Comparison of postprocedural new-onset atrial fibrillation between transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis based on 16 randomized controlled trials

Background:Presently, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) as an effective and convenient intervention has been adopted extensively for patients with severe aortic disease. However, after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and TAVR, the incidence of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) is prevalently found. This meta-analysis was designed to comprehensively compare the incidence of NOAF at different times after TAVR and SAVR for patients with severe aortic disease.Methods:A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science up to October 1, 2020 was conducted for relevant studies that comparing TAVR and SAVR in the treatment of severe aortic disease. The primary outcomes were the incidence of NOAF with early, midterm and long term follow-up. The secondary outcomes included permanent pacemaker (PM) implantation, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiogenic shock, as well as mortality and other complications. Two reviewers assessed trial quality and extracted the data independently. All statistical analyses were performed using the standard statistical procedures provided in Review Manager 5.2.Results:A total of 16 studies including 13,310 patients were identified. The pooled results indicated that, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly lower incidence of 30-day/in-hospital, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year NOAF, with pooled risk ratios (RRs) of 0.31 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23–0.41; 5725 pts), 0.30 (95% CI 0.24–0.39; 6321 pts), 0.48 (95% CI 0.38–0.61; 3441 pts), and 0.45 (95% CI 0.37–0.55; 2268 pts) respectively. In addition, TAVR showed lower incidence of MI (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.40–0.97) and cardiogenic shock (RR 0.34; 95% CI 0.19–0.59), but higher incidence of permanent PM (RR 3.16; 95% CI 1.61–6.21) and major vascular complications (RR 2.22; 95% CI 1.14–4.32) at 30-day/in-hospital. At 1- and 2-year after procedure, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly higher incidence of neurological events, transient ischemic attacks (TIA), permanent PM, and major vascular complications, respectively. At 5-year after procedure, compared with SAVR, TAVR experienced a significantly higher incidence of TIA and re-intervention respectively. There was no difference in 30-day, 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year all-cause or cardiovascular mortality as well as stroke between TAVR and SAVR.Conclusions:Our analysis showed that TAVR was superior to SAVR in decreasing the both short and long term postprocedural NOAF. TAVR was equal to SAVR in early, midterm and long term mortality. In addition, TAVR showed lower incidence of 30-day/in-hospital MI and cardiogenic shock after procedure. However, pooled results showed that TAVR was inferior to SAVR in reducing permanent pacemaker implantation, neurological events, TIA, major vascular complications, and re-intervention.     

The impact of mitral stenosis on outcomes of aortic valve stenosis patient undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Background

The concomitant presence of mitral stenosis (MS) in the setting of symptomatic aortic stenosis represent a clinical challenge. Little is known regarding the outcome of mitral stenosis (MS) patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Therefore, we sought to study the outcome of MS patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Method

Using weighted data from the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database between 2011 and 2014, we identified patients who were diagnosed with MS. Patients who had undergone TAVR as a primary procedure were identified and compared to patients who had SAVR. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed for the outcomes of in‐hospital mortality, length of stay (LOS), blood transfusion, postprocedural hemorrhage, vascular, cardiac and respiratory complications, permanent pacemaker placement (PPM), postprocedural stroke, acute kidney injury (AKI), and discharge to an outside facility.

Results

A total of 4524 patients were diagnosed with MS, of which 552 (12.2%) had TAVR and 3972 (87.8%) had SAVR. TAVR patients were older (79.9 vs 70.0) with more females (67.4% vs 60.0%) and African American patients (7.7% vs 7.1%) (P < 0.001). In addition, the TAVR group had more comorbidities compared to SAVR in term of coronary artery disease (CAD), congestive heart failure (CHF), chronic lung disease, hypertension (HTN), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and peripheral vascular disease (PVD) (P < 0.001 for all). Using Multivariate logistic regression, and after adjusting for potential risk factors, TAVR patients had lower in‐hospital mortality (7.9% vs 8.1% adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR], 0.615; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.392–0.964, P = 0.034), shorter LOS. Also, TAVR patients had lower rates of cardiac and respiratory complications, PPM, AKI, and discharge to an outside facility compared with the SAVR group.

