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.     

Prospective Evaluation of TMVR for Failed Surgical Annuloplasty Rings: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Ring Arm 1-Year Outcomes

ObjectivesThe authors report 1-year outcomes of high-risk patients with failed surgical annuloplasty rings undergoing transseptal mitral valve–in–ring (MViR) with the SAPIEN 3 aortic transcatheter heart valve (THV).BackgroundThe MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial is the first prospective study evaluating transseptal MViR with the SAPIEN 3 aortic THV in high-risk patients with failed surgical annuloplasty rings.MethodsProspective enrollment of high-risk patients with symptomatic moderate to severe or severe mitral regurgitation (MR) or severe mitral stenosis and failed annuloplasty rings at 13 U.S. sites. The primary safety endpoint was technical success. The primary THV performance endpoint was absence of MR grade ≥2+ or mean mitral valve gradient ≥10 mm Hg (30 days and 1 year). Secondary endpoints included procedural success and all-cause mortality (30 days and 1 year).ResultsThirty patients were enrolled between January 2016 and October 2017 (median age 71.5 years [interquartile range: 67.0 to 76.8 years], 36.7% women, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 7.6% [interquartile range: 5.1% to 11.8%], 76.7% in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV). Technical success was 66.7% (driven primarily by need for a second valve in 6 patients). There was no intraprocedural mortality or conversion to surgery. The primary performance endpoint was achieved in 85.7% of survivors at 30 days (24 of 28) and 89.5% of patients alive at 1 year with echocardiographic data available (17 of 19). All-cause mortality at 30 days was 6.7% and at 1 year was 23.3%. Among survivors at 1-year follow-up, 84.2% were in New York Heart Association functional class I or II, the median mean mitral valve gradient was 6.0 mm Hg (interquartile range: 4.7 to 7.3 mm Hg), and all had ≤1+ MR.ConclusionsTransseptal MViR was associated with a 30-day mortality rate lower than predicted by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons score. At 1 year, transseptal MViR was associated with symptom improvement and stable THV performance.     

Prospective Evaluation of Transseptal TMVR for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses: MITRAL Trial Valve-in-Valve Arm 1-Year Outcomes

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess 1-year clinical outcomes among high-risk patients with failed surgical mitral bioprostheses who underwent transseptal mitral valve-in-valve (MViV) with the SAPIEN 3 aortic transcatheter heart valve (THV) in the MITRAL (Mitral Implantation of Transcatheter Valves) trial.BackgroundThe MITRAL trial is the first prospective study evaluating transseptal MViV with the SAPIEN 3 aortic THV in high-risk patients with failed surgical mitral bioprostheses.MethodsHigh-risk patients with symptomatic moderate to severe or severe mitral regurgitation (MR) or severe mitral stenosis due to failed surgical mitral bioprostheses were prospectively enrolled. The primary safety endpoint was technical success. The primary THV performance endpoint was absence of MR grade ≥2+ or mean mitral valve gradient ≥10 mm Hg (30 days and 1 year). Secondary endpoints included procedural success and all-cause mortality (30 days and 1 year).ResultsThirty patients were enrolled between July 2016 and October 2017 (median age 77.5 years [interquartile range (IQR): 70.3 to 82.8 years], 63.3% women, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 9.4% [IQR: 5.8% to 12.0%], 80% in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV). The technical success rate was 100%. The primary performance endpoint in survivors was achieved in 96.6% (28 of 29) at 30 days and 82.8% (24 of 29) at 1 year. Thirty-day all-cause mortality was 3.3% and was unchanged at 1 year. The only death was due to airway obstruction after swallowing several pills simultaneously 29 days post-MViV. At 1-year follow-up, 89.3% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I or II, the median mean mitral valve gradient was 6.6 mm Hg (interquartile range: 5.5 to 8.9 mm Hg), and all patients had MR grade ≤1+.ConclusionsTransseptal MViV in high-risk patients was associated with 100% technical success, low procedural complication rates, and very low mortality at 1 year. The vast majority of patients experienced significant symptom alleviation, and THV performance remained stable at 1 year.     

