupture and dissection were dramatic events reported in 0-2% of transapical cases. Stent-valve malfunction was rarely reported (1-2%), whereas the valve-in-valve bailout procedure for malpositioning, malfunctioning or severe paravalvular leak was reported in about 1.0-3.5% of cases. Sudden hemodynamic management and bailout procedures such as valve-in-valve rescue or cannulation for cardiopulmonary bypass were more effective when planned during the preoperative phase. CONCLUSION: Despite attempts to avoid pitfalls, complications during transapical aortic valve procedures still occur. Preoperative strategic planning, including hemodynamic status management, alternative cannulation sites and bailout procedures, are highly recommended, particularly during the learning curve of this technique.

Implantation de valve aortique par voie transcatheter (TAVI): update sur les indications [Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): update on the indications].

Although surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard of care for patient with severe aortic stenosis, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is now a fair standard of care for patients not eligible or high risk for surgical treatment. The decision of therapeutic choice between TAVI and surgery considers surgical risk (estimated by the Euro-SCORE and STS-PROM) as well as many parameters that go beyond the assessment of the valvular disease's severity by echocardiography: a multidisciplinary assessment in "Heart Team" is needed to assess each case in all its complexity.

Use of a ventricular septal defect occluder for apical closure in transapical aortic valve replacement.

During transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TA-TAVR), the apical closure remains a challenge for the surgeon, having the risk for ventricular tear and massive bleeding. Apical closure devices are already under clinical evaluation, but only a few can lead to a full percutaneous TA-TAVR. We describe the successful use of a 9-mm myocardial occluder (ventricular septal defect occluder) that was used to seal the apex after a standard TA-TAVR (using the Sapien XT 23-mm transcatheter valve and the Ascendra + delivery system). The placement of the nonmodified myocardial occluder was performed through the Ascendra + delivery system, with a very small amount of blood loss and an acceptable sealing of the apical tear. This approach is feasible and represents a further step toward true-percutaneous transapical heart valve procedures. Modified apical occluders are under evaluation in animal models.

Future perspectives in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) constitutes a relatively new treatment option for the patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Evidence from registries and randomized control trials has underscored the value of this treatment in inoperable and high risk populations, while new developments in valve technology and TAVR enabling devices have reduced the risk of complications, simplified the procedure, and broadened the applications of this therapy. The initial promising clinical results and the potential of an effective less invasive treatment of aortic stenosis has not only created high expectations but also the need to address the pitfalls of TAVR technology. The evolving knowledge concerning the groups of patients who would benefit from this treatment, the limited long term follow-up data, the concerns about devices' long term durability, and the severity of complications remain important caveats which restrict the widespread clinical adoption of TAVR. The aim of this review article is to present the recent advances, highlight the limitations of TAVR technology, and discuss the future perspectives in this rapidly evolving field.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a lung transplant recipient.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a feasible therapeutic option for selected patients with severe aortic stenosis and high or prohibitive risk for standard surgery. Lung transplant recipients are often considered high-risk patients for heart surgery because of their specific transplant-associated characteristics and comorbidities. We report a case of successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a lung transplant recipient with a symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, severe left ventricular dysfunction, and end-stage renal failure 9 years after bilateral lung transplantation.

Safety and Use of Anticoagulation After Aortic Valve Replacement With Bioprostheses: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend 3 months of anticoagulation after replacement of the aortic valve with a bioprosthesis. However, there remains great variability in the current clinical practice and conflicting results from clinical studies. To assist clinical decision making, we pooled the existing evidence to assess whether anticoagulation in the setting of a new bioprosthesis was associated with improved outcomes or greater risk of bleeding. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched the PubMed database from the inception of these databases until April 2015 to identify original studies (observational studies or clinical trials) that assessed anticoagulation with warfarin in comparison with either aspirin or no antiplatelet or anticoagulant therapy. We included the studies if their outcomes included thromboembolism or stroke/transient ischemic attacks and bleeding events. Quality assessment was performed in accordance with the Newland Ottawa Scale, and random effects analysis was used to pool the data from the available studies. I(2) testing was done to assess the heterogeneity of the included studies. After screening through 170 articles, a total of 13 studies (cases=6431; controls=18210) were included in the final analyses. The use of warfarin was associated with a significantly increased risk of overall bleeding (odds ratio, 1.96; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-3.08; P<0.0001) or bleeding risk at 3 months (odds ratio, 1.92; 95% confidence interval, 1.10-3.34; P<0.0001) compared with aspirin or placebo. With regard to composite primary outcome variables (risk of venous thromboembolism, stroke, or transient ischemic attack) at 3 months, no significant difference was seen with warfarin (odds ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval, 0.82-1.56; P=0.67). Moreover, anticoagulation was also not shown to improve outcomes at time interval >3 months (odds ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.58; P=0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to the current guidelines, a meta-analysis of previous studies suggests that anticoagulation in the setting of an aortic bioprosthesis significantly increases bleeding risk without a favorable effect on thromboembolic events. Larger, randomized controlled studies should be performed to further guide this clinical practice.