Management and Outcome of Acute Ischemic Stroke Complicating Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundDespite advances in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), periprocedural acute ischemic stroke remains a concern.ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to investigate acute ischemic stroke complicating TAVR (AISCT) and to describe the indications and outcomes of interventions to treat AISCT.MethodsAn international multicenter registry was established focusing on AISCT within 30 days of TAVR. Stroke severity was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale. Primary outcomes were 1-year all-cause death and neurologic disability status at 90 days according to modified Rankin scale score.ResultsOf 16,615 TAVR procedures, 387 patients with AISCT were included (2.3%). Rates of 1-year death were 28.9%, 35.9%, and 77.5% in patients with mild, moderate, and severe stroke, respectively (P < 0.001). Although 348 patients were managed conservatively, 39 patients (10.1%) underwent neurointervention (NI) with either mechanical thrombectomy (n = 26) or thrombolytic therapy (n = 13). In a subanalysis excluding patients with mild stroke, there was no clear 1-year survival benefit for NI compared with conservative management (47.6% vs 41.1%, respectively; P = 0.78). In a logistic regression model controlling for stroke severity, NI was associated with 2.9-fold odds (95% CI: 1.2-7.0; P = 0.016) of independent survival at 90 days.ConclusionsAISCT carries significant morbidity and mortality, which is correlated with stroke severity. The present findings suggest that neurologic disability for patients with moderate or worse stroke could potentially be improved by timely intervention and highlight the importance of collaboration between cardiologists and neurologists to optimize AISCT outcomes.     

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Rheumatic Aortic Stenosis

BackgroundPatients with rheumatic aortic stenosis (AS) were excluded from transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) trials.ObjectivesThe authors sought to examine outcomes with TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with rheumatic AS, and versus TAVR in nonrheumatic AS.MethodsThe authors identified Medicare beneficiaries who underwent TAVR or SAVR from October 2015 to December 2017, and then identified patients with rheumatic AS using prior validated International Classification of Diseases, Version 10 codes. Overlap propensity score weighting analysis was used to adjust for measured confounders. The primary study outcome was all-cause mortality. Multiple secondary outcomes were also examined.ResultsThe final study cohort included 1,159 patients with rheumatic AS who underwent aortic valve replacement (SAVR, n = 554; TAVR, n = 605), and 88,554 patients with nonrheumatic AS who underwent TAVR. Patients in the SAVR group were younger and with lower prevalence of most comorbidities and frailty scores. After median follow-up of 19 months (interquartile range: 13 to 26 months), there was no difference in all-cause mortality with TAVR versus SAVR (11.2 vs. 7.0 per 100 person-year; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.84 to 2.79; p = 0.2). Compared with TAVR in nonrheumatic AS, TAVR for rheumatic AS was associated with similar mortality (15.2 vs. 17.7 deaths per 100 person-years (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.09; p = 0.2) after median follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range: 11 to 24 months). None of the rheumatic TAVR patients, <11 SAVR patients, and 242 nonrheumatic TAVR patients underwent repeat aortic valve replacement (124 redo-TAVR and 118 SAVR) at follow-up.ConclusionsCompared with SAVR, TAVR could represent a viable and possibly durable option for patients with rheumatic AS.     

Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Transcatheter Prosthesis Dysfunction

