Search

Background: Conduction disturbances requiring a permanent pacemaker (PPM) are a frequent complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with few reports of rates, predictors, and long-term clinical outcomes following implantation of the third-generation, balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valve (THV)., Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the rates, predictors, and long-term clinical outcomes of PPM implantation following TAVR with the S3 THV., Methods: The current study included 857 patients in the PARTNER 2 S3 registries with intermediate and high surgical risk without prior PPM, and investigated predictors and 5-year clinical outcomes of new PPM implanted within 30 days of TAVR., Results: Among 857 patients, 107 patients (12.5%) received a new PPM within 30 days after TAVR. By multivariable analysis, predictors of PPM included increased age, pre-existing right bundle branch block, larger THV size, greater THV oversizing, moderate or severe annulus calcification, and implantation depth >6 mm. At 5 years (median follow-up 1,682.0 days [min 2.0 days, max 2,283.0 days]), new PPM was not associated with increased rates of all-cause mortality (Adj HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.85-1.70; P = 0.30) or repeat hospitalization (Adj HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.67-2.21; P = 0.52). Patients with new PPM had a decline in left ventricular ejection fraction at 1 year that persisted at 5 years (55.1 ± 2.55 vs 60.4 ± 0.65; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: PPM was required in 12.5% of patients without prior PPM who underwent TAVR with a SAPIEN 3 valve in the PARTNER 2 S3 registries and was not associated with worse clinical outcomes, including mortality, at 5 years. Modifiable factors that may reduce the PPM rate include bioprosthetic valve oversizing, prosthesis size, and implantation depth., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The PARTNER 2 trial was funded by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr R.T. Hahn reports speaker fees from Abbott Structural, Baylis Medical, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic and Philips Healthcare, Siemens Healthineers; she has institutional consulting contracts for which she receives no direct compensation with Abbott Structural, Anteris, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic and Novartis; she is Chief Scientific Officer for the Echocardiography Core Laboratory at the Cardiovascular Research Foundation for multiple industry-sponsored valve trials, for which she receives no direct industry compensation. P Pibarot has received institutional funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Pi-Cardia, Cardiac Success, Roche Diagnostics for echocardiography core laboratory analyses, blood biomarker analyses, and research studies in the field of interventional and pharmacologic treatment of valvular heart diseases, for which he received no personal compensation. Dr George has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Zhao is an employee of Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Blanke has institutional core laboratory contracts with Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, PI Cardia, and Conformal; he is a Consultant for Edwards Lifesciences and Laralab Imaging. Dr Babaliaros has received consulting fees from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Szeto has received grant support from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic; and is a consultant for MicroInterventional Devices. Dr Makkar has received research support from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott; and consultant fees/honoraria from Abbott, Cordis Corporation, and Medtronic. Dr Thourani serves on advisory boards for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, Atricure, Cryolife, Jenavalve, Shockwave, and Boston Scientific. Dr Webb is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Michael Mack served as co-primary investigator for the PARTNER Trial for Edwards Lifesciences and COAPT trial for Abbott; and served as study chair for the APOLLO trial for Medtronic (all activities unpaid). Dr Leon serves on the PARTNER Trial Executive Committee for Edwards Lifesciences (unpaid); has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; has been an unpaid advisor for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Sinomed, and Medtronic; and holds equity in Medinol. Dr Kodali has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott; has received consulting fees from Abbott, Admedus, and Meril Lifesciences; and has equity options from Biotrace Medical and Thubrikar Aortic Valve Inc. Dr Nazif has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Teleflex. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) studies show that one-quarter of left anterior descending (LAD) arteries have a myocardial bridge. An MB may be associated with stent failure when the stent extends into the MB., Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate: 1) the association between an MB and chronic total occlusion (CTO) in any LAD lesions; and 2) the association between an MB and subsequent clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in LAD CTOs., Methods: A total of 3,342 LAD lesions with IVUS-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (280 CTO and 3,062 non-CTO lesions) were included. The primary outcome was target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, and ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization)., Results: An MB by IVUS was significantly more prevalent in LAD CTOs than LAD non-CTOs (40.4% [113/280] vs 25.8% [789/3,062]; P < 0.0001). The discrepancy in CTO length between angiography and IVUS was greater in 113 LAD CTOs with an MB than 167 LAD CTOs without an MB (6.0 [Q1, Q3: 0.1, 12.2] mm vs 0.2 [Q1, Q3: -1.4, 8.4] mm; P < 0.0001). Overall, 48.7% (55/113) of LAD CTOs had a stent that extended into an MB after which target lesion failure was significantly higher compared to a stent that did not extend into an MB (26.3% vs 0%; P = 0.0004) or compared to an LAD CTO without an MB (26.3% vs 9.6%; P = 0.02)., Conclusions: An MB was more common in LAD CTO than non-CTO LAD lesions. If present, approximately one-half of LAD CTOs had a stent extending into an MB that, in turn, was associated with worse outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Karmpaliotis has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and Abbot Vascular; and holds equity in Saranas Soundbite and Traverse Vascular. Dr Matsumura is a consultant for Terumo Corporation and Boston Scientific. Dr Fall is a consultant for INFRAREDX and Boston Scientific. Dr Prasad is a consultant for CONAVI, Neovasc, Abbott Vascular, Cardinol, Chiesi, and Boehringer Ingelheim; and is on the Speakers Bureau for CONAVI, Neovasc, Abbott Vascular, Cardinol, Chiesi, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Ng has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Parikh has received research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Phillips, Cordis, Jannsen; is a consultant for Inari, Penumbra, Terumo, and Canon; and holds equity in eFemoral, Advanced Nano Therapies, and Encompass Vascular. Dr Ali has received grants from Abbott Vascular and CSI; is a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Boston Scientific; and holds equity for Shockwave. Dr Leon has received institutional clinical research grants from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr McEntegart has received honoraria from Boston Scientific, Abbot Vascular, Shockwave Medical, Teleflex, and Biosensors. Dr Moses holds equity in Orchestra Biomed and Xenter. Dr Kirtane has received institutional funding to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, CSI, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical, and Neurotronic; has received institutional funding including fees paid to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation for consulting and/or speaking engagements in which Dr Kirtane controlled the content; is a consultant for IMDS; and has received travel expenses/meals from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, CSI, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical, Chiesi, OpSens, Zoll, and Regeneron. Dr Ochiai has received consulting fees from Abbott, Asahi Intecc, Boston Scientific, and Terumo. Dr Mintz has received honoraria from Boston Scientific, Philips, SpectraWave, and Gentuity. Dr Maehara has received research grants from Boston Scientific and Abbott Vascular; and is a consultant for Boston Scientific and Philips. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although >150,000 mitral TEER procedures have been performed worldwide, the impact of MR etiology on MV surgery after TEER remains unknown., Objectives: The authors sought to compare outcomes of mitral valve (MV) surgery after failed transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) stratified by mitral regurgitation (MR) etiology., Methods: Data from the CUTTING-EDGE registry were retrospectively analyzed. Surgeries were stratified by MR etiology: primary (PMR) and secondary (SMR). MVARC (Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium) outcomes at 30 days and 1 year were evaluated. Median follow-up was 9.1 months (IQR: 1.1-25.8 months) after surgery., Results: From July 2009 to July 2020, 330 patients underwent MV surgery after TEER, of which 47% had PMR and 53.0% had SMR. Mean age was 73.8 ± 10.1 years, median STS risk at initial TEER was 4.0% (IQR: 2.2%-7.3%). Compared with PMR, SMR had a higher EuroSCORE, more comorbidities, lower LVEF pre-TEER and presurgery (all P < 0.05). SMR patients had more aborted TEER (25.7% vs 16.3%; P = 0.043), more surgery for mitral stenosis after TEER (19.4% vs 9.0%; P = 0.008), and fewer MV repairs (4.0% vs 11.0%; P = 0.019). Thirty-day mortality was numerically higher in SMR (20.4% vs 12.7%; P = 0.072), with an observed-to-expected ratio of 3.6 (95% CI: 1.9-5.3) overall, 2.6 (95% CI: 1.2-4.0) in PMR, and 4.6 (95% CI: 2.6-6.6) in SMR. SMR had significantly higher 1-year mortality (38.3% vs 23.2%; P = 0.019). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the actuarial estimates of cumulative survival were significantly lower in SMR at 1 and 3 years., Conclusions: The risk of MV surgery after TEER is nontrivial, with higher mortality after surgery, especially in SMR patients. These findings provide valuable data for further research to improve these outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Bhadra has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Tagliari has received research support from the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior. Dr Leurent has been a consultant and physician proctor for and has received speaker honoraria from Abbott. Dr Asgar has been a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and W. L. Gore & Associates; and has received research grants from Abbott. Dr Leroux has been a physician proctor for Medtronic and Abbott; and a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Dumonteil has received speaker honoraria and travel reimbursement by Edwards Lifesciences; and has been a physician proctor and consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Geirsson has been a member of the Medtronic Strategic Surgical Advisory Board. Dr Wyler von Ballmoos has served as a consultant for LivaNova, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr Reardon has been a consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, and W. L. Gore & Associates. Dr Bapat has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, 4C Medical, and Boston Scientific. Dr Nazif has equity in Venus Medtech; and has received consulting fees or honoraria from Keystone Heart, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr Kaneko has been a speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott, and Baylis Medical; and has been a consultant for 4C Medical. Dr Modine has been a physician proctor and consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Abbott. Dr Denti has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and has been a consultant for InnovHeart. Dr Tang has been a physician proctor for Medtronic; a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott, and NeoChord; and a physician advisory board member for Abbott, Boston Scientific and JenaValve; and has received speaker honoraria from Siemens Healthineers and East End Medical. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic and iodinated contrast shortage may have affected interventional cardiology (IC) fellowship training., Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the educational experience of first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada., Methods: A 59-question online survey was conducted among 2021-2022 first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada., Results: Of the 360 IC fellows invited to participate, 111 (31%) responded; 95% were from the United States, and 79% were men. Participants were mostly from university programs (70%), spent 61 to 70 hours/week in the hospital, and had an annual percutaneous coronary intervention case number of <200 (5%), 200 to 249 (8%), 250 to 349 (33%), 350 to 499 (39%), 500 to 699 (12%), or ≥700 (3%). For femoral access, a micropuncture needle was used regularly by 89% and ultrasound-guided puncture by 81%, and 43% used vascular closure devices in most cases (>80%). Intravascular ultrasound was performed and interpreted very comfortably by 62% and optical coherence tomography (OCT) by 32%, and 20% did not have access to OCT. Approximately one-third felt very comfortable performing various atherectomy techniques. Covered stents, fat embolization, and coil embolization were used very comfortably by 14%, 4%, and 3%, respectively. Embolic protection devices were used very comfortably by 11% to 24% of IC fellows. Almost one-quarter of fellows (24%) were warned about their high radiation exposure. Eighty-four percent considered IC fellowship somewhat or very stressful, and 16% reported inadequate psychological support., Conclusions: This survey highlights opportunities for improvement with regard to the use of intravascular imaging, atherectomy techniques, complication prevention and management strategies, radiation awareness and mitigation, and psychological support., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors are grateful for the philanthropic support of their generous anonymous donors and the philanthropic support of Drs Mary Ann and Donald A. Sens, Mrs Diane and Dr Cline Hickok, Mrs Wilma and Mr Dale Johnson, the Mrs Charlotte and Mr Jerry Golinvaux Family Fund, the Roehl Family Foundation, and the Joseph Durda Foundation. The generous gifts of these donors to the Minneapolis Heart Institute Foundation’s Science Center for Coronary Artery Disease helped support this research project. Dr Azzalini has received honoraria from Teleflex, Abiomed, Asahi Intecc, Philips, GE Healthcare, Abbott Vascular, and Cardiovascular Systems. Dr Sandoval previously served on the advisory boards for Roche Diagnostics and Abbott Diagnostics without personal compensation; and has been a speaker without personal financial compensation for Abbott Diagnostics. Dr Brilakis has received consulting and speaker honoraria from Abbott Vascular, the American Heart Association (associate editor, Circulation), Amgen, Asahi Intecc, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, the Cardiovascular Innovations Foundation (Board of Directors), ControlRad, Cardiovascular Systems, Elsevier, GE Healthcare, Interventional Medical Device Solutions, InfraRedx, Medicure, Medtronic, Opsens, Siemens, and Teleflex; is an owner of Hippocrates; and is a shareholder in MHI Ventures and Cleerly Health. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although the presence of severe stenosis in the left main coronary artery (LMCA) is a well-established predictor of mortality, whether this extends to nonobstructive atherosclerosis in the LMCA is unknown., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the association between LMCA disease by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and long-term mortality., Methods: Between 2005 and 2013, 3,239 patients with LMCA IVUS imaging without LMCA revascularization (either before angiography or scheduled based on index angiography or IVUS) were included. The primary and secondary endpoints were all-cause and cardiac mortality at a minimum of 5 years obtained from the National Death Index., Results: The IVUS-measured LMCA minimum lumen area (MLA) and plaque burden were 13.1 ± 5.0 mm 2 and 41.7% ± 15.6%, respectively. The median follow-up was 8.2 years. The Kaplan-Meier estimated 12-year all-cause and cardiac death rates were 37.5% and 17.0%, respectively. Greater plaque burden (unadjusted HR per 10%: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.12-1.22; P < 0.0001) and smaller IVUS MLA (unadjusted HR per 1 mm 2 : 0.98; 95% CI: 0.96-0.99; P = 0.0008) were associated with all-cause death. After adjusting for clinical, angiographic, and IVUS factors, plaque burden (adjusted HR per 10%: 1.12; 95% CI: 1.04-1.21; P = 0.003) but not MLA (adjusted HR per 1 mm 2 : 1.02; 95% CI: 0.99-1.04; P = 0.18) was associated with long-term all-cause death. These findings were also consistent for long-term cardiac mortality., Conclusions: In the present large-scale study with a 12-year follow-up, increasing LMCA plaque burden was associated with long-term all-cause and cardiac mortality in patients not undergoing LMCA revascularization, even when the lumen area was preserved., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported in part by an unrestricted grant from Boston Scientific. Dr Matsumura is a consultant for Terumo Corporation. Dr Ali has received a grant from Abbott Vascular and Cardiovascular Systems Inc, is a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, and Boston Scientific; and has equity in Shockwave. Dr Karmpaliotis has received honoraria from Boston Scientific and Abbott Vascular; has equity in Saranas Soundbite and Traverse Vascular. Dr Parikh has provided research for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Surmodics, TriReme, Shockwave, and Veryan Medical; is on the advisory board for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Medtronic, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, and Philips; and is a consultant for Inari, Penumbra, Terumo, and Abiomed. Dr Leon has received institutional clinical research grants from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Stone is a speaker or has received other honoraria from Cook and Infraredx; is a consultant for Valfix, TherOx, Robocath, HeartFlow, Ablative Solutions, Vectorious, Miracor, Neovasc, Abiomed, Ancora, Elucid Bio, Occlutech, CorFlow, Apollo Therapeutics, Impulse Dynamics, Reva, MAIA Pharmaceuticals, Vascular Dynamics, Shockwave, V-Wave, Cardiomech, and Gore; and has equity/options from Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, Valfix, and MedFocus family of funds. Dr Kirtane has received institutional funding to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical, and Neurotronic; has received institutional funding includes fees paid to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation for consulting and/or speaking engagements in which Dr Kirtane controlled the content; has received consulting fees from interventional Medical Device Solutions; and has received travel expenses/meals from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical, Chiesi, OpSens, Zoll, and Regeneron. Dr Mintz has received honoraria from Boston Scientific, Philips, Abiomed, and Medtronic. Dr Maehara has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Consultant, Boston Scientific, and Philips. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: As transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement is increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy, a sizable proportion will require redo TAV replacement (TAVR). The unique configuration of balloon-expandable TAV (bTAV) vs a self-expanding TAV (sTAV) potentially affects TAV-in-TAV outcome., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to better inform prosthesis selection, TAV-in-TAV outcomes were assessed according to the type of initial and subsequent TAV., Methods: Patients from the Redo-TAVR registry were analyzed using propensity weighting according to their initial valve type (bTAV [n = 115] vs sTAV [n = 106]) and subsequent valve type (bTAV [n = 130] vs sTAV [n = 91])., Results: Patients with failed bTAVs presented later (vs sTAV) (4.9 ± 2.1 years vs 3.7 ± 2.3 years; P < 0.001), with smaller effective orifice area (1.0 ± 0.7 cm 2 vs 1.3 ± 0.8 cm 2 ; P = 0.018) and less frequent dominant regurgitation (16.2% vs 47.3%; P < 0.001). Mortality at 30 days was 2.3% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 0% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.499) and 1.7% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 1.0% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.612); procedural safety