Search

Background: The latest-generation Evolut FX TAVR system (Medtronic) offers several potential design improvements over its predecessors, but early reported experience has been limited., Objectives: This study sought to report our multicenter, limited market release, first-in-human experience of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Evolut FX system and compare it with a single-center PRO+ (Medtronic) experience., Methods: From June 27 to September 16, 2022, 226 consecutive patients from 9 US centers underwent transfemoral TAVR with the Evolut FX system for native aortic stenosis (89.4%) or prosthetic valve degeneration (10.6%). Commissural alignment was defined as 0° to 30° between native and FX commissures. Patient, anatomical, and procedural characteristics were retrospectively reviewed, and 30-day clinical and echocardiographic outcomes per Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 definitions were reported., Results: Of 226 patients, 34.1% were low risk, 4% had a bicuspid valve, and 11.5% had a horizontal root (≥60°). Direct Inline sheath (Medtronic) was used in 67.6% and Lunderquist stiff wire (Cook Medical) in 35.4% of cases. Optimal hat marker orientation during deployment was achieved in 98.4%, with commissural alignment in 96.5%. At 30 days, 14.3% mild, 0.9% moderate, and no severe paravalvular leak were observed. Compared with the Evolut PRO+ experience from 1 center, FX had a more symmetrical implantation with shallower depth at the left coronary cusp (P < 0.001), fewer device recaptures (26.1% vs 39.5%; P = 0.004), and improved commissural alignment (96.5% vs 80.2%; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: The Evolut FX system demonstrated favorable 30-day outcomes with a significant improvement over PRO+ in achieving commissural alignment, fewer device recaptures, and more symmetrical implantation. These features may benefit younger patients undergoing TAVR with the supra-annular, self-expanding valve, where lifetime management would be important., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Attizzani is a consultant for Medtronic and Abbott Vascular; and serves as a proctor and is on the advisory board for Medtronic. Dr Chetcuti has received personal fees from Medtronic for proctoring and consulting; institutional grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Jena during the conduct of the study; and serves on advisory boards for JenaValve without remuneration. Dr Fukuhara is a consultant for Medtronic, Terumo Aortic, and Artivion. Dr Grossman is a physician proctor for Medtronic; and receives research support from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., and Boston Scientific. Dr Goel is a consultant for Medtronic and W. L. Gore & Associates; and is on the Speakers Bureau for Abbott Structural Heart. Dr Kleiman is a local principal investigator in trials sponsored by Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Puri is a speaker and proctor for Medtronic; is a consultant for Medtronic, Centerline Biomedical, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Philips, Products & Features, Shockwave Medical, VDyne, VahatiCor, Advanced Nanotherapies, NuevoSono, TherOx, GE Healthcare, BioVentrix, and Protembis; and has equity interest in Centerline Biomedical, VahatiCor, and NuevoSono. Dr Byrne is a physician proctor for Abbott Structural Heart and Medtronic; a consultant for Medtronic and Abiomed; and has received speakers honoraria from Abbott Structural Heart and Abiomed. Dr Grubb is a physician proctor for Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences; and has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Ancora, HLT, BioVentrics, 4C Medical, W.L. Gore, and Abbott Vascular. Dr Herrmann has received institutional research funding from Boston Scientific, Abbott Structural Heart, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; and has received consultant fees and speaking honoraria from Medtronic. Dr Ramlawi is a consultant for Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Liva Nova, and Atricure. Dr Khera is a speaker for Medtronic and Zoll Medical; a proctor for Medtronic; and a consultant for Terumo, Medtronic, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. Dr Reardon is a consultant for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, and W. L. Gore & Associates. Dr Tang is a physician proctor for Medtronic; a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott Structural Heart, and NeoChord; a physician advisory board member for Abbott Structural Heart, Boston Scientific, and JenaValve; and receives speakers 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: Despite the rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement since its approval, the frequency and outcomes of aortic valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement are poorly understood., Methods: Valve reinterventions, either surgical transcatheter aortic valve explantation or repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement, between 2012 and 2019 were queried using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database and the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry through the Michigan Statewide quality collaborative. The reintervention frequency and clinical outcomes including observed-to-expected mortality ratio using Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality were reviewed., Results: Among 9694 transcatheter aortic valve replacement recipients, a total of 87 patients (0.90%) received a reintervention, consisting of 34 transcatheter aortic valve explants and 53 repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedures. The transcatheter aortic valve explant group demonstrated a higher Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality. Reintervention cases increased from 0 in 2012 and 2013 to 26 in 2019. The proportion of transcatheter aortic valve explants among all reinterventions increased and was 65% in 2019. Self-expandable devices had a higher reintervention rate than balloon-expandable devices secondary to a higher transcatheter aortic valve explant frequency (0.58% [23/3957] vs 0.19% [11/5737]; P = .001), whereas repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement rates were similar (0.61% [24/3957] vs 0.51% [29/5737]; P = .51). Among patients with transcatheter aortic valve explants, contraindications to repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement included unfavorable anatomy (75%), need for other cardiac surgery (29%), other structural issues by transcatheter aortic valve device (18%), and endocarditis (12%). For transcatheter aortic valve explant and repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement, the 30-day mortality was 15% and 2% (P = .032) and the observed-to-expected mortality ratio was 1.8 and 0.3 (P = .018), respectively., Conclusions: Aortic valve reintervention remains rare but is increasing. The clinical impact of surgical device explantation was substantial, and the proportion of transcatheter aortic valve explants was significantly higher in patients with a self-expandable device., (Copyright © 2021 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR., Objectives: The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR., Methods: Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed., Results: Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020)., Conclusions: The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The data for this research were provided by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons’ National Database Participant User File Research Program. Data analysis was performed at the investigators’ institution. This work was funded by the Family of Harpreet and Sangeeta Ahluwalia Fund. Dr Patel has received consulting fees from Medtronic, Terumo, and W.L. Gore. Dr Chetcuti has received consulting fees from Medtronic. Dr Ailawadi has received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, W.L. Gore, Cephea, Admedus, Philips, and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Fukuhara has received consulting fees from Terumo, Medtronic, and Artivion. 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 30-day rate of stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been suggested as a hospital quality metric. Thirty-day stroke rates for nonsurgical, high, and moderate-risk TAVR trials were 3.4% to 6.1%, whereas those in the national Transcatheter Valve Therapy (TVT) Registry for the same patient population were much lower. Hospital comprehensive stroke center (CSC) is the highest designation for integrated acute stroke recognition, management, and care., Objectives: Using Michigan TVT data, we assessed whether in-hospital post-TAVR stroke rates varied between CSC and non-CSC institutions., Methods: TVT data submitted from the 22 Michigan Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Collaborative participating institutions between January 1, 2016, and June 30, 2019, were included (N = 6,231). Bayesian hierarchical regression models accounting for patient clinical characteristics and hospital clustering were fitted to assess the association between hospital CSC accreditation and in-hospital post-TAVR stroke. Adjusted ORs and 95% credible intervals were estimated. The University of Michigan Institutional Review Board has waived the need for the approval of studies based on the data collected by the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium registry., Results: There were 3,882 (62.3%) patients at 9 CSC sites and 2,349 (37.7%) patients at 13 non-CSC sites. CSC sites had significantly higher rates of in-hospital post-TAVR stroke (CSC: 2.65% vs non-CSC: 1.15%; P < 0.001). After adjustment, patients who underwent TAVR at a CSC hospital had a significantly higher risk of in-hospital stroke (adjusted OR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.03-4.62). However, CSC designation was not significantly associated with other important post-TAVR clinical outcomes including 30-day mortality., Conclusions: Reported Michigan Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Collaborative TVT stroke rates were significantly higher at sites with Joint Hospital Commission stroke designation status; however, other reported important clinical outcomes did not differ significantly based on this designation. CSC designation is a possible factor in stroke rate detection differences between TAVR institutions and might be a factor in the observed differences in stroke rates between TAVR trials and those reported in TVT. In addition, these data suggest that comparison between hospitals based on post-TAVR stroke rates is potentially problematic., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Michigan TAVR is supported by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Dr Grossman is a consultant for Medtronic Cardiovascular and Edwards Lifesciences; provides research support for Medtronic Cardiovascular, Edwards Lifesciences; Cardiovascular Systems Inc, and National Institutes of Health; and provides registry support for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Dr Sukul provides registry support for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Dr Seth provides registry support for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Dr Chetcuti is a consultant for Medtronic Cardiovascular and Edwards Lifesciences; provides research support for Medtronic Cardiovascular and Edwards Lifesciences; and provides registry support for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. Dr Patel provides registry support from Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan. 