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) use is increasing in patients with longer life expectancy, yet robust data on the durability of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) are limited. Redo-TAVR may play a key strategy in treating patients in whom THVs fail.ObjectivesThe authors sought to examine outcomes following redo-TAVR.MethodsThe Redo-TAVR registry collected data on consecutive patients who underwent redo-TAVR at 37 centers. Patients were classified as probable TAVR failure or probable THV failure if they presented within or beyond 1 year of their index TAVR, respectively.ResultsAmong 63,876 TAVR procedures, 212 consecutive redo-TAVR procedures were identified (0.33%): 74 within and 138 beyond 1 year of the initial procedure. For these 2 groups, TAVR-to-redo-TAVR time was 68 (38 to 154) days and 5 (3 to 6) years. The indication for redo-TAVR was THV stenosis in 12 (16.2%) and 51 (37.0%) (p = 0.002) and regurgitation or combined stenosis–regurgitation in 62 (83.8%) and 86 (62.3%) (p = 0.028), respectively. Device success using VARC-2 criteria was achieved in 180 patients (85.1%); most failures were attributable to high residual gradients (14.1%) or regurgitation (8.9%). At 30-day and 1-year follow-up, residual gradients were 12.6 ± 7.5 mm Hg and 12.9 ± 9.0 mm Hg; valve area 1.63 ± 0.61 cm² and 1.51 ± 0.57 cm²; and regurgitation ≤mild in 91% and 91%, respectively. Peri-procedural complication rates were low (3 stroke [1.4%], 7 valve malposition [3.3%], 2 coronary obstruction [0.9%], 20 new permanent pacemaker [9.6%], no mortality), and symptomatic improvement was substantial. Survival at 30 days was 94.6% and 98.5% (p = 0.101) and 83.6% and 88.3% (p = 0.335) at 1 year for patients presenting with early and late valve dysfunction, respectively.ConclusionsRedo-TAVR is a relatively safe and effective option for selected patients with valve dysfunction after TAVR. These results are important for applicability of TAVR in patients with long life expectancy in whom THV durability may be a concern.     

Stroke Complicating Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundStroke is one of the most common and potentially disabling complications of infective endocarditis (IE). However, scarce data exist about stroke complicating IE after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine the incidence, risk factors, clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of patients with definite IE after TAVR complicated by stroke during index IE hospitalization.MethodsData from the Infectious Endocarditis after TAVR International Registry (including 569 patients who developed definite IE following TAVR from 59 centers in 11 countries) was analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups according to stroke occurrence during IE admission (stroke [S-IE] vs. no stroke [NS-IE]).ResultsA total of 57 (10%) patients had a stroke during IE hospitalization, with no differences in causative microorganism between groups. S-IE patients exhibited higher rates of acute renal failure, systemic embolization, and persistent bacteremia (p < 0.05 for all). Previous stroke before IE, residual aortic regurgitation ≥moderate after TAVR, balloon-expandable valves, IE within 30 days after TAVR, and vegetation size >8 mm were associated with a higher risk of stroke during the index IE hospitalization (p < 0.05 for all). Stroke rate in patients with no risk factors was 3.1% and increased up to 60% in the presence of >3 risk factors. S-IE patients had higher rates of in-hospital mortality (54.4% vs. 28.7%; p < 0.001) and overall mortality at 1 year (66.3% vs. 45.6%; p < 0.001). Surgical treatment was not associated with improved outcomes in S-IE patients (in-hospital mortality: 46.2% in surgical vs. 58.1% in no surgical treatment; p = 0.47).ConclusionsStroke occurred in 1 of 10 patients with IE post-TAVR. A history of stroke, short time between TAVR and IE, vegetation size, valve prosthesis type, and residual aortic regurgitation determined an increased risk. The occurrence of stroke was associated with increased in-hospital and 1-year mortality rates, and surgical treatment failed to improve clinical outcomes.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Multivalvular Heart Disease