Transcatheter Replacement of Transcatheter Versus Surgically Implanted Aortic Valve Bioprostheses

BackgroundSurgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are now both used to treat aortic stenosis in patients in whom life expectancy may exceed valve durability. The choice of initial bioprosthesis should therefore consider the relative safety and efficacy of potential subsequent interventions.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare TAVR in failed transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) versus surgical aortic valves (SAVs).MethodsData were collected on 434 TAV-in-TAV and 624 TAV-in-SAV consecutive procedures performed at centers participating in the Redo-TAVR international registry. Propensity score matching was applied, and 330 matched (165:165) patients were analyzed. Principal endpoints were procedural success, procedural safety, and mortality at 30 days and 1 year.ResultsFor TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV, procedural success was observed in 120 (72.7%) versus 103 (62.4%) patients (p = 0.045), driven by a numerically lower frequency of residual high valve gradient (p = 0.095), ectopic valve deployment (p = 0.081), coronary obstruction (p = 0.091), and conversion to open heart surgery (p = 0.082). Procedural safety was achieved in 116 (70.3%) versus 119 (72.1%) patients (p = 0.715). Mortality at 30 days was 5 (3%) after TAV-in-TAV and 7 (4.4%) after TAV-in-SAV (p = 0.570). At 1 year, mortality was 12 (11.9%) and 10 (10.2%), respectively (p = 0.633). Aortic valve area was larger (1.55 ± 0.5 cm² vs. 1.37 ± 0.5 cm²; p = 0.040), and the mean residual gradient was lower (12.6 ± 5.2 mm Hg vs. 14.9 ± 5.2 mm Hg; p = 0.011) after TAV-in-TAV. The rate of moderate or greater residual aortic regurgitation was similar, but mild aortic regurgitation was more frequent after TAV-in-TAV (p = 0.003).ConclusionsIn propensity score–matched cohorts of TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV patients, TAV-in-TAV was associated with higher procedural success and similar procedural safety or mortality.     

Coronary Access After TAVR With a Self-Expanding Bioprosthesis: Insights From Computed Tomography

ObjectivesThe authors sought to estimate possible interference of the Medtronic Evolut R/Pro transcatheter heart valve (THV) frame with coronary access using multislice computed tomography (MSCT) data.BackgroundLower-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) endure a high cumulative risk of coronary events, but coronary access can be challenging.MethodsIn 101 patients who received an Evolut R/Pro THV, post-TAVR MSCT (performed at a median of 30 days after TAVR) was used to assess possible interference of the elements of the THV frame with coronary access.ResultsThe closest cell of the THV frame vertically aligned with the coronary ostium was located opposite the ostium in 58% and 63%, below the ostium in 22% and 30%, or above the ostium in 20% and 7% of left and right coronary arteries, respectively. The free sinus of Valsalva space between the THV frame and the coronary ostium was 0.45 ± 0.17 cm and 0.44 ± 0.17 cm for the left and right coronary arteries, respectively, and showed a stepwise decrease with decreasing THV size (p < 0.001). Bioprosthetic valve commissures were antianatomic (i.e., not aligned with native commissures) in 45 patients (47%), and the commissural post was overlapping a coronary ostium in 15 patients (16%). Two patients (2.0%) had a possible interference of the paravalvular sealing skirt with coronary access.ConclusionsUsing post-TAVR MSCT data, the main mechanism of potential interference of Evolut R/Pro frame with coronary access was an antianatomic commissural post overlapping the coronary ostium.     