Conclusion

In patients with severe aortic stenosis and concomitant mitral stenosis, TAVR is a safe and attractive option for patients undergoing AVR with less complications compared with SAVR.

     

Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objectives

This study sought to evaluate the long-term clinical impact of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Long-Term Risk of Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Background

Patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) are considered at high risk of infective endocarditis (IE). However, data on the risk of IE following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are sparse and limited by the lack of long-term follow-up as well as a direct comparison with patients undergoing SAVR.

Racial Disparities in the Utilization and Outcomes of TAVR: TVT Registry Report

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate racial disparities in the performance and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundRacial disparities in cardiovascular diseases are well described. Whether the racial disparities observed in surgical aortic valve replacement also exist with TAVR remains unknown.MethodsPatients undergoing TAVR between November 2011 and June 2016 were identified in the American College of Cardiology/Society of Thoracic Surgeons/Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. We described the racial distribution, and the risk-adjusted in-hospital morbidity, and mortality stratified by race. We evaluated 1-year outcomes in a subset of patients via linkage to Medicare (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) claims.ResultsAmong the 70,221 included patients, 91.3% were white, 3.8% were black, 3.4% were Hispanic, and 1.5% were of Asian/Native American/Pacific Islander race. This represented significant underrepresentation of nonwhite patients compared with their proportion of the population. After risk-adjustment, there was no difference in the rates of in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, major bleeding, vascular complications, or new pacemaker requirements among the 4 racial groups. Among 29,351 patients with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services linkage, 1-year adjusted mortality rates were similar in blacks and Hispanics compared with whites, but lower among patients of Asian/Native American/Pacific Islander race (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.71; 95% confidence interval: 0.55 to 0.92; p = 0.028). Black and Hispanic patients had more heart failure hospitalizations compared with whites (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% confidence interval: 1.16 to 1.67; p < 0.001; and adjusted hazard ratio: 1.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.13 to 1.66; p = 0.004, respectively). These differences persisted after additional risk-adjustment for socioeconomic status.ConclusionsRacial minorities are underrepresented among patients undergoing TAVR in the United States, but their adjusted 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes are comparable with those of white race.     

Non‐vitamin K oral anticoagulants versus vitamin K antagonists in post transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with clinical indication for oral anticoagulation: A meta‐analysis

BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend oral anticoagulation (OAC) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with clinical indication, but the optimal antithrombotic regimen remains uncertain. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of non‐vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) versus vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in patients undergoing TAVR with concomitant indication of OAC.HypothesisComparing with VKAs therapy, NOACs are similar in reducing the all‐cause mortality and major bleeding in post‐TAVR patients requiring OAC medication.MethodsWe searched the databases of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library databases to identify studies that investigated NOACs versus VKAs after TAVR in patients with another indication of OAC, which were published before 28th September 28, 2021. The effectiveness of outcomes was all‐cause mortality and stroke or systemic embolism, while the main safety outcome was major and/or life‐threatening bleeding. The hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as a measure of treatment effect.ResultsOur search identified eight studies. We included 4947 post‐TAVR patients with another indication of OAC allocated to the NOAC (n = 2146) or VKA groups (n = 2801). There were no significant differences in the all‐cause mortality (HR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.77–1.08, p = .29, I ² = 47%), stroke or systemic embolism (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.68–1.37, p = .84, I ² = 0%), and major and/or life‐threatening bleeding (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.89–1.32, p = .40, I ² = 30%) in both groups.ConclusionAmong post‐TAVR patients who required OAC therapy, NOACs therapy compared to VKAs is similar in reducing the all‐cause mortality, stroke or systemic embolism, and major and/or life‐threatening bleeding events.     