As transcatheter aortic valve replacement becomes a more dominant treatment option across all risk profiles, the frequency of encountering patients with multivalvular disease will increase. Furthermore, percutaneous interventions to treat other valvular lesions are also evolving. Understanding the clinical implications and treatment options for a second valvular lesion is becoming increasingly important to guide heart team decisions, and this paper aims to review the evidence around these situations. Diagnosis of multivalvular disease can be challenging because of changes in physiology. There are little randomized data to guide therapy in multivalvular disease. Multidisciplinary heart team decisions can be invaluable in integrating the plethora of clinical, hemodynamic, and imaging data on which an optimal management strategy can be planned. Prospective studies to assess the role of structural valve interventions in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era would greatly help improve outcomes for structural heart patients.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and transcatheter heart valve hemodynamic parameters after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low-risk patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS).BackgroundTAVR is approved for low-risk patients in the United States. However, patients with bicuspid AS were excluded from the randomized cohorts of the pivotal low-risk trials.MethodsThe LRT (Low Risk TAVR) trial was an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter study and was the first and only U.S. Food and Drug Administration–approved investigational device exemption trial to evaluate the feasibility of TAVR with either balloon-expandable or self-expanding valves in low-risk patients with bicuspid AS. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30 days. Baseline and follow-up echocardiography and computed tomography to detect leaflet thickening were analyzed in an independent core laboratory.ResultsSixty-one low-risk patients with symptomatic, severe AS and bicuspid aortic valves (78.3% Sievers type 1 morphology) underwent TAVR at 6 centers from 2016 to 2019. The mean age was 68.6 years, and 42.6% were men. At 30 days, there was zero mortality and no disabling strokes. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 13.1%; just 1 patient had a moderate paravalvular leak at 30 days. Hypoattenuated leaflet thickening was observed in 10% of patients at 30 days.ConclusionsTAVR appears to be safe in patients with bicuspid AS, with short length of hospital stay, zero mortality, and no disabling strokes at 30 days. Subclinical leaflet thrombosis was observed in a minority of patients at 30 days but did not appear to be associated with clinical events.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease

BackgroundIn patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), surgical aortic valve replacement is associated with higher early and late mortality, and adverse outcomes compared with patients without renal disease. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers another alternative, but there are limited reported outcomes.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to determine the outcomes of TAVR in patients with ESRD.MethodsAmong the first 72,631 patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) treated with TAVR enrolled in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapies) registry, 3,053 (4.2%) patients had ESRD and were compared with patients who were not on dialysis for demographics, risk factors, and outcomes.ResultsCompared with the nondialysis patients, ESRD patients were younger (76 years vs. 83 years; p < 0.01) and had higher rates of comorbidities leading to a higher STS predicted risk of mortality (median 13.5% vs. 6.2%; p < 0.01). ESRD patients had a higher in-hospital mortality (5.1% vs. 3.4%; p < 0.01), although the observed to expected ratio was lower (0.32 vs. 0.44; p < 0.01). ESRD patients also had a similar rate of major vascular complications (4.5% vs. 4.6%; p = 0.86), but a higher rate of major bleeding (1.4% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.03). The 1-year mortality was significantly higher in dialysis patients (36.8% vs. 18.7%; p < 0.01).ConclusionsPatients undergoing TAVR with ESRD are at higher risk and had higher in-hospital mortality and bleeding, but similar vascular complications, when compared with those who are not dialysis dependent. The 1-year survival raises concerns regarding diminished benefit in this population. TAVR should be used judiciously after full discussion of the risk-benefit ratio in patients on dialysis.     

Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: An Updated Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate early results of valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for structural valve degeneration (SVD).BackgroundViV TAVR has been increasingly used for SVD, but it remains unknown whether it produces better or at least comparable results as redo SAVR.MethodsObservational studies comparing ViV TAVR and redo SAVR were identified in a systematic search of published research. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed, comparing clinical outcomes between the 2 groups.ResultsTwelve publications including a total of 16,207 patients (ViV TAVR, n = 8,048; redo SAVR, n = 8,159) were included from studies published from 2015 to 2020. In the pooled analysis, ViV TAVR was associated with lower rates of 30-day mortality overall (odds ratio [OR]: 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39 to 0.68; p < 0.001) and for matched populations (OR: 0.419; 95% CI: 0.278 to 0.632; p = 0.003), major bleeding (OR 0.48; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.80; p = 0.013), as well as with shorter hospital stay (OR: ?3.30; 95% CI: ?4.52 to ?2.08; p < 0.001). In contrast, ViV TAVR was associated with higher rates of severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR: 4.63; 95% CI: 3.05 to 7.03; p < 0.001). The search revealed an important lack of comparative studies with long-term results.ConclusionsViV TAVR is a valuable option in the treatment of patients with SVD because of its lower incidence of post-operative complications and better early survival compared with redo SAVR. However, ViV TAVR is associated with higher rates of myocardial infarction and severe patient-prosthesis mismatch.     