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: Left bundle branch block (LBBB) and atrioventricular (AV) conduction abnormalities requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation occur frequently following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The resultant left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony may be associated with adverse clinical events., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the adverse outcomes associated with LV dyssynchrony due to high-burden right ventricular (RV) pacing or permanent LBBB following TAVR in patients with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF)., Methods: Consecutive TAVR patients at the University of Michigan from January 2012 to June 2017 were included. Pre-existing cardiac implantable electronic device, previous LBBB, LVEF <50%, or follow-up period <1 year were excluded. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included cardiomyopathy (defined as LVEF ≤45%), a composite endpoint of cardiomyopathy or all-cause mortality, and the change in LVEF at 1-year follow-up., Results: A total of 362 patients were analyzed (mean age 77 years). LV dyssynchrony group (n = 91 [25.1%]) included 56 permanent LBBB patients, 12 permanent LBBB patients with PPM, and 23 non-LBBB patients with PPM and high-burden RV pacing. Remaining patients served as control (n = 271 [74.9%]). After adjusted analysis, LV dyssynchrony had significantly higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-4.37) and cardiomyopathy (adjusted HR 14.80; 95% CI 6.31-14.69). The LV dyssynchrony group had mean LVEF decline of 10.5% ± 10.2% compared to a small increase (0.5% ± 7.7%) in control., Conclusion: Among TAVR patients with preserved LVEF and normal AV conduction, development of postprocedural LV dyssynchrony secondary to high-burden RV pacing or permanent LBBB was associated with significantly higher risk of death and cardiomyopathy at 1-year follow-up., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (Medtronic Cardiovascular Corevalve and Evolut) is a supra-annular, trileafet porcine pericardial valves on a diamond lattice nickel-titanium alloy frame. The TAVR device has undergone significant improvements in design and procedural techniques to further increase safety, efficacy, and durability since they it was first released. Unique design characteristics, as well as patient and procedural factors, favor self-expanding over balloon-expandable prostheses in certain situations. The self-expanding transcatheter heart valve has proven to be an excellent option for severe aortic stenosis patients with any level of surgical risk and preliminary data suggest a comparable durability to surgical tissue valves., Competing Interests: Disclosure Dr P.M. Grossman: Research support from Medtronic Cardiovascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Physician proctor for Medtronic TAVR and Edwards TAVR., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite the rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) since its initial approval in 2011, the frequency and outcomes of surgical explantation of TAVR devices (TAVR-explant) is poorly understood., Methods: Patients undergoing TAVR-explant between January 2012 and June 2020 at 33 hospitals in Michigan were identified in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database and linked to index TAVR data from the Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry through a statewide quality collaborative. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Indications for TAVR-explant, contraindications to redo TAVR, operative data, and outcomes were collected from Society of Thoracic Surgeons and Transcatheter Valve Therapy databases. Baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was compared between index TAVR and TAVR-explant., Results: Twenty-four surgeons at 12 hospitals performed TAVR-explants in 46 patients (median age, 73). The frequency of TAVR-explant was 0.4%, and the number of explants increased annually. Median time to TAVR-explant was 139 days and among known device types explanted, most were self-expanding valves (29/41, 71%). Common indications for TAVR-explant were procedure-related failure (35%), paravalvular leak (28%), and need for other cardiac surgery (26%). Contraindications to redo TAVR included need for other cardiac surgery (28%), unsuitable noncoronary anatomy (13%), coronary obstruction (11%), and endocarditis (11%). Overall, 65% (30/46) of patients underwent concomitant procedures, including aortic repair/replacement in 33% (n=15), mitral surgery in 22% (n=10), and coronary artery bypass grafting in 16% (n=7). The median Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 4.2% at index TAVR and 9.3% at TAVR-explant (P=0.001). Operative mortality was 20% (9/46) and 76% (35/46) of patients had in-hospital complications. Of patients alive at discharge, 37% (17/37) were discharged home and overall 3-month survival was 73±14%., Conclusions: TAVR-explant is rare but increasing, and its clinical impact is substantial. As the utilization of TAVR expands into younger and lower-risk patients, providers should consider the potential for future TAVR-explant during selection of an initial valve strategy.