Trans-Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes in Patients with Dialysis: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BackgroundDialysis is associated with higher rate of aortic valve calcification and higher cardiovascular mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established alternative for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with higher and intermediate co-morbidities including dialysis.MethodsTwo independent investigators systematically searched Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science. The ROBINS-I tool was used to analyze and assess the bias from the selected studies.ResultsThe search resulted in 4 observational studies with a total of 966 patients. TAVR in dialysis patients was associated with no significant difference in in-hospital mortality [8.1% vs 10.3%; OR (95% CI) 0.74 (0.35, 1.60), I2 = 50%, P = 0.45], risk-of-strokes at 30 days [2% vs 4.4%; OR (95% CI) 0.49 (0.22, 1.09), I2 = 0%, P = 0.08], vascular complications [12.7% vs 13.2%; OR (95% CI) 0.96 (0.55, 1.67), I2 = 0%, P = 0.89], need of blood transfusion [43.1% vs 66.4%; OR (95% CI) 0.27 (0.05, 1.39), I2 = 89%, P = 0.12], or bleeding risk [5.6% vs 6.8%; OR (95% CI) 0.91 (0.18, 4.64), I2 = 5%, P = 0.91] when compared to SAVR. TAVR was associated with significantly shorter length of stay [8.5 days vs 14.2 days; mean difference (95% CI) ?5.89 (?9.13, ?2.64), I2 = 76%, P < 0.0001] and higher pacemaker implantation [11.4% vs 6.8%; OR (95% CI) 1.74 (1.07, 2.81), I2 = 5%, P = 0.02].ConclusionTAVR outcomes were comparable to SAVR but had a significantly shorter length of stay and a higher pacemaker implantation rate in dialysis patients.     

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Prior Cardiac Surgery in the Randomized PARTNER 2A Trial

Objectives

The aim of this study was to further evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with and without PCS.

Prognostic Significance of LGE by CMR in Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing Valve Replacement

Background

Prior studies have shown that late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) can detect focal fibrosis in aortic stenosis (AS), suggesting that it might predict higher mortality risk.

Objectives

This study was conducted to evaluate whether LGE-CMR can predict post-operative survival in patients with severe AS undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR).

Methods

We prospectively evaluated survival (all-cause and cardiovascular disease related) according to LGE-CMR status in 154 consecutive AS patients (96 men; mean age: 74 ± 6 years) without a history of myocardial infarction undergoing surgical AVR and in 40 AS patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Results

LGE was present in 29% of patients undergoing surgical AVR and in 50% undergoing TAVR. During a median follow-up of 2.9 years, 21 patients undergoing surgical AVR and 20 undergoing TAVR died. In surgical AVR, the presence of LGE predicted higher post-operative mortality (odds ratio: 10.9; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.2 to 100.0; p = 0.02) and worse all-cause survival (73% vs. 88%; p = 0.02 by log-rank test) and cardiovascular disease related survival (85% vs. 95%; p = 0.03 by log-rank test) on 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimates of survival after surgical AVR. Multivariate Cox analysis identified the presence of LGE (hazard ratio: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.3 to 6.9; p = 0.025) and New York Heart Association functional class III/IV (hazard ratio: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.1 to 8.1; p < 0.01) as the sole independent predictors of all-cause mortality after surgical AVR. The presence of LGE also predicted higher all-cause mortality (p = 0.05) and cardiovascular disease related mortality (p = 0.03) in the subgroup of patients without angiographic coronary artery disease (n = 110) and higher cardiovascular disease related mortality in 25 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR.

Conclusions

The presence of LGE indicating focal fibrosis or unrecognized infarct by CMR is an independent predictor of mortality in patients with AS undergoing AVR and could provide additional information in the pre-operative evaluation of risk in these patients.     