Relationship Between Hospital Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Volume and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine whether hospital surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) volume was associated with corresponding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes.BackgroundRecent studies have demonstrated a volume-outcome relationship for TAVR.MethodsIn total, 208,400 fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries were analyzed for all aortic valve replacement procedures from 2012 to 2015. Claims for patients <65 years of age, concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting surgery, other heart valve procedures, or other major open heart procedures were excluded, as were secondary admissions for aortic valve replacement. Hospital SAVR volumes were stratified on the basis of mean annual SAVR procedures during the study period. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year post-operative TAVR survival. Adjusted survival following TAVR was assessed using multivariate Cox regression.ResultsA total of 65,757 SAVR and 42,967 TAVR admissions were evaluated. Among TAVR procedures, 21.7% (n = 9,324) were performed at hospitals with <100 (group 1), 35.6% (n = 15,298) at centers with 100 to 199 (group 2), 22.9% (n = 9,828) at centers with 200 to 299 (group 3), and 19.8% (n = 8,517) at hospitals with ≥300 SAVR cases/year (group 4). Compared with group 4, 30-day TAVR mortality risk-adjusted odds ratios were 1.32 (95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 1.47) for group 1, 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.12 to 1.39) for group 2, and 1.08 (95% confidence interval: 0.82 to 1.25) for group 3. These adjusted survival differences in TAVR outcomes persisted at 1 year post-procedure.ConclusionsTotal hospital SAVR volume appears to be correlated with TAVR outcomes, with higher 30-day and 1-year mortality observed at low-volume centers. These data support the importance of a viable surgical program within the heart team, and the use of minimum SAVR hospital thresholds may be considered as an additional metric for TAVR performance.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the LOTUS Edge System: Early European Experience

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the LOTUS Edge system.BackgroundThe LOTUS Edge system was commercially re-released in April 2019. The authors report the first European experience with this device.MethodsA multicenter, single-arm, retrospective registry was initiated to evaluate short-term clinical outcomes. Included cases are the first experience with this device and new implantation technique in Europe. Clinical, echocardiographic, and computed tomographic data were analyzed. Endpoints were defined according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 and were site reported.ResultsBetween April and November 2019, 286 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with the LOTUS Edge system at 18 European centers were included. The mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score were 81.2 ± 6.9 years and 5.2 ± 5.4%, respectively. Nearly one-half of all patients (47.9%) were considered to have complex anatomy. Thirty-day major adverse events included death (2.4% [n = 7]) and stroke (3.5% [n = 10]). After TAVR, the mean aortic valve area was 1.9 ± 0.9 cm², and the mean transvalvular gradient was 11.9 ± 5.7 mm Hg. None or trace paravalvular leak (PVL) occurred in 84.4% and moderate PVL in 2.0%. There were no cases of severe PVL. New permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation was required in 25.9% among all patients and 30.8% among PPM-naive patients.ConclusionsEarly experience with the LOTUS Edge system demonstrated satisfactory short-term safety and efficacy, favorable hemodynamic data, and very low rates of PVL in an anatomically complex cohort. New PPM implantation remained high. Further study will evaluate if increasing operator experience with the device and new implantation technique can reduce the incidence of PPM implantation.     