5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and echocardiographic outcome data of the CHOICE (Randomized Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve Versus Edwards SAPIEN XT) trial at 5 years.BackgroundThe CHOICE trial was designed to compare device performance of a balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valve (THV) versus a self-expanding (SE) THV.MethodsThe CHOICE trial is an investigator-initiated trial that randomized 241 high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and an anatomy suitable for treatment with both BE and SE THVs to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with either device. The primary endpoint was device success. Patients were followed up to 5 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes, and echocardiographic evaluation of valve function and THV durability.ResultsAfter 5 years, there were no statistically significant differences between BE and SE valves in the cumulative incidence of death from any cause (53.4% vs. 47.6%; p = 0.38), death from cardiovascular causes (31.6% vs. 21.5%; p = 0.12), all strokes (17.5% vs. 16.5%; p = 0.73), and repeat hospitalization for heart failure (28.9% vs. 22.5%; p = 0.75). SE patients had larger prosthetic valve area (1.6 ± 0.5 cm² vs. 1.9 ± 0.5 cm²; p = 0.02) with a lower mean transprosthetic gradient (12.2 ± 8.7 mm Hg vs. 6.9 ± 2.7 mm Hg; p = 0.001) at 5 years. No differences were observed in the rates of paravalvular regurgitation. Clinical valve thrombosis occurred in 7 BE patients (7.3%) and 1 SE patient (0.8%; p = 0.06), and moderate or severe structural valve deterioration in 6 BE patients (6.6%) and no SE patient (0%; p = 0.018). The rate of bioprosthetic valve failure was low and not significantly different between both groups (4.1% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.63).ConclusionsFive-year follow-up of patients in the CHOICE trial revealed clinical outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early-generation BE and SE valves that were not statistically significantly different, with limited statistical power. Forward flow hemodynamics were significantly better with the SE valve. Moderate or severe structural valve deterioration was uncommon but occurred more frequently with the BE valve. (A Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CHOICE Trial [CHOICE]; NCT01645202)     

Impact of Annular Oversizing on Paravalvular Regurgitation and Valve Hemodynamics: New Insights From PARTNER 3

ObjectivesThis study sought to investigate the impact of computed tomography (CT)–based area and perimeter oversizing on the incidence of paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) and valve hemodynamics in patients treated with the SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (THV).BackgroundThe incremental value of considering annular perimeter or left ventricular outflow tract measurements and the impact of THV oversizing on valve hemodynamics are not well defined.MethodsThe PARTNER 3 (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 3) trial included 495 low-surgical-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent THV implantation. THV sizing was based on annular area assessed by CT. Area- and perimeter-based oversizing was determined using systolic annular CT dimensions and nominal dimensions of the implanted THV. PVR, effective orifice area, and mean gradient were assessed on 30-day transthoracic echocardiography.ResultsOf 485 patients with available CT and echocardiography data, mean oversizing was 7.9 ± 8.7% for the annulus area and 2.1 ± 4.1% for the perimeter. A very low incidence of ≥moderate PVR (0.6%) was observed, including patients with minimal annular oversizing. Incidence of ≥mild PVR and need for procedural post-dilatation were inversely related to the degree of oversizing. For patients with annular dimensions suitable for 2 THV sizes, the larger THV with both area and perimeter oversizing was associated with the lowest incidence of ≥mild PVR (12.0% vs 43.4%; P < 0.0001). Left ventricular outflow tract area oversizing was not associated with PVR. THV prosthesis size, rather than degree of oversizing, had greatest impact on effective orifice area and mean gradient.ConclusionsIn low-surgical-risk patients, a low incidence of ≥moderate PVR was observed, including patients with minimal THV oversizing. The degree of prosthesis oversizing had the greatest impact on reducing mild PVR and incidence of post-dilatation, without impacting valve hemodynamics. In selected patients with annular dimensions in between 2 valve sizes, the larger THV device oversized to both the annular area and perimeter reduced PVR and optimized THV hemodynamics.     

Safety and Performance Outcomes of a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Heart Valve: The BIOVALVE Trials

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the safety and performance of a newly introduced transfemoral self-expanding supra-annular transcatheter heart valve.BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement has become an established procedure, and newer transcatheter heart valves aim to supplement the current armamentarium.MethodsBIOVALVE-I is a prospective, single-center feasibility study enrolling 13 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, and BIOVALVE-II is a multicenter pilot study enrolling a further 55 patients under the same protocol.ResultsPatients’ mean age was 82.4 ± 5.3 years, 57.4% had concomitant coronary artery disease, 50.0% had renal insufficiency stage ≥3, 32.4% had diabetes mellitus, 29.4% had current anemia, 19.1% had chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 19.1% were frail, and 17.6% had prior cerebrovascular events. The primary endpoint, early safety according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 guidelines, was observed in 13 patients (19.1%). One patient (1.5%) died through 30 days of a noncardiac cause, and 4 patients (7.8%) died through 180 days. Disabling stroke occurred at 30 days in 1 patient (1.5%) and at 180 days in 2 patients (3.2%). New permanent pacemakers up to 30 days were implanted in 9 patients (13.4%). Two patients (3.8%) had moderate or severe paravalvular leakage at 30 days and 4 (9.1%) at 6 months, mean effective orifice area was 2.0 ± 0.4 cm² and 1.9 ± 0.5 cm², and mean gradient was 6.4 mm Hg at 30 days and 6 months.ConclusionsClinical outcomes with the Biovalve self-expanding transcatheter heart valve were similar to those seen in other first-in-human studies with first-generation devices for severe aortic stenosis.     