TAVR in Low-Risk Patients: 1-Year Results From the LRT Trial

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes and transcatheter heart valve hemodynamics at 1 year after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low-risk patients.BackgroundEarly results from the LRT (Low Risk TAVR) trial demonstrated that TAVR is safe in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at low risk for surgical valve replacement.MethodsThe LRT trial was an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter study and was the first Food and Drug Administration–approved Investigational Device Exemption trial to evaluate feasibility of TAVR in low-risk patients. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes and valve hemodynamics at 1 year.ResultsThe LRT trial enrolled 200 low-risk patients with symptomatic severe AS to undergo TAVR at 11 centers. Mean age was 73.6 years and 61.5% were men. At 30 days, there was zero mortality, zero disabling stroke, and low permanent pacemaker implantation rate (5.0%). At 1-year follow-up, mortality was 3.0%, stroke rate was 2.1%, and permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 7.3%. Two (1.0%) subjects underwent surgical reintervention for endocarditis. Of the 14% of TAVR subjects who had evidence of hypoattenuated leaflet thickening at 30 days, there was no impact on valve hemodynamics at 1 year, but the stroke rate was numerically higher (3.8% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.53).ConclusionsTAVR in low-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis appears to be safe at 1 year. Hypoattenuated leaflet thickening, observed in a minority of TAVR patients at 30 days, did not have an impact on valve hemodynamics in the longer term.     

Transcatheter vs surgical aortic valve replacement in low to intermediate surgical risk aortic stenosis patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is regarded as the most superior alternative treatment approach for patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who are associated with high surgical risk, whereas the effectiveness of TAVR vs surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low to intermediate surgical risk patients remained inconclusive. This study aimed to determine the best treatment strategies for AS with low to intermediate surgical risk based on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Hypothesis and MethodsRCTs that compared TAVR vs SAVR in AS patients with low to intermediate surgical risk were identified by PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane library from inception till April 2019. The pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the data collected using random‐effects models.ResultsSeven RCTs with a total of 6929 AS patients were enrolled. We noted that TAVR significantly increased the risk of transient ischemic attack (TIA) (RR: 1.43; 95%CI: 1.04‐1.96; P = .029), and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR: 3.00; 95%CI: 1.70‐5.30; P < .001). However, TAVR was associated with lower risk of post‐procedural bleeding (RR: 0.57; 95%CI: 0.33‐0.98; P = .042), new‐onset or worsening of atrial fibrillation (RR: 0.32; 95%CI: 0.23‐0.45; P < .001), acute kidney injury (RR: 0.40; 95%CI: 0.25‐0.63; P < .001), and cardiogenic shock (RR: 0.34; 95%CI: 0.19‐0.59; P < .001). The risk of aortic‐valve reintervention at 1‐ (RR: 2.63; 95%CI: 1.34‐5.15; P = .005), and 2 years (RR: 3.19; 95%CI: 1.63‐6.24; P = .001) in low to intermediate surgical risk patients who received TAVR was significantly increased than those who received SAVR.ConclusionsThese findings indicated that low to intermediate surgical risk patients who received TAVR had low risk of complications, whereas the risk of TIA, permanent pacemaker implantation, and aortic‐valve reintervention was increased.     

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

This systematic review and meta‐analysis sought to summarize the available evidence on the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation (NAVR) and compare outcomes between first and second generation valves. Owing to the improvements in transcatheter heart valve design and procedural success, TAVR has become increasingly performed in broader aortic valve pathologies. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases from 2007 to 2018 and performed a systematic review on reports with at least 10 patients with aortic valve regurgitation undergoing TAVR procedure. The main outcome of interest was all‐cause mortality at 30 days. A total of 638 patients across 12 studies were included. Mean age ranged from 68 to 84. Society of Thoracic Surgeons score ranged from 5.4% to 13.1% and Logistic EuroSCORE ranged from 18.2% to 33%. The incidence rate of all‐cause mortality at 30 days was found to be 11% (95% CI 7%‐16%; I² = 20.86%). All‐cause mortality at 30 days for first generation valves had an incidence rate of 15% (95% CI 10%‐20%; I² = 10%) compared to 7% (95% CI 3%‐13%; I² = 37%) in second generation valves with subgroup interaction analysis P = 0.059. Device success incidence rate in second generation valves was 92% (95% CI 83%‐99%; I² = 67%) vs 68% (95% CI 59%‐77%; I² = 53%) in first generation valves with P = 0.001. TAVR appears to be a feasible treatment choice for NAVR patients at high risk for surgical valve replacement. Second generation valves show promising results in terms of short‐term outcomes.     