Evolution,Predictors, and Neurocognitive Effects of Silent Cerebral Embolism During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the characteristics, predictors, evolution, and neurocognitive effects of silent cerebral ischemic lesions (SCILs).BackgroundMost patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) develop SCILs detectable on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The natural history and clinical relevance of SCILs are not well established.MethodsCerebral MRI was performed within 7 days before TAVR to assess baseline status and age-related white matter change score. MRI was repeated post-operatively to assess the occurrence, location, number, and dimensions of SCILs. Patients developing SCILs underwent a third MRI examination at 3- to 5-month follow-up. A neurocognitive evaluation was performed before TAVR, at discharge, and at 3-month follow-up.ResultsOf the 117 patients enrolled, 96 underwent post-procedural MRI; SCILs were observed in 76% of patients, distributed in all vascular territories, with a median number of 2 lesions, a median diameter of 4.5 mm, and a median total volume of 140 mm³. Independent predictors of SCIL occurrence were higher baseline age-related white matter change score and the use of self-expanding or mechanically expanded bioprostheses. Among 47 patients who underwent follow-up MRI, only 26.7% of post-procedural SCILs evolved into gliotic scar. SCIL occurrence was associated with a more pronounced transient neurocognitive decline early after TAVR and with lower recovery at follow-up.ConclusionsSCILs occur in the vast majority of patients undergoing TAVR and are predicted by more diffuse white matter damage at baseline and by the use of non-balloon-expandable prostheses. Although most SCILs disappear within months, their occurrence has a limited but significant impact on neurocognitive function.     

Commissural Versus Coronary Optimized Alignment During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

ObjectivesThe aims of this study were to determine the rate of noncentered coronary ostia and their risk for coronary overlap (CO) and to develop an improved orientation strategy for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) devices taking into account anatomical cues to identify patients at risk for CO regardless of commissural alignment and compute an alternative, CO-free TAVR rotation angle for those patients.BackgroundCommissural alignment during TAVR reduces CO risk. However, eccentricity of coronary ostia from the center of the sinus of Valsalva may result in CO even after perfect alignment of TAVR commissures.MethodsBaseline computed tomography from TAVR candidates helped identify distance from commissures to the right coronary artery (RCA) and the left coronary artery (LCA). Then, for each case, a virtual valve was simulated with ideal commissural or coronary alignment, and the degree of CO was determined. On the basis of the potential BASILICA (bioprosthetic or native aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction) efficacy, 3 groups were defined: no risk for CO (>35° from neocommissure to coronary ostia), moderate risk (20°-35°), and severe risk (≤20°).ResultsComputed tomographic studies from 107 patients were included. After excluding 7 patients (poor quality or bicuspid valve), 100 patients were analyzed. The RCA showed greater eccentricity compared with the LCA (18.5° [IQR: 3.3°-12.8°] vs 6.5° [IQR: 3.3°-12.8°]; P < 0.001). The mean intercoronary angle was 140.0° ± 18.7° (95% CI: 136.3°-143.7°). Thirty-two patients had moderate to severe risk for CO (≤35°) despite ideal commissural alignment. Greater coronary eccentricity (cutoff for RCA, 24.5°; cutoff for LCA, 19°) and intercoronary angle >147.5° or <103° were associated with greater risk for moderate to severe CO despite commissural alignment (area under the curve: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.91-0.99). If optimal coronary alignment was simulated, this prevented severe CO in all cases and reduced moderate CO from 27% to 5% (P < 0.001).ConclusionsOne third of patients would have CO during TAVR-in-TAVR despite commissural alignment; a 6-fold decrease in this risk was achieved with optimized coronary alignment. Coronary eccentricity and intercoronary angle were the main predictors.     

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement With the Transseptal EVOQUE System