was 72.6% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 71.2% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.817) and 73.2% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 76.5% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.590). Device success was similar according to initial valve type but higher with subsequent sTAV vs bTAV (77.2% vs 64.3%; P = 0.045), primarily because of lower residual gradients (10.3 mm Hg [8.9-11.7 mm Hg] vs 15.2 mm Hg [13.2-17.1 mm Hg]; P < 0.001). Residual regurgitation (moderate or greater) was similar after bTAV-in-TAV and sTAV-in-TAV (5.7%) and nominally higher after TAV-in-bTAV (9.1%) vs TAV-in-sTAV (4.4%) (P = 0.176)., Conclusions: In selected patients, no association was observed between TAV type and redo TAVR safety or mortality, yet subsequent sTAV was associated with higher device success because of lower redo gradients. These findings are preliminary, and more data are needed to guide valve choice for redo TAVR., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr Kim is a proctor for and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Abdel-Wahab has received speaker honoraria and/or consultancy fees to the hospital on his behalf from Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences; and is an advisory board member for Biotronik. Dr Søndergaard has received consulting fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr Redwood is a proctor for and has received lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Hamm is an advisory board member for Medtronic. Dr Sinning has received speaker honoraria and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Sathananthan is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Schofer has received speaker fees and travel compensation from Boston Scientific; and has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott/St. Jude Medical. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Medtronic; and has received institutional grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI. Dr Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr Nazif is a consultant for or has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and is a consultant for and holds equity in Venus Medtech. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr Babaliaros is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Daiichi Sankyo, and PulseCath; and has received institutional research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Latib has received institutional research and grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Hildick-Smith is a proctor and adviser for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine clinical and echocardiographic characteristics, mechanisms of failure, and outcomes of mitral valve (MV) surgery after transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER)., Background: Although >100,000 mitral TEER procedures have been performed worldwide, longitudinal data on MV surgery after TEER are lacking., Methods: Data from the multicenter, international CUTTING-EDGE registry were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were evaluated. Median follow-up duration was 9.0 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 1.2-25.7 months) after MV surgery, and follow-up was 96.1% complete at 30 days and 81.1% complete at 1 year., Results: From July 2009 to July 2020, 332 patients across 34 centers underwent MV surgery after TEER. The mean age was 73.8 ± 10.1 years, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk for MV repair at initial TEER was 4.0 (IQR: 2.3-7.3), and primary/mixed and secondary mitral regurgitation were present in 59.0% and 38.5%, respectively. The median interval from TEER to surgery was 3.5 months (IQR: 0.5-11.9 months), with overall median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk of 4.8% for MV replacement (IQR: 2.8%-8.4%). The primary indication for surgery was recurrent mitral regurgitation (33.5%), and MV replacement and concomitant tricuspid surgery were performed in 92.5% and 42.2% of patients, respectively. The 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were 16.6% and 31.3%, respectively. On Kaplan-Meier analysis, the actuarial estimates of mortality were 24.1% at 1 year and 31.7% at 3 years after MV surgery., Conclusions: In this first report of the CUTTING-EDGE registry, the mortality and morbidity risks of MV surgery after TEER were not negligible, and only <10% of patients underwent MV repair. These registry data provide valuable insights for further research to improve these outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Kaneko is a speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott, and Baylis Medical; and is a consultant for 4C Medical. Dr Lange is an advisory board member for and has received royalties and speaker honoraria from Medtronic; has received speaker honoraria from Abbott; and is a shareholder in Highlife. Dr Kempfert has served as a physician proctor for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Conradi is a physician proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Hagl has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Borger has received speaker honoraria and/or consulting fees to his hospital from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott, and