The Learning Curve and Annual Procedure Volume Standards for Optimum Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Findings From an International Registry

Objectives

The authors aimed to determine the procedural learning curve and minimum annual institutional volumes associated with optimum clinical outcomes for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Mitral Regurgitation in Low-Flow,Low-Gradient Aortic Stenosis Patients Undergoing TAVR: Insights From the TOPAS-TAVI Registry

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the incidence, clinical impact, and changes over time of mitral regurgitation (MR) in patients with low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG-AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundFew data exist on the clinical impact and changes in severity over time of MR in patients with LFLG-AS undergoing TAVR.MethodsA total of 308 TAVR candidates with LFLG-AS were included. Patients were categorized according to MR severity at baseline, and presence of MR improvement at 12-month follow-up. Clinical outcomes were assessed at 1 and 12 months (+ echocardiography), and yearly thereafter.ResultsBaseline mild and moderate-to-severe MR were present in 118 (38.3%) and 115 (37.3%) patients, respectively. MR was of functional and mixed etiology in 77.2% and 22.7% of patients, respectively. A total of 131 patients (42.5%) died after a median follow-up of 2 (1 to 3) years. Baseline moderate-or-greater MR had no impact on mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 2.48) or heart failure hospitalization (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.49 to 2.10). At 1-year follow-up, MR improved in 44.3% of patients and remained unchanged/worsened in 55.7%. The lack of MR improvement was associated with a higher risk of all-cause and cardiac mortality (HR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.29 to 3.17; HR: 3.03; 95% CI: 1.27 to 7.23, respectively), rehospitalization for cardiac causes (HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.04 to 2.15), and an increased overall-mortality/heart failure rehospitalization (HR: 1.94; 95% CI: 1.25 to 3.02). A higher baseline left ventricular end-diastolic diameter and a higher increase in left ventricular ejection fraction were found to be independent predictors of MR improvement at 1-year follow-up (odds ratio: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.94; and odds ratio: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.96, respectively).ConclusionsMost TAVR candidates with LFLG-AS had some degree of MR, of functional origin in most cases. MR improved in about one-half of patients, with larger left ventricular size and a higher increase in left ventricular ejection fraction post-TAVR determining MR improvement over time. The lack of MR improvement at 1 year was associated with poorer outcomes.     

Trends in Timing of Dialysis Initiation within Versus Outside the Department of Veterans Affairs

Background and objectives

The secular trend toward dialysis initiation at progressively higher levels of eGFR is not well understood. This study compared temporal trends in eGFR at dialysis initiation within versus outside the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)—the largest non–fee-for-service health system in the United States.

Design, setting, participants, & measurements

The study used linked data from the US Renal Data System, VA, and Medicare to compare temporal trends in eGFR at dialysis initiation between 2000 and 2009 (n=971,543). Veterans who initiated dialysis within the VA were compared with three groups who initiated dialysis outside the VA: (1) veterans whose dialysis was paid for by the VA, (2) veterans whose dialysis was not paid for by the VA, and (3) nonveterans. Logistic regression was used to estimate average predicted probabilities of dialysis initiation at an eGFR≥10 ml/min per 1.73 m².

Results

The adjusted probability of starting dialysis at an eGFR≥10 ml/min per 1.73 m² increased over time for all groups but was lower for veterans who started dialysis within the VA (0.31; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.30 to 0.32) than for those starting outside the VA, including veterans whose dialysis was (0.36; 95% CI, 0.35 to 0.38) and was not (0.40; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.40) paid for by the VA and nonveterans (0.39; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.39). Differences in eGFR at initiation within versus outside the VA were most pronounced among older patients (P for interaction <0.001) and those with a higher risk of 1-year mortality (P for interaction <0.001).