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the initial experience with a novel transseptal transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) system.BackgroundTransseptal TMVR may offer a less invasive option than surgery for mitral regurgitation (MR) with greater efficacy and fewer anatomic limitations than transcatheter repair.MethodsPatients were treated with the EVOQUE TMVR system from September 2018 to October 2019. Key inclusion criteria were moderate or greater MR, New York Heart Association functional class ≥II, and high or prohibitive surgical risk. The primary outcome was technical success, defined by Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria.ResultsFourteen patients were treated, all with at least moderate to severe MR. The median age was 84 years, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 4.6%. MR was degenerative in 4 (28.6%), functional in 3 (21.4%), and mixed in 7 (50%). Technical success was achieved in 13 patients (92.9%), and 1 patient was converted to surgery. At 30 days there was 1 noncardiovascular mortality (7.1%), 2 strokes (14.3%), no myocardial infarctions, and no rehospitalizations. Two patients (14.3%) underwent paravalvular leak closure. One patient (7.1%) underwent alcohol septal ablation for left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Including the 2 patients with paravalvular leak closure, MR was mild or less in all implanted patients at 30 days, with no MR in 10 (83.3%). Mean mitral gradient was 5.8 mm Hg (median). New York Heart Association functional class improved to ≤II in 9 patients (81.8%).ConclusionsThis first-in-human experience has demonstrated the feasibility of the transseptal EVOQUE TMVR system. Further clinical studies are required to establish safety and clinical outcomes.     

Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: REFLECT II

ObjectivesThe REFLECT II (Randomized Evaluation of TriGuard 3 Cerebral Embolic Protection After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) trial was designed to investigate the safety and efficacy of the TriGUARD 3 (TG3) cerebral embolic protection in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement.BackgroundCerebral embolization occurs frequently following transcatheter aortic valve replacement and procedure-related ischemic stroke occurs in 2% to 6% of patients at 30 days. Whether cerebral protection with TriGuard 3 is safe and effective in reducing procedure-related cerebral injury is not known.MethodsThis prospective, multicenter, single-blind, 2:1 randomized (TG3 vs. no TG3) study was designed to enroll up to 345 patients. The primary 30-day safety endpoint (Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 defined) was compared with a performance goal (PG). The primary hierarchical composite efficacy endpoint (including death or stroke at 30 days, National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale score worsening in hospital, and cerebral ischemic lesions on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging at 2 to 5 days) was compared using the Finkelstein-Schoenfeld method.ResultsREFLECT II enrolled 220 of the planned 345 patients (63.8%), including 41 roll-in and 179 randomized patients (121 TG3 and 58 control subjects) at 18 US sites. The sponsor closed the study early after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommended enrollment suspension for unblinded safety data review. The trial met its primary safety endpoint compared with the PG (15.9% vs. 34.4% (p < 0.0001). The primary hierarchal efficacy endpoint at 30 days was not met (mean scores [higher is better]: ?8.58 TG3 vs. 8.08 control; p = 0.857). A post hoc diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging analysis of per-patient total lesion volume above incremental thresholds showed numeric reductions in total lesion volume >500 mm³ (?9.7%) and >1,000 mm³ (?44.5%) in the TG3 group, which were more pronounced among patients with full TG3 coverage: ?51.1% (>500 mm³) and ?82.9% (>1,000 mm³).ConclusionsThe REFLECT II trial demonstrated that the TG3 was safe compared with a historical PG but did not meet its pre-specified primary superiority efficacy endpoint.     

Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundInfective endocarditis may affect patients after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to provide detailed information on incidence rates, types of microorganisms, and outcomes of infective endocarditis after TAVR.MethodsBetween February 2011 and July 2018, consecutive patients from the SwissTAVI Registry were eligible. Infective endocarditis was classified into early (peri-procedural [<100 days] and delayed-early [100 days to 1 year]) and late (>1 year) endocarditis. Clinical events were adjudicated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 endpoint definitions.ResultsDuring the observational period, 7,203 patients underwent TAVR at 15 hospitals in Switzerland. During follow-up of 14,832 patient-years, endocarditis occurred in 149 patients. The incidence for peri-procedural, delayed-early, and late endocarditis after TAVR was 2.59, 0.71, and 0.40 events per 100 person-years, respectively. Among patients with early endocarditis, Enterococcus species were the most frequently isolated microorganisms (30.1%). Among those with peri-procedural endocarditis, 47.9% of patients had a pathogen that was not susceptible to the peri-procedural antibiotic prophylaxis. Younger age (subhazard ratio [SHR]: 0.969; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.944 to 0.994), male sex (SHR: 1.989; 95% CI: 1.403 to 2.818), lack of pre-dilatation (SHR: 1.485; 95% CI: 1.065 to 2.069), and treatment in a catheterization laboratory as opposed to hybrid operating room (SHR: 1.648; 95% CI: 1.187 to 2.287) were independently associated with endocarditis. In a case-control matched analysis, patients with endocarditis were at increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio: 6.55; 95% CI: 4.44 to 9.67) and stroke (hazard ratio: 4.03; 95% CI: 1.54 to 10.52).ConclusionsInfective endocarditis after TAVR most frequently occurs during the early period, is commonly caused by Enterococcus species, and results in considerable risks of mortality and stroke. (NCT01368250)     