CryoLife. Dr Taramasso has been a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, 4Tech, Mitraltech, Simulands, MTEx, Occlufit, CoreMedic, and Shenqi Medical. Dr Nguyen has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, CryoLife, and Abbott. Dr Ailawadi is a consultant for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and AtriCure. Dr Smith has received grant support from Edwards Lifesciences; and has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and CryoLife. Dr Anselmi is a physician proctor and consultant for Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Ben Ali has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Ramlawi is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, LivaNova, and Atricure. Dr Grubb is a physician proctor for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific; and has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Ancora, HLT, and BioVentrics. Dr Pirelli is a physician proctor for and has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences; and is a consultant for Medtronic. Dr Chu has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Terumo Aortic. Dr Andreas is a physician proctor and consultant for and has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Medtronic; and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI Solutions. Dr Obadia is a consultant for Abbott, Carmat, Delacroix-Chevalier, Landanger, and Medtronic. Dr Gennari is a consultant for Medtronic. Dr Garatti is a physician proctor for Abbott. Dr Nazif has equity in Venus Medtech; and has received consulting fees or honoraria from Keystone Heart, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr Bapat has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, 4C Medical, and Boston Scientific. Dr Modine is a physician proctor and consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Abbott. Dr Denti receives speaker honoraria from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and is a consultant for InnovHeart. Dr Tang is a physician proctor for Medtronic; is a consultant for Medtronic, NeoChord, and Abbott; and is a physician advisory board member for Abbott and JenaValve. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and prognostic impact of early and late postoperative atrial fibrillation or flutter (POAF) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR)., Background: There is an ongoing controversy regarding the incidence, recurrence rate, and prognostic impact of early (in-hospital) POAF and late (postdischarge) POAF in patients with AS undergoing TAVR or SAVR., Methods: In the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) 3 trial, patients with severe AS at low surgical risk were randomized to TAVR or SAVR. Analyses were performed in the as-treated population excluding patients with preexistent atrial fibrillation or flutter., Results: Among 781 patients included in the analysis, early POAF occurred in 152 (19.5%) (18 of 415 [4.3%] and 134 of 366 [36.6%] following TAVR and SAVR, respectively). Following discharge, 58 new or recurrent late POAF events occurred within 1 year following the index procedure in 55 of 781 patients (7.0%). Early POAF was not an independent predictor of late POAF following discharge (odds ratio: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.52-2.08; P = 0.90). Following adjustment, early POAF was not an independent predictor of the composite outcome of death, stroke, or rehospitalization (hazard ratio: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.64-1.92; P = 0.72), whereas late POAF was associated with an increased adjusted risk for the composite outcome (hazard ratio: 8.90; 95% CI: 5.02-15.74; P < 0.0001), irrespective of treatment modality., Conclusions: In the PARTNER 3 trial, early POAF was more frequent following SAVR compared with TAVR. Late POAF, but not early POAF, was significantly associated with worse outcomes at 2 years, irrespective of treatment modality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The PARTNER 3 trial was funded by Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Malaisrie is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott. Dr George is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Thourani does research and is a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Allergen, Boston Scientific, CryoLife, Edwards Lifesciences, Gore Vascular, and JenaValve. Dr Babaliaros has received institutional research funding from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr Kodali has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott; has received consulting fees from Abbott, Admedus, and Meril Life; and holds equity options from Biotrace Medical and Thubrikar Aortic Valve. Dr Nazif is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr Genereux has received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Cardinal Health, Cardiovascular Systems, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Opsens, Siemens, SoundBite Medical Solutions, Sig.Num, Saranas, Teleflex, and Tryton Medical; and has equity in Pi-Cardia, Sig.Num, SoundBite Medical Solutions, Saranas, and Puzzle Medical. Drs Lu and Yu are employees of Edwards Lifesciences. Ms Alu has received institutional research support (no direct compensation) from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Webb is a proctor and consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Mack has received institutional research support (no direct physician compensation) from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Leon has received institutional research support from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott; and is a consultant or advisory board member for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Gore, Meril Life, and Abbott. Dr Kosmidou has received institutional research support from Amgen; and is a consultant for Sanofi. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The 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., Background: Cerebral 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., Methods: This 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., Results: REFLECT 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 mm 3 (-9.7%) and >1,000 mm 3 (-44.5%) in the TG3 group, which were more pronounced among patients with full TG3 coverage: -51.1% (>500 mm 3 ) and -82.9% (>1,000 mm 3 )., Conclusions: The 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., Competing Interests: FUNDING SUPPORT AND Author Disclosures This work was supported by an unrestricted research grant from Keystone Heart. Dr. Nazif has equity in Venus Medtech; and has received consulting fees or honoraria from Keystone Heart, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Dhoble has received honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Keystone Heart. Dr. Forrest has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr. Zivadinov has received personal compensation from Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Sanofi, Keystone Heart, Protembis, and Novartis for speaker and consulting fees; and has received financial support for research activities from Sanofi, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, Mapi Pharma, Keystone Heart, Protembis, Boston Scientific, and V-WAVE Medical. Dr. Dwyer has received personal compensation from Novartis, EMD Serono, and Keystone Heart; and has received financial support for research activities from Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Mapi Pharma, Keystone Heart, Protembis, and V-WAVE Medical. Dr. Lansky has equity in Venus Medtech; and has received consulting fees from Keystone Heart, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and AstraZeneca. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the evolution of early outcomes for 3 iterative self-expanding transcatheter aortic valves., Background: Over the past decade there have been rapid advancements in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) technologies, including 3 generations of supra-annular self-expanding transcatheter systems., Methods: Data from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry for patients undergoing TAVR with CoreValve, Evolut R, or Evolut PRO valves to treat tricuspid aortic stenosis between January 2014 and September 2017 were obtained. Patient risk and echocardiographic data are site reported. Valves analyzed included 23-, 26-, and 29-mm sizes to fit 18- to 26-mm annular diameters. Propensity score matching was performed using the Evolut PRO group as the common reference., Results: Of 18,874 patients undergoing TAVR at 381 centers, 5,514 patients were implanted with CoreValve, 11,295 with Evolut R, and 2,065 with Evolut PRO valves. At 30 days, there were significantly fewer patients with more than mild aortic regurgitation for the unmatched (7.8% CoreValve, 5.2% Evolut R, and 2.8% Evolut PRO; p < 0.001) and matched populations (8.3% CoreValve, 5.4% Evolut R, and 3.4% Evolut PRO; p = 0.032). The mean aortic valve gradients at 30 days in the matched populations were <8 mm Hg for all 3 valves (7.3 mm Hg CoreValve, 7.5 mm Hg Evolut R, 7.2 mm Hg Evolut PRO)., Conclusions: Advancements in transcatheter valve technologies and expanding indications for TAVR have resulted in improved outcomes for patients undergoing TAVR in the United States with self-expanding, supra-annular valves. In particular, the addition of an outer pericardial tissue wrap designed to enhance sealing at the level of the aortic annulus has resulted in very low rates of significant aortic regurgitation while maintaining excellent hemodynamic status., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), the authors compared outcomes by observed wire position (intraplaque vs. subintimal) achieved during successful chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesion treatment., Background: Recent successes in CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have used both intraluminal and subintimal wire tracking to improve procedural success. IVUS may be used to determine the course of wire tracking after crossing a CTO., Methods: From March 2014 to March 2016, data were collected into a single-center database from 219 patients undergoing CTO PCI with concomitant IVUS imaging. IVUS-visualized wire tracking patterns were then retrospectively examined. Clinical outcomes with a composite in-hospital cardiovascular endpoint of all-cause death, periprocedural myocardial infarction, and in-hospital target lesion revascularization were analyzed along with IVUS-detected vascular