Background: Structural valve degeneration (SVD) is a major flaw of bioprostheses. An apparent increase in the SVD rate has been observed among patients who received the Trifecta bioprosthesis (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA)., Methods: This study retrospectively reviewed 1058 consecutive patients who underwent aortic valve placement with a stented bioprosthesis between January 2011 and December 2015. Patients were grouped into a Trifecta group (508 [48.0%] patients with Trifecta bioprostheses) and a non-Trifecta group (550 [52.0%] patients with other bioprostheses)., Results: Patients in the Trifecta group were older (69.7 years vs 64.6 years; P = .001), were more likely female (40.4% vs 28.0%; P = .001), more often had aortic stenosis (85.1% vs 77.1%; P = .001), and received smaller valves (23.0 mm vs 25.0 mm; P < .001) than patients in the non-Trifecta group. SVD occurred in 28 patients (Trifecta, n = 22; non-Trifecta, n = 6) within 7 years. Aortic regurgitation or mixed stenosis/regurgitation was observed as the mode of failure in more than 50% of the Trifecta group, whereas none in non-Trifecta group. The cumulative incidence of SVD was higher in the Trifecta group both in the entire cohort (13.3% vs 4.6%; P = .010) and in the younger cohort (age ≤ 65 years; 27.9% vs 6.9%; P = .004), with a notable increase between 5 and 7 years. Multivariable competing risks regression in the Trifecta group revealed younger age (hazard ratio, 0.56 per 10-point decrease; 95% confidence interval, 0.44 to 0.72; P < .001) to be the sole contributor to SVD., Conclusions: The SVD rate of the Trifecta bioprosthesis has been greater than expected, compared with other bioprostheses, particularly in younger patients. In view of the large number of Trifecta bioprostheses implanted worldwide, further investigation involving other institutions is warranted., (Copyright © 2020 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to describe clinical and procedural characteristics of veterans undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) within U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) centers and to examine their association with short- and long-term mortality, length of stay (LOS), and rehospitalization within 30 days., Background: Veterans with severe aortic stenosis frequently undergo TAVR at VA medical centers., Methods: Consecutive veterans undergoing TAVR between 2012 and 2017 were included. Patient and procedural characteristics were obtained from the VA Clinical Assessment, Reporting, and Tracking system. The primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year survival, LOS >6 days, and rehospitalization within 30 days. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to evaluate the associations between pre-procedural characteristics and LOS and rehospitalization., Results: Nine hundred fifty-nine veterans underwent TAVR at 8 VA centers during the study period, 860 (90%) by transfemoral access, 50 (5%) transapical, 36 (3.8%) transaxillary, and 3 (0.3%) transaortic. Men predominated (939 of 959 [98%]), with an average age of 78.1 years. There were 28 deaths within 30 days (2.9%) and 134 at 1 year (14.0%). Median LOS was 5 days, and 141 veterans were rehospitalized within 30 days (14.7%). Nonfemoral access (odds ratio: 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10 to 2.74), heart failure (odds ratio: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.83 to 3.44), and atrial fibrillation (odds ratio: 1.40; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.95) were associated with increased LOS. Atrial fibrillation was associated with 30-day rehospitalization (hazard ratio: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.22 to 2.63)., Conclusions: Veterans undergoing TAVR at VA centers are predominantly elderly men with significant comorbidities. Clinical outcomes of mortality and rehospitalization at 30 days and 1-year mortality compare favorably with benchmark outcome data outside the VA., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The authors sought to compare clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for low-gradient (LG) aortic stenosis in the CoreValve EUS (Expanded Use Study) versus those with high-gradient (HG) aortic stenosis from the CoreValve U.S. Pivotal Extreme Risk Trial and CAS (Continued Access Study)., Background: The EUS examined the impact of TAVR in patients unsuitable for surgical aortic valve replacement who were excluded from the U.S. Pivotal Extreme Risk Trial due to LG aortic stenosis., Methods: EUS patients were stratified by left ventricular ejection fraction: normal (≥50%, LG-normal ejection fraction), and low (<50%, did not respond to dobutamine by generating a mean gradient >40 mm Hg and/or velocity >4.0 m/s, "nonresponders"), and compared with extreme-risk patients from U.S. Pivotal and CAS that had either low resting gradient and responded to dobutamine ("responders"), or a high resting gradient (HG) or velocity. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality or major stroke at 1 year. Hemodynamics and quality of life are reported at 30 days and 1 year., Results: At 30 days, patients with LG/low left ventricular ejection fraction (nonresponders and responders) had significantly higher rates of all-cause mortality or major stroke, all-cause mortality, and cardiovascular mortality than both HG and LG-normal ejection fraction patients. At 1 year, only the responders had higher rates of these outcomes in comparison to the other 3 groups. Mean gradient and effective orifice area improved significantly in all patients and were maintained through 1 year. New York Heart Association functional classification and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary scores improved (p < 0.05) in all cohorts through 1 year. When all 4 subgroups were pooled, both decreasing mean gradient and stroke volume index were associated with increased mortality. Pre-procedural mean gradient was the only hemodynamic independent predictor of 1-year mortality by multivariate analysis., Conclusions: In this study, TAVR provided EUS patients significant hemodynamic relief with both 1-year survival and quality of life outcomes comparable to Pivotal and CAS patients (Safety & Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System-Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis With Significant Comorbidities in Extreme Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement, NCT01675440; Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in High Risk and Very High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement, NCT01240902; Safety and Efficacy Continued Access Study of the Medtronic CoreValve System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in Very High Risk Subjects and High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement, NCT01531374)., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: This analysis evaluates the relationship of annular size to hemodynamics and the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) in surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients., Methods: The CoreValve US Pivotal High Risk Trial, described previously, compared TAVR using a self-expanding valve with SAVR. Multislice computed tomography was used to categorize TAVR and SAVR subjects according to annular perimeter-derived diameter: large (≥26 mm), medium (23 to <26 mm), and small (<23 mm). Hemodynamics, PPM, and clinical outcomes were assessed., Results: At all postprocedure visits, mean gradients were significantly lower for TAVR compared with SAVR in small and medium size annuli (p < 0.001). Annular size was significantly associated with mean gradient after SAVR, with small annuli having the highest gradients (p < 0.05 at all timepoints); gradients were similar across all annular sizes after TAVR. In subjects receiving SAVR, the frequency of PPM was significantly associated with annular size, with small annuli having the greatest incidence. No difference in PPM incidence by annular sizing was observed with TAVR. In addition, TAVR subjects had significantly less PPM than SAVR subjects in small and medium annuli (p < 0.001), with no difference in the incidence of PPM between TAVR and SAVR in large annuli (p = 0.10)., Conclusions: Annular size has a significant effect on hemodynamics and the incidence of PPM in SAVR subjects, not observed in TAVR subjects. With respect to annular size, TAVR results in better hemodynamics and less PPM for annuli less than 26 mm and should be strongly considered when choosing a tissue valve for small and medium size annuli., (Copyright © 2018 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with surgical valve failure (SVF)., Background: Self-expanding TAVR is superior to medical therapy for patients with severe native aortic valve stenosis at increased surgical risk., Methods: The CoreValve U.S. Expanded Use Study was a prospective, nonrandomized study that enrolled 233 patients with symptomatic SVF who were deemed unsuitable for reoperation. Patients were treated with self-expanding TAVR and evaluated for 30-day and 1-year outcomes after the procedure. An independent core laboratory was used to evaluate serial echocardiograms for valve hemodynamics and aortic regurgitation., Results: SVF occurred through stenosis (56.4%), regurgitation (22.0%), or a combination (21.6%). A total of 227 patients underwent attempted TAVR and successful TAVR was achieved in 225 (99.1%) patients. Patients were elderly (76.7 ± 10.8 years), had a Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score of 9.0 ± 6.7%, and were severely symptomatic (86.8% New York Heart Association functional class III or IV). The all-cause mortality rate was 2.2% at 30 days and 14.6% at 1 year; major stroke rate was 0.4% at 30 days and 1.8% at 1 year. Moderate aortic regurgitation occurred in 3.5% of patients at 30 days and 7.4% of patients at 1 year, with no severe aortic regurgitation. The rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation was 8.1% at 30 days and 11.0% at 1 year. The mean valve gradient was 17.0 ± 8.8 mm Hg at 30 days and 16.6 ± 8.9 mm Hg at 1 year. Factors significantly associated with higher discharge mean aortic gradients were surgical valve size, stenosis as modality of SVF, and presence of surgical valve prosthesis patient mismatch (all p < 0.001)., Conclusions: Self-expanding TAVR in patients with SVF at increased risk for surgery was associated with a low 1-year mortality and major stroke rate, significantly improved aortic valve hemodynamics, and low rates of moderate and no severe residual aortic regurgitation, with improved quality of life., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased risk for surgery, self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with improved 2-year survival compared with surgery., Objectives: This study sought to determine whether this clinical benefit was sustained over time., Methods: Patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed at increased risk for surgery by a multidisciplinary heart team were randomized 1:1 to TAVR or open surgical valve replacement (SAVR). Three-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were obtained in those patients with an attempted procedure., Results: A total of 797 patients underwent randomization at 45 U.S. centers; 750 patients underwent an attempted procedure. Three-year all-cause mortality or stroke was significantly lower in TAVR patients (37.3% vs. 46.7% in SAVR; p = 0.006). Adverse clinical outcome components were also reduced in TAVR patients compared with SAVR patients, including all-cause mortality (32.9% vs. 39.1%, respectively; p = 0.068), all stroke (12.6% vs. 19.0%, respectively; p = 0.034), and major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (40.2% vs. 47.9%, respectively; p = 0.025). At 3 years aortic valve hemodynamics were better with TAVR patients (mean aortic valve gradient 7.62 ± 3.57 mm Hg vs. 11.40 ± 6.81 mm Hg in SAVR; p < 0.001), although moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation was higher in TAVR patients (6.8% vs. 0.0% in SAVR; p < 0.001). There was no clinical evidence of valve thrombosis in either group., Conclusions: Patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased risk for surgery had improved 3-year clinical outcomes after TAVR compared with surgery. Aortic valve hemodynamics were more favorable in TAVR patients without differences in structural valve deterioration. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve(®) System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in High Risk and Very High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement; NCT01240902)., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the use of sarcopenia as a frailty assessment tool for patients with aortic stenosis undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Methods: The study cohort comprised 295 patients who underwent either SAVR (n = 156) or TAVR (n = 139). The mean preoperative Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality risk score was 4.7%. Preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans were used to calculate gender-standardized total psoas area (TPA), as a validated measure of sarcopenia., Results: For the entire cohort, independent predictors of a composite measure of 30-day death, stroke, renal failure, prolonged ventilation, and deep wound infection included preoperative STS major morbidity and mortality risk score (odds ratio [OR], 91.1; P = .02) and TPA (OR, 0.5; P = .024). Two-year survival was 85.7% in patients with sarcopenia, compared with 93.8% in patients without sarcopenia (P = .02). Independent predictors of late survival included TPA (hazard ratio, 0.47; P = .02). Male sex (OR, 0.52; P = .04) and TPA (OR, 0.6; P = .001) were predictive of high resource utilization. A separate analysis by treatment group found that TPA predicted high resource utilization after SAVR (OR, 0.4; P < .001), but not after TAVR (P = .66)., Conclusions: CT scan-derived measurement of TPA as an objective frailty assessment tool predicts early morbidity and mortality, high resource utilization, and late survival after treatment for aortic stenosis. The correlation observed between sarcopenia and resource utilization after SAVR versus TAVR suggests that this simple and reproducible risk assessment tool also may help identify those patients who will derive optimal benefit from catheter-based therapy., (Copyright © 2016 The American Association for Thoracic Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has expanded the proportion of patients with aortic stenosis (AS) who are candidates for valve replacement, some patients remain untreated, and their outcomes are not clear. We evaluated 172 consecutive patients with severe symptomatic AS referred for TAVR who declined (n = 55) or were not candidates for (n = 117) intervention. We examined clinical and echocardiographic variables associated with mortality. There were 77 deaths, and mean follow-up was 17.9 ± 10.9 months for survivors. Mortality rate at 1 and 2 years was 39.2% and 52.6%, respectively. There was a significant difference in mortality rate between patients who declined the procedure and those who were not candidates (p = 0.001), with 1-year mortality rates of 20.6% and 48.4%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, 4 variables were independently associated with all-cause mortality: New York Heart Association Class IV heart failure (hazard ratio [HR] 2.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6 to 4.2, p <0.001), glomerular filtration rate <48 ml/min (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.4, p = 0.002), albumin <3.9 g/dl (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2 to 3.1, p = 0.007), and ejection fraction <50% (HR 1.9, 95% CI 1.4 to 3.0, p = 0.01). In this new era with expanded treatment options, patients with severe symptomatic AS who remain untreated after referral for TAVR experience a mortality rate of 39% at 1 year. The presence of advanced heart failure, renal dysfunction, low albumin, and/or left ventricular dysfunction identifies patients at higher risk of mortality., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)