Antithrombotic Therapy After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment option for symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis who are candidates for a bioprosthesis across the entire spectrum of risk. However, TAVR carries a risk for thrombotic and bleeding events, underscoring the importance of defining the optimal adjuvant antithrombotic regimen. Antithrombotic considerations are convoluted by the fact that many patients undergoing TAVR are generally elderly and present with multiple comorbidities, including conditions that may require long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) (eg, atrial fibrillation) and antiplatelet therapy (eg, coronary artery disease). After TAVR among patients without baseline indications for OAC, recent data suggest dual-antiplatelet therapy to be associated with an increased risk for bleeding events, particularly early postprocedure, compared with single-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin. Concerns surrounding the potential for thrombotic complications have raised the hypothesis of adjunctive use of OAC for patients with no baseline indications for anticoagulation. Although effective in modulating thrombus formation at the valve level, the bleeding hazard has shown to be unacceptably high, and the net benefit of combining antiplatelet and OAC therapy is unproven. For patients with indications for the use of long-term OAC, such as those with atrial fibrillation, the adjunctive use of antiplatelet therapy increases bleeding. Whether direct oral anticoagulant agents achieve better outcomes than vitamin K antagonists remains under investigation. Overall, single-antiplatelet therapy and OAC appear to be reasonable strategies in patients without and with indications for concurrent anticoagulation. The aim of the present review is to appraise the current published research and recommendations surrounding the management of antithrombotic therapy after TAVR, with perspectives on evolving paradigms and ongoing trials.     

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Young,Low-Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is approved for all patient risk profiles and is an option for all patients irrespective of age. However, patients enrolled in the low- and intermediate-risk trials were in their 70s, and those in the high-risk trials were in their 80s. TAVR has never been systematically tested in young (<65 years), low-risk patients. Unanswered questions remain, including the safety and effectiveness of TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valves; future coronary access; durability of transcatheter heart valves; technical considerations for surgical transcatheter heart valve explantation; management of concomitant conditions such as aortopathy, mitral valve disease, and coronary artery disease; and the safety and feasibility of future TAVR-in-TAVR. The authors predict that balancing these questions with patients’ clear preference for less invasive treatment will become common. In this paper, the authors consider each of these questions and discuss risks and benefits of theoretical treatment strategies in the lifetime management of young patients with severe aortic stenosis.     

Preventing Coronary Obstruction During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Results From the Multicenter International BASILICA Registry

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the safety of the BASILICA (bioprosthetic or native aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction) procedure.BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement causes coronary artery obstruction in 0.7% of cases, with 40% to 50% mortality. BASILICA is a procedure to prevent coronary obstruction. Safety and feasibility in a large patient cohort is lacking.MethodsThe international BASILICA registry was a retrospective, multicenter, real-world registry of patients at risk of coronary artery obstruction undergoing BASILICA and transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions were used to adjudicate events.ResultsBetween June 2017 and December 2020, 214 patients were included from 25 centers in North America and Europe; 72.8% had bioprosthetic aortic valves and 78.5% underwent solo BASILICA. Leaflet traversal was successful in 94.9% and leaflet laceration in 94.4%. Partial or complete coronary artery obstruction was seen in 4.7%. Procedure success, defined as successful BASILICA traversal and laceration without mortality, coronary obstruction, or emergency intervention, was achieved in 86.9%. Thirty-day mortality was 2.8% and stroke was 2.8%, with 0.5% disabling stroke. Thirty-day death and disabling stroke were seen in 3.4%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 composite safety was achieved in 82.8%. One-year survival was 83.9%. Outcomes were similar between solo and doppio BASILICA, between native and bioprosthetic valves, and with the use of cerebral embolic protection.ConclusionsBASILICA is safe, with low reported rates of stroke and death. BASILICA is feasible in the real-world setting, with a high procedure success rate and low rates of coronary artery obstruction.     