Impact of Commissural Misalignment on Hydrodynamic Function Following Valve-in-Valve Intervention With the ACURATE neo

BackgroundLimited evidence is available regarding valve-in-valve (VIV) intervention with the ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV). Low implantation has demonstrated leaflet interaction between the surgical bioprosthesis and the THV, leading to impaired hydrodynamic performance. It is unknown if commissural alignment (CA) can affect this phenomenon. Novel techniques have now been developed to achieve CA with the ACURATE neo THV.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the impact of commissural misalignment (CMA) on hydrodynamic function following VIV intervention with the ACURATE neo THV using a bench model.MethodsVIV intervention was performed with the ACURATE neo (a self-expanding THV with supra-annular leaflet position) implanted deep in the surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve (Mitroflow). Hydrodynamic function at CA (0°) and 3 different degrees of CMA (30°, 60°, and 90°) was tested. As per the International Organization for Standardization, a regurgitant fraction <20% is considered optimal.ResultsFollowing VIV, the central THV regurgitant fraction at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° of CMA was 8.6% ± 2.0%, 30.3% ± 12.0%, 42.6% ± 11.9%, and 66.7% ± 25.4% (P < 0.0001), respectively. On high-speed video there was no evidence of leaflet interaction at CA, whereas at 30°, 60°, and 90° of CMA there was clear evidence of THV leaflet interaction with those of the surgical valve, leading to impaired leaflet closure and to severe central THV regurgitation.ConclusionsIn VIV using the ACURATE neo THV at deep implantation, increasing degree of CMA was associated with THV leaflet interaction with those of the surgical valve and worsening regurgitant fraction. THV leaflet interaction was prevented when there was CA.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Self-Expanding ACURATE neo2: Postprocedural Hemodynamic and Short-Term Clinical Outcomes

BackgroundThe first-generation ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) (Boston Scientific) was associated with a non-negligible occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. To overcome this issue, the ACURATE neo2 iteration, which incorporates a taller outer skirt aimed at reducing the occurrence of paravalvular AR, has recently been developed.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of the ACURATE neo2 (Boston Scientific) THV in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.MethodsITAL-neo was an observational, retrospective, multicenter registry enrolling consecutive patients with severe aortic valve stenosis, treated with first- and second-generation ACURATE neo THVs, via transfemoral and trans-subclavian access, in 13 Italian centers. One-to-one propensity score matching was applied to account for baseline characteristics unbalance. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of moderate or greater paravalvular AR on predischarge echocardiographic assessment. Secondary endpoints included postprocedural technical success and 90-day device success and safety.ResultsAmong 900 patients included in the registry, 220 received the ACURATE neo2 THV, whereas 680 were treated with the first-generation device. A total of 410 patients were compared after 1:1 propensity score matching. The ACURATE neo2 THV was associated with a 3-fold lower frequency of postprocedural moderate or greater paravalvular AR (11.2% vs 3.5%; P < 0.001). No other hemodynamic differences were observed. Postprocedural technical success was similar between the 2 cohorts. Fewer adverse events were observed in patients treated with the ACURATE neo2 at 90 days.ConclusionsTransfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement using the ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significant lower frequency of moderate or greater paravalvular AR compared with the earlier generation ACURATE neo device, with encouraging short-term safety and efficacy.     

