Left-Atrial Appendage Thrombosis in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

BackgroundData about the impact of left-atrial appendage thrombosis (LAAT) on early safety and mortality in patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) are scarce. We aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of LAAT and the outcome associated with this condition in patients treated by TF-TAVI.MethodsRetrospective data analysis was derived from a prospective single-centre registry comparing patients with and without LAAT regarding early safety at 30 days, according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) and 2-year mortality.ResultsLAAT was found in 7.6% of the whole cohort (n = 2527) and in 16.6% in those patients with known pre-existing atrial fibrillation (AF cohort, n = 1099). Compared with controls, patients with LAAT were sicker, indicated by a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score and burden of comorbidities. Neither VARC-2–defined early safety at 30 days nor the rate of stroke was different between LAAT and controls in both the whole (early safety: 29.2% vs 24.2%, P = 0.123; stroke: 5.9% vs 4.7%, P = 0.495) and AF cohort (early safety: 29.1% vs 22.9%, P = 0.072; stroke: 5.6% vs 3.3%, P = 0.142). Evaluating the whole cohort in a univariate analysis, the 2-year mortality was significantly higher in LAAT compared with controls (hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.86; P = 0.014). However, multivariate analysis of the whole cohort and the AF cohort revealed no association between LAAT and 2-year mortality.ConclusionsLAAT was frequent in patients undergoing TF-TAVI— in particular, in patients with histories of AF—but it was not associated with an increase in periprocedural complications and did not predict 2-year mortality.     

Syncope in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

BackgroundNo data exist on the clinical and prognostic significance of syncope in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe aortic stenosis.MethodsA total of 1705 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR in a tertiary university centre between 2007 and 2021 were included and classified according to the presence of syncope before the TAVR procedure. Baseline, procedural, and follow-up data were collected prospectively in a dedicated database.ResultsA total of 115 patients (7%) presented with syncope before the TAVR procedure. Of these, 15 patients (13%) showed arrhythmic episodes as the probable cause of the syncope, and all of them had pacemakers implanted at a median of 13 (6 to 53) days before the TAVR procedure. Patients with syncope were older (82 ± 8 years vs 80 ± 8 years, P = 0.001) and had a higher rate of pacemaker implantation before the TAVR procedure (27% vs 14%, P < 0.001), with no differences between groups regarding the severity of aortic stenosis (transvalvular gradient, valve area). There were no differences between groups in 30-day (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.28; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46-3.60) and 1-year (adjusted HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.0.35-1.45) mortality following TAVR.ConclusionsSyncope was not associated with a more advanced valvular disease and had no significant prognostic impact on patients undergoing TAVR. However, arrhythmias and conduction-system disturbances were more common in patients with previous syncope and might play a relevant role in the pathogenesis of syncope in patients with aortic stenosis.     

In-Hospital Outcomes with Transfemoral Versus Transapical Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients with Peripheral Arterial Disease

BackgroundThere is a paucity of data regarding outcomes with transfemoral (TF) versus transapical (TA) access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD).MethodsWe queried the national inpatient sample database (NIS) (2012−2013) to identify patients with PAD who underwent TAVR. We conducted a propensity matching analysis using 25 clinical variables to compare TF-TAVR versus TA-TAVR. The main outcome was in-hospital mortality.ResultsThe analysis included 22,349 patients who underwent TAVR, among those 6692 (29.9%) had PAD. In the matched cohort, in-hospital mortality was similar between TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR groups (4.8% vs. 5.1%, OR 0.95; 95%CI 0.74–1.21). TF-TAVR was associated with lower rates of cardiogenic shock (OR 0.64; 95%CI 0.50–0.82), use of mechanical circulatory support (OR 0.56; 95%CI 0.42–0.75), acute kidney injury (OR 0.76; 95%CI 0.67–0.86), hemodialysis (OR 0.51; 95%CI 0.36–0.71), major bleeding (OR 0.72; 95%CI 0.64–0.80), blood transfusion (OR 0.65; 95%CI 0.58–0.73), discharge to a skilled nursing facility (OR 0.61; 95%CI 0.54–0.68) as well as shorter length of hospital stay (8.13 ± 6.76 vs. 10.11 ± 7.80 days) compared with TA-TAVR. However, TF-TAVR was associated with higher rate of vascular complications (11.7% vs. 3.7%, OR 3.40; 95%CI 2.63–4.38), complete heart block (OR 1.52; 95%CI 1.23–1.87), and pacemaker insertion (OR = 1.58; 95%CI: 1.28–1.94). There was no difference between both groups in the rate of cerebrovascular accidents (OR 1.26; 95%CI 0.93–1.72).ConclusionIn this observational analysis from a large national database, there was no difference in in-hospital mortality between TF-TAVR and TA-TAVR among patients with PAD. Further studies are encouraged to identify the optimal access for TAVR in patients with PAD.     

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.