Commissural Alignment After Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Is Associated With Improved Hemodynamic Outcomes

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is generally performed without control over the alignment of the bioprosthesis to the native aortic valve (AV) commissures. Data on the impact of commissural misalignment (CMA) on the clinical and hemodynamic outcome after TAVR are scarce.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the impact of commissural misalignment (CMA) on the clinical and hemodynamic outcome in patients with severe tricuspid aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR using the balloon-expandable (BE) SAPIEN 3 valve (Edwards LifeSciences).MethodsClinical data of consecutive patients who underwent BE TAVR at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center (Los Angeles, California, USA) enrolled in the RESOLVE (Assessment of TRanscathetER and Surgical Aortic BiOprosthetic Valve Thrombosis and Its TrEatment With Anticoagulation) registry were retrospectively analyzed to evaluate CMA, which was defined as a neocommissure position >30° compared with native commissures on computed tomography.ResultsA total of 324 patients (36.6% female, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 3.9%) were included in the analysis. CMA was present in 171 individuals (52.8%). At 30 days, rates of aortic regurgitation greater than mild (5.6%) and a residual AV gradient ≥20 mm Hg (7.4%) were not different between CMA and non-CMA patients. Commissural orientation was independently associated with a relative AV mean gradient increase >50% from discharge to 30 days (per increase of 10° misalignment; OR: 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0-1.4; P = 0.01). The long-term composite outcome of death or stroke was not different between groups (log-rank P = 0.29).ConclusionsIn patients with severe tricuspid aortic stenosis who undergo SAPIEN 3 TAVR, the neocommissures align randomly. Our data demonstrate that commissural alignment may impact device performance and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing BE TAVR. (Assessment of TRanscathetEr and Surgical Aortic BiOprosthetic VaLVve Dysfunction with Multimodality Imaging and Its TrEatment with Anticoagulation [RESOLVE]; NCT02318342)     

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Complex Coronary Artery Disease

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare, in a cohort of patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) and severe aortic stenosis (AS), the clinical outcomes associated with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (plus percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI]) versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (plus coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]).BackgroundPatients with complex CAD were excluded from the main randomized trials comparing TAVR with SAVR, and no data exist comparing TAVR + PCI vs SAVR + CABG in such patients.MethodsA multicenter study was conducted including consecutive patients with severe AS and complex CAD (SYNTAX [Synergy Between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery] score >22 or unprotected left main disease). A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis was performed to account for unbalanced covariates. The rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), including all-cause mortality, nonprocedural myocardial infarction, need for new coronary revascularization, and stroke, were evaluated.ResultsA total of 800 patients (598 undergoing SAVR + CABG and 202 undergoing transfemoral TAVR + PCI) were included, and after propensity matching, a total of 156 pairs of patients were generated. After a median follow-up period of 3 years (interquartile range: 1-6 years), there were no significant differences between groups for MACCE (HR for transfemoral TAVR vs SAVR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.89-1.98), all-cause mortality (HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.81-1.94), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.41-3.27), and stroke (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.13-1.32), but there was a higher rate of new coronary revascularization in the TAVR + PCI group (HR: 5.38; 95% CI: 1.73-16.7).ConclusionsIn patients with severe AS and complex CAD, TAVR + PCI and SAVR + CABG were associated with similar rates of MACCE after a median follow-up period of 3 years, but TAVR + PCI recipients exhibited a higher risk for repeat coronary revascularization. Future trials are warranted.