5-Year Outcomes With Self-Expanding vs Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Small Annuli

BackgroundSelf-expanding transcatheter heart valves (THVs) are associated with better echocardiographic hemodynamic performance than balloon-expandable THVs and are considered preferable in patients with small annuli.ObjectivesThis study sought to compare 5-year outcomes between self-expanding vs balloon-expandable THVs in severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients with small annuli.MethodsConsecutive severe AS patients with an aortic valve annulus area <430 mm² who underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with either the CoreValve Evolut (Medtronic) or SAPIEN (Edwards Lifesciences) THV between 2012 and 2021 were enrolled from the Bern TAVI registry. A 1:1 propensity-matched analysis was performed to account for baseline differences between groups.ResultsA total of 723 patients were included, and propensity score matching resulted in 171 pairs. Technical success was achieved in over 85% of both groups with no significant difference. Self-expanding THVs were associated with a lower transvalvular gradient (8.0 ± 4.8 mm Hg vs 12.5 ± 4.5 mm Hg; P < 0.001), a larger effective orifice area (1.81 ± 0.46 cm² vs 1.49 ± 0.42 cm²; P < 0.001), and a lower incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (19.7% vs 51.8%; P < 0.001) than balloon-expandable THVs. At 5 years, there were no significant differences in mortality (50.4% vs 39.6%; P = 0.269) between groups. Disabling stroke occurred more frequently in patients with a self-expanding THV than those with a balloon-expandable THV (6.6% vs 0.6%; P = 0.030). Similar results were obtained using inverse probability of treatment weighting in the Bern TAVI registry and the nationwide Swiss TAVI registry.ConclusionsThe echocardiographic hemodynamic advantage of self-expanding THVs was not associated with better clinical outcomes compared with balloon-expandable THVs up to 5 years in patients with small annuli. (Swiss TAVI Registry; NCT01368250)     

Propensity-Matched 1-Year Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Bicuspid and Tricuspid Patients

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare 1-year outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low surgical risk patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis to patients with tricuspid aortic stenosis.BackgroundThe pivotal TAVR trials excluded patients with bicuspid aortic valves. The Low Risk Bicuspid Study 30-day primary endpoint of death or disabling stroke was 1.3%.MethodsThe Low Risk Bicuspid Study is a prospective, single-arm, TAVR trial that enrolled patients from 25 U.S. sites. A screening committee confirmed bicuspid anatomy and valve classification on computed tomography using the Sievers classification. Valve sizing was by annular measurements. An independent clinical events committee adjudicated all serious adverse events, and an independent core laboratory assessed all echocardiograms. The 150 patients from the Low Risk Bicuspid Study were propensity matched to the TAVR patients in the randomized Evolut Low Risk Trial using the 1:1 5- to-1-digit greedy method, resulting in 145 pairs.ResultsAll-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 1 year was 1.4% in the bicuspid and 2.8% in the tricuspid group (P = 0.413). A pacemaker was implanted in 16.6% of bicuspid and 17.9% of tricuspid patients (P = 0.741). The effective orifice area was similar between groups at 1 year (2.2 ± 0.7 cm² vs 2.3 ± 0.6 cm², P = 0.677) as was the mean gradient (8.7 ± 3.9 mm Hg vs 8.5 ± 3.1 mm Hg, P = 0.754). Fewer patients in the bicuspid group had mild or worse paravalvular leak (21.3% vs 42.6%, P < 0.001).ConclusionsThere were no significant differences in clinical or forward flow hemodynamic outcomes between the propensity-matched groups at 1 year.     

Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis in Transcatheter and Surgical Bioprosthetic Valves: PARTNER 3 Cardiac Computed Tomography Substudy

BackgroundSubclinical leaflet thrombosis, characterized by hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT) and reduced leaflet motion observed on 4-dimensional computed tomography (CT), may represent a form of bioprosthetic valve dysfunction.ObjectivesThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration mandated CT studies to understand the natural history of this finding, differences between transcatheter and surgical valves, and its association with valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes.MethodsThe PARTNER 3 (The Safety and Effectiveness of the SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in Low-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis) CT substudy randomized 435 patients with low–surgical-risk aortic stenosis to undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (n = 221) or surgery (n = 214). Serial 4-dimensional CTs were performed at 30 days and 1 year and were analyzed independently by a core laboratory.ResultsThe incidence of HALT increased from 10% at 30 days to 24% at 1 year. Spontaneous resolution of 30-day HALT occurred in 54% of patients at 1 year, whereas new HALT appeared in 21% of patients at 1 year. HALT was more frequent in transcatheter versus surgical valves at 30 days (13% vs. 5%; p = 0.03), but not at 1 year (28% vs. 20%; p = 0.19). The presence of HALT did not significantly affect aortic valve mean gradients at 30 days or 1 year. Patients with HALT at both 30 days and 1 year, compared with those with no HALT at 30 days and 1 year, had significantly increased aortic valve gradients at 1 year (17.8 ± 2.2 mm Hg vs. 12.7. ± 0.3 mm Hg; p = 0.04).ConclusionsSubclinical leaflet thrombosis was more frequent in transcatheter compared with surgical valves at 30 days, but not at 1 year. The impact of HALT on thromboembolic complications and structural valve degeneration needs further assessment.     