Conclusions

Temporal trends in eGFR at dialysis initiation within the VA mirrored those in the wider United States dialysis population, but eGFR at initiation was consistently lowest among those who initiated within the VA. Differences in eGFR at initiation within versus outside the VA were especially pronounced in older patients and those with higher 1-year mortality risk.     

Procedural and clinical outcomes of the valve‐in‐valve technique for severe aortic insufficiency after balloon‐expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Objective : To describe the clinical and procedural outcomes of patients treated with the valve‐in‐valve technique for severe aortic insufficiency (AI) after balloon‐expandable transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Background : Severe AI immediately after valve implantation is a notable complication of TAVR. It can be treated with a valve‐in‐valve technique which involves deploying a second valve within the first one to crush the leaflets of the first implant leaving a new functional valve. Methods : We analyzed data on 142 consecutive patients at our institution undergoing TAVR with the Sapien valve between November of 2007 and April of 2011. Etiologies of acute AI, procedural and intermediate term clinical outcomes were reported for those in whom a valve‐in‐valve procedure was necessary. Post‐hoc analysis of these cases with C‐THV imaging (Paieon Medical Ltd.) was performed to elucidate the mechanism for successful AI treatment. Results : A total of 5 of 142 (3.5%) patients were treated with the valve‐in‐valve technique. Etiologies of the aortic valve insufficiency included bioprosthesis malposition (n = 3), valve dysfunction (n = 1), and valve undersizing (n = 1). With placement of the second valve, the first valve dimensions increased to approach the nominal valve size while the second valve size remained less than nominal. Conclusions : The valve‐in‐valve technique is an appropriate bailout measure for patients with acute valvular AI after balloon‐expandable TAVR. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals Inc.     

The Impact of Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction on Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Objectives

This study sought to determine the impact of left ventricular diastolic dysfunction (LVDD) on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Outcomes Following Urgent/Emergent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From the STS/ACC TVT Registry

Objectives

The authors sought to examine outcomes and identify independent predictors of mortality among patients undergoing urgent/emergent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).

Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty as a Bridge to Aortic Valve Replacement: A Contemporary Nationwide Perspective

ObjectivesThis study sought to use a national representative database to assess the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) as a bridge to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in contemporary practice.BackgroundNationwide data on the use and outcomes of BAV as a bridge to TAVR are limited.MethodsPatients who underwent BAV between January and June in 2015 and 2016 were identified in the National Readmission Database. We assessed rate of subsequent TAVR following BAV, and predictors and timing of subsequent TAVR. We then identified a group of patients who had direct TAVR (without prior BAV) in the original 2015 to 2016 National Readmission Database dataset. We compared in-hospital outcomes following TAVR between patients with prior bridging BAV and those undergoing direct TAVR.ResultsAmong the 3,691 included patients 1,426 (38.6%) had subsequent TAVR. Timing of TAVR was pre-discharge in 7.4%, within 30 days in 35%, between 31 and 90 days in 47%, between 91 and 180 days in 14%, and >180 days in 4%. Negative predictors of subsequent TAVR included prior defibrillator (odds ratio [OR]: 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.36 to 0.85), dementia (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.79), malnutrition (OR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.90), and malignancy (OR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.82). In propensity-score matched cohorts of patients who underwent direct TAVR versus those with prior BAV, in-hospital mortality during TAVR admission was similar (3.7% vs. 3.5%; p = 0.91). Major complications, length of stay, and discharge disposition were also comparable. However, cost of the hospitalization was higher in the direct TAVR group.ConclusionsAbout 40% of BAV patients undergo subsequent TAVR mostly within 90 days. In-hospital outcomes of TAVR in these patients were comparable with propensity-score matched patients who underwent TAVR without prior BAV. Further investigations are needed to define the role of BAV in contemporary practice.