injury., Results: Of the 524 lesions assessed, 219 patients with successfully recanalized CTO lesions had adequate IVUS imaging and were included. Subintimal tracking was detected in 52.1% of overall cases (86.7% dissection re-entry, 27.9% wire escalation). Minimal stent area of the CTO segment and prevalence of significant edge dissection were similar in the 2 groups. In the subintimal tracking group, there was a higher rate of the composite endpoint, mostly driven by periprocedural myocardial infarction. Subintimal tracking was associated with significantly greater IVUS-detected vascular injury, angiographic dye staining/extravasation, and branch occlusion., Conclusions: IVUS-detected subintimal tracking is observed in approximately one-half of all successful CTO PCI cases and is associated with an expected higher, yet acceptable, event rate with no difference in minimal stent area or edge dissection among patients undergoing contemporary hybrid CTO PCI., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify predictors and clinical implications of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: Cardiac conduction disturbances requiring PPM are a frequent complication of TAVR. However, limited data is available regarding this complication after TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve., Methods: The study included patients without prior pacemaker who underwent TAVR in the PARTNER (Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER Valves) trial and registry and investigated predictors and clinical effect of new PPM., Results: Of 2,559 TAVR patients, 586 were excluded due to pre-existing PPM. A new PPM was required in 173 of the remaining 1,973 patients (8.8%). By multivariable analysis, predictors of PPM included right bundle branch block (odds ratio [OR]: 7.03, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.92 to 10.06, p < 0.001), prosthesis diameter/left ventricular (LV) outflow tract diameter (for each 0.1 increment, OR: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.51, p = 0.002), LV end-diastolic diameter (for each 1 cm, OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.53 to 0.87, p = 0.003), and treatment in continued access registry (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.08 to 2.92, p = 0.025). Patients requiring PPM had a longer mean duration of post-procedure hospitalization (7.3 ± 2.7 days vs. 6.2 ± 2.8 days, p = 0.001). At 1 year, new PPM was associated with significantly higher repeat hospitalization (23.9% vs. 18.2%, p = 0.05) and mortality or repeat hospitalization (42.0% vs. 32.6%, p = 0.007). There was no difference between groups in LV ejection fraction at 1 year., Conclusions: PPM was required in 8.8% of patients without prior PPM who underwent TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve in the PARTNER trial and registry. In addition to pre-existing right bundle branch block, the prosthesis to LV outflow tract diameter ratio and the LV end-diastolic diameter were identified as novel predictors of PPM after TAVR. New PPM was associated with a longer duration of hospitalization and higher rates of repeat hospitalization and mortality or repeat hospitalization at 1 year. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRtic TraNscathetER Valves Trial; NCT00530894)., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to determine the impact of quantity and location of aortic valve calcification (AVC) on paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) and rates of post-dilation (PD) immediately after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: The impact of AVC in different locations within the aortic valve complex is incompletely understood., Methods: This study analyzed 150 patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR. Total AVC volume scores were calculated from contrast-enhanced multidetector row computed tomography imaging. AVC was divided by leaflet sector and region (Leaflet, Annulus, left ventricular outflow tract [LVOT]), and a combination of LVOT and Annulus (AnnulusLVOT). Asymmetry was assessed. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis was performed with greater than or equal to mild PVR and PD as classification variables. Logistic regression was performed., Results: Quantity of and asymmetry of AVC for all regions of the aortic valve complex predicted greater than or equal to mild PVR by receiver-operating characteristic analysis (area under the curve = 0.635 to 0.689), except Leaflet asymmetry. Receiver-operating characteristic analysis for PD was significant for quantity and asymmetry of AVC in all regions, with higher area under the curve values than for PVR (area under the curve = 0.648 to 0.741). On multivariable analysis, Leaflet and AnnulusLVOT calcification were independent predictors of both PVR and PD regardless of multidetector row computed tomography area cover index., Conclusions: Quantity and asymmetry of AVC in all regions of the aortic valve complex predict greater than or equal to mild PVR and performance of PD, with the exception of Leaflet asymmetry. Quantity of AnnulusLVOT and Leaflet calcification independently predict PVR and PD when taking into account multidetector row computed tomography area cover index., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)