Mid-Term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Extremely Large Annuli With Edwards SAPIEN 3 Valve

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to report the 1-year results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 (S3) valve in extremely large annuli.BackgroundFavorable 30-day outcomes of S3 TAVR in annuli >683 mm² have previously been reported. Pacemaker implantation rates were acceptable, and a larger left ventricular outflow tract and more eccentric annular anatomy were associated with increasing paravalvular leak.MethodsFrom December 2013 to December 2018, 105 patients across 15 centers with mean area 721.3 ± 36.1 mm² (range 683.5 to 852.0 mm²) underwent TAVR using an S3 device. Clinical, anatomic, and procedural characteristics were analyzed. One-year survival and echocardiographic follow-up were reached in 94.3% and 82.1% of patients, respectively. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 30-day and 1-year outcomes were reported.ResultsThe mean age was 76.9 ± 10.4 years, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk score averaged 5.2 ± 3.4%. One-year overall mortality and stroke rates were 18.2% and 2.4%, respectively. Quality-of-life index improved from baseline to 30 days and at 1 year (p < 0.001 for both). Mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation occurred in 21.7% of patients, while moderate or greater paravalvular aortic regurgitation occurred in 4.3%. Mild and moderate or severe transvalvular aortic regurgitation occurred in 11.6% and 0%, respectively. Valve gradients remained stable at 1 year.ConclusionsS3 TAVR in annular areas >683 mm² is feasible, with favorable mid-term outcomes.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Balloon-Expandable Valves: Comparison of SAPIEN 3 Ultra Versus SAPIEN 3

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 Ultra (Ultra) and SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valves (THVs).BackgroundThe latest generation balloon-expandable Ultra THV incorporates new technical features and might improve outcomes following TAVR.MethodsThis registry included all consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with either the Ultra or S3 between January 2014 and January 2020. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics. In-hospital and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-2–defined outcomes were investigated.ResultsA total of 310 patients (n = 155 Ultra, n = 155 S3) were included. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics after propensity score matching. Procedures were significantly more often performed under conscious sedation with Ultra compared with S3 (97.4% vs. 71.6%; p < 0.001). Pre-dilatation was more frequent with S3 compared with Ultra (85.2% vs. 42.6%; p < 0.001). In-hospital outcomes, including device success (91.6% vs. 95.5%; p = 0.165), major vascular complications (12.3% vs. 11.0%; p = 0.723), and new pacemaker implantation (5.8% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.608), were comparable between S3 and Ultra patients, respectively. Post-procedural mean transprosthetic gradients (13.2 ± 5.7 mm Hg vs. 13.1 ± 4.7 mm Hg; p = 0.829) and rate of moderate or greater paravalvular leakage (PVL) (1.3% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.414) were comparable, whereas mild PVL was more frequent with S3 compared with Ultra (43.0% vs. 18.7%; p < 0.001).ConclusionsDevice success rates were high with both balloon-expandable THVs, with overall low rates of adverse events up to 30 days after TAVR. Despite a lower frequency of pre-dilatation, significant reduction of mild PVL confirms improved annular sealing properties of the novel Ultra THV.     

Safety Profile of an Intra-Annular Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve and Next-Generation Low-Profile Delivery System

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to characterize the safety profile of an intra-annular self-expanding valve with a next-generation low-profile delivery system (DS).BackgroundKey design modifications to the FlexNav DS include the addition of a hydrophilic-coated, integrated sheath and stability layer to facilitate gradual, controlled deployment in vessels with diameter ≥5 mm.MethodsPatients were pooled from 2 concurrent prospective, multicenter, single-arm studies (FlexNav DS arm of PORTICO IDE [Portico Re-Sheathable Transcatheter Aortic Valve System U.S. IDE Trial] [n = 134] and the FlexNav EU CE Mark Study [n = 46]) for the analysis. The primary endpoint was Valve Academic Research Consortium-2–defined major vascular complications at 30 days. Clinical outcomes and valve performance were assessed through 30 days by an independent clinical events committee and an echocardiography core laboratory, respectively.ResultsOne hundred forty high-risk and 40 extreme-risk subjects enrolled between October 15, 2018, and December 10, 2019, from 28 sites in the United States, Australia, and Europe who underwent attempted transfemoral Portico valve implantation were included. The mean age was 85.1 ± 5.6 years, 60% were women, the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.3%, and 96.1% presented with ≥1 frailty factor. Technical device success was 96.7%. At 30 days, the rate of major vascular complications was 5.0%, with 4.4% of complications adjudicated as access site-related (3.3% transcatheter aortic valve replacement DS access site-related). Death (0.6%) and disabling stroke (1.1%) were rare. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 15.4%. Echocardiography revealed a mean gradient of 7.1 ± 3.2 mm Hg, mean valve area of 1.77 ± 0.41 cm², and a 4.1% rate of moderate paravalvular leak at 30 days.ConclusionsPortico valve implantation with the FlexNav DS was associated with an excellent safety profile at 30 days.     

First-in-Human Experience With Patient-Specific Computer Simulation of TAVR in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Morphology

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to prospectively evaluate the clinical use of patient-specific computer simulation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) morphology.BackgroundPatient-specific computer simulation of TAVR in BAV may predict important clinical outcomes, such as paravalvular regurgitation and conduction disturbance.MethodsBetween May 2018 and April 2019, all patients who were referred for TAVR who had BAV identified on work-up cardiac multidetector computed tomographic imaging prospectively underwent patient-specific computer simulation with a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) using TAVIguide technology.ResultsNine patients were included in the study. Sievers classification was type 0 in 2 patients and type 1 in 7 patients. The simulations altered the treatment strategy in 8 patients (89%). The simulations suggested moderate to severe paravalvular regurgitation in 3 patients, who were referred for consideration of surgery. The remaining 6 patients underwent TAVR with a self-expanding THV. In 5 of these patients (83%), THV size and/or implantation depth was altered to minimize paravalvular regurgitation and/or conduction disturbance. In 1 patient, simulations suggested significant conduction disturbance after TAVR, and a permanent pacemaker was implanted before the procedure. Following treatment, all 9 patients had no to mild paravalvular regurgitation. The patient who had a pre-procedure permanent pacemaker implanted became pacing dependent, with underlying third-degree atrioventricular block.ConclusionsPatient-specific computer simulation of TAVR in BAV can be used to identify those patients where TAVR may be associated with unfavorable clinical outcomes. Patient-specific computer simulation may be useful to guide THV sizing and positioning for potential favorable clinical outcomes.     

Balloon-Expandable Valve for Treatment of Evolut Valve Failure: Implications on Neoskirt Height and Leaflet Overhang

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine the degree of Evolut (Medtronic) leaflet pinning, diameter expansion, leaflet overhang, and performance at different implant depths of the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 (S3, Edwards Lifesciences LLC) transcatheter heart valve (THV) within the Evolut THV.BackgroundPreservation of coronary access and flow is a major factor when considering the treatment of failed Evolut THVs.MethodsAn in vitro study was performed with 20-, 23-, 26-, and 29-mm S3 THVs deployed within 23-, 26-, 29-, and 34-mm Evolut R THVs, respectively. The S3 outflow was positioned at various depths at node 4, 5, and 6 of the Evolut R. Neoskirt height, leaflet overhang, performance, and Evolut R valve housing diameter expansion were assessed under physiological conditions as per ISO 5840-3 standard.ResultsThe neoskirt height for the Evolut R was shorter when the S3 outflow was positioned at node 4 compared with node 6 (node 4 height for 23 mm = 16.3 mm, 26 mm = 17.1 mm, 29 mm = 18.3 mm, and 34 mm = 19.9 mm vs node 6 height for 23 mm = 23.9 mm, 26 mm = 23.4 mm, 29 mm = 24.7 mm, and 34 mm = 27 mm Evolut R). All configurations exhibited acceptable hydrodynamic performance irrespective of the degree of leaflet overhang, except the 29-mm S3 implanted in 34-mm Evolut R at node 4 (regurgitant fraction >20%). The valve housing radius of the index Evolut R increased when the S3 was implanted, with the increase ranging from 0 to 2.5 mm.ConclusionsPlacement of the S3 at a lower implant position within an index Evolut R reduces the neoskirt height with no significant compromise to S3 valve function despite a higher degree of leaflet overhang. Low S3 implantation may facilitate future coronary access after redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valves From the STS/ACC TVT Registry

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare outcomes in patients with bicuspid versus tricuspid anatomy undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundTAVR has shown excellent safety and efficacy in patients with tricuspid aortic valve stenosis, but limited data are available on the use of self-expanding valves in patients with bicuspid valves.MethodsThe Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT Registry was used to analyze patients who underwent TAVR with the Evolut R or Evolut PRO valves. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were analyzed through 1-year follow-up.ResultsBetween July 2015 and September 2018 a total of 932 patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis underwent elective TAVR with the self-expanding Evolut R or Evolut PRO valve. These patients were compared with a group of 26,154 patients with tricuspid aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR during that same time period. At baseline, patients with bicuspid valves were younger, had fewer cardiac comorbidities, and had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality scores (5.3 ± 4.2% vs. 6.9 ± 4.8%; p < 0.001). To account for these differences, propensity matching was performed, which resulted in 929 matched pairs. Within these match groups, the rates of all-cause mortality at 30 days (2.6% vs. 1.7%; p = 0.18) and 1 year (10.4% vs. 12.1%; p = 0.63), as well the rate of stroke at 30 days (3.4% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.41) and 1 year (3.9% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.93), were comparable.ConclusionsAll-cause mortality, stroke, and valve hemodynamics did not differ at 30 days or 1 year between patient groups. In patients at increased surgical risk, TAVR for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis indicates acceptable safety outcomes with low complications rates.     

Outcomes Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Degenerative Stentless Versus Stented Bioprostheses

ObjectivesA large comprehensive analysis of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was performed for failed stentless bioprostheses.BackgroundValve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to redo surgery for patients with a failing aortic bioprosthesis.MethodsUnadjusted outcome data were collected from the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data) registry between 2007 and 2016 from a total of 1,598 aortic ViV procedures (291 stentless, 1,307 stented bioprostheses).ResultsBioprosthetic failure was secondary to aortic regurgitation in 56% of stentless and 20% stented devices (p < 0.001). ViV-TAVR access was transfemoral in 71.1% stentless and 74.2% stented ViV-TAVR. Self-expanding devices were more frequently used in stentless ViV-TAVR (56.0% vs. 39.9%; p = 0.05), but there was no difference between balloon-expanding and self-expanding TAVR devices for stented ViV-TAVR (48.6% vs. 45.1%). The degree of oversizing for all mechanisms of bioprosthesis failure was 9 ± 10% for stentless ViV-TAVR vs. 6 ± 9% for stented ViV-TAVR (and 8 ± 10% for stentless ViV-TAVR vs. 3 ± 9% for stented ViV-TAVR in patients with predominant aortic regurgitation; both p < 0.001). Initial device malposition (10.3% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.014), second transcatheter device (7.9% vs. 3.4%), coronary obstruction (6.0% vs. 1.5%), and paravalvular leak occurred more frequently in stentless ViV-TAVR (all p < 0.001). Hospital stay duration (median 7 days) was no different, and 30-day (6.6% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.12) and 1-year mortality year (15.8% vs. 12.6%; p = 0.15) were numerically higher, but not statistically different, after stentless ViV-TAVR.ConclusionsStentless ViV-TAVR is associated with greater periprocedural complications (initial device malposition, second transcatheter device, coronary obstruction, paravalvular leak), but no difference in 30-day and 1-year outcome.