Search

Background: Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a common, serious valve disease in which no effective medical therapy is available and, if not treated by intervention, has a 5-year survival of only 40-60%. Despite the availability of guidelines supporting the effective use of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to treat the majority of these patients, adherence to these guidelines in clinical practice is still unsatisfactory. Several recent studies have emphasised the necessity for improved communication between multidisciplinary teams, with the aim to ensure that severe AS patients receive appropriate treatment.Methods/design: IMPULSE is a prospective, multicentre, European registry designed to gather data over 12 months on the treatment decisions made by referring physicians for patients newly diagnosed with severe AS. Each patient has a follow-up of 3 months. The study will consist of two observational phases to assess the appropriateness and rate of referral based on current guidelines prior to and after an interventional phase aiming to determine whether a simple quality of care intervention improves patient management.Discussion: Data will be analysed firstly, to determine the appropriateness of treatment decisions for the management of severe AS in current European clinical practice, and secondly, to evaluate the effectiveness of facilitated data relay from a designated echocardiography department nurse to the referring physician early after diagnosis in improving quality of care. Additionally, variables will be identified that are associated with inappropriate decision-making. Collectively, the aim will be to design a clinical pathway that will improve the timely management of patients with newly diagnosed severe AS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Severe pure aortic regurgitation (AR) carries a high mortality and morbidity risk, and it is often undertreated because of the inherent surgical risk. Transcatheter heart valves (THVs) have been used off-label in this setting with overall suboptimal results. The dedicated "purpose-built" Jena Valve Trilogy (JVT, JenaValve Technology) showed an encouraging performance, although it has never been compared to other THVs., Objectives: The aim of our study was to assess the performance of the latest iteration of THVs used off-label in comparison to the purpose-built JVT in inoperable patients with severe AR., Methods: We performed a multicenter, retrospective registry with 18 participating centers worldwide collecting data on inoperable patients with severe AR of the native valve. A bicuspid aortic valve was the main exclusion criterion. The primary endpoints were technical and device success, 1-year all-cause mortality, and the composite of 1-year mortality and the heart failure rehospitalization rate., Results: Overall, 256 patients were enrolled. THVs used off-label were used in 168 cases (66%), whereas JVT was used in 88 (34%). JVT had higher technical (81% vs 98%; P < 0.001) and device success rates (73% vs 95%; P < 0.001), primarily driven by significantly lower incidences of THV embolization (15% vs 1.1%; P < 0.001), the need for a second valve (11% vs 1.1%; P = 0.004), and moderate residual AR (10% vs 1.1%; P = 0.007). The permanent pacemaker implantation rate was comparable and elevated for both groups (22% vs 24%; P = 0.70). Finally, no significant difference was observed at the 1-year follow-up in terms of mortality (HR: 0.99; P = 0.980) and the composite endpoint (HR: 1.5; P = 0.355)., Conclusions: The JVT platform has a better acute performance than other THVs when used off-label for inoperable patients with severe AR. A longer follow-up is conceivably needed to detect a possible impact on prognosis., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study has been performed at IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, a clinical research hospital partially funded by the Italian Ministry of Health. Dr Adam has received grants and personal fees from Medtronic; and has received personal fees from JenaValve, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Wienemann has received travel grants from JenaValve. Dr Panoulas has received consultancy fees for Medtronic; and has served as a proctor for Medtronic. Dr Taramasso has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifescience, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Shenqi Medical, PiCardia, CoreMedic, CoreQuest, MEDIRA, Simulands, and VentriMend; and serves on the Advisory Boards for Abbott and HiD Imaging. Dr Baldus has received lecture fees from JenaValve; and has received lecture and speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Baumbach has received speaker/consultant fees from Medtronic, Biotronik, Meril, Sinomed, and Microport; and is a proctor for JenaValve. Dr Rudolph has received consultancy fees/speaker honoraria from Abbott, JenaValve, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Testa is a proctor/consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Meril; and has received speaker honoraria from Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Meril., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) achieves symptomatic benefit for a broad spectrum of patients with relevant secondary mitral regurgitation, conflicting data exist on its prognostic impact., Objectives: Adapted enrollment criteria approaching those used in the COAPT (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation) and MITRA-FR (Percutaneous Repair or Medical Treatment for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation) trials were retrospectively applied to a European real-world registry to evaluate the influence of the respective criteria on outcomes., Methods: A total of 1,022 patients included in the EuroSMR (European Registry of Transcatheter Repair for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation) registry and treated with M-TEER (November 2008 to September 2019) were stratified into COAPT-eligible (n = 353 [34.5%]) and COAPT-ineligible (n = 669 [65.5%]) as well as MITRA-FR-eligible (n = 408 [48.3%]) and MITRA-FR-ineligible (n = 437 [51.7%]) groups., Results: Although the stratification of patients according to adapted MITRA-FR criteria led to comparable outcomes regarding all-cause mortality (P = 0.19), the application of adapted COAPT enrollment criteria demonstrated lower mortality rates in COAPT-eligible compared with COAPT-ineligible patients (P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis identified New York Heart Association functional class IV (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.29; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.53-3.42; P < 0.001), logarithmic N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.24-1.75; P < 0.001), and right ventricular-to-pulmonary arterial coupling (HR: 0.10; 95% CI: 0.02-0.57; P = 0.009) as independent predictors of outcome. Yet improvement of functional outcome was demonstrated in a subset of patients irrespective of COAPT eligibility status., Conclusions: In this real-world cohort of patients with secondary mitral regurgitation undergoing M-TEER, the retrospective application of adapted COAPT enrollment criteria successfully identified a specific phenotype demonstrating lower mortality rates. On the contrary, stratification according to adapted MITRA-FR criteria resulted in comparable outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Orban has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Medical. Dr Kalbacher has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences; has received travel expenses from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received proctor fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Hausleiter has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Medical. Dr Pfister has received speaker honoraria and travel expenses from Abbott Medical. Dr Baldus has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received research grants from Abbott Medical. Dr Lubos has received speaker honoraria, travel expenses, and research grants from Abbott Medical. Dr Lurz has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Medical; and has received consultant fees from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Karam has received consultant fees from Abbott Medical. Dr Iliadis has received consultant fees from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received travel expenses from Abbott Medical. Dr Petrescu has received consultant fees and research grants from Abbott Medical. Dr Metra has received consultant fees from Abbott Medical; and has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Windecker has received research grants from Abbott Medical and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Ludwig has received travel expenses from Edwards Lifesciences. 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 retrospectively compare the characteristics, procedural courses, and outcomes of patients presenting with concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR) and tricuspid regurgitation (TR) in the TriValve (Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Therapies) and TRAMI (Transcatheter Mitral Valve Interventions) registries., Background: Transcatheter mitral edge-to-edge valve repair (TMVR) has been shown to be successful in patients with severe MR. Lately, edge-to-edge repair has also emerged as a possible treatment for severe TR in patients at high risk for cardiac surgery. In patients with both severe MR and TR, the yield of concomitant transcatheter mitral and tricuspid valve repair (TMTVR) for patients at high surgical risk is unknown., Methods: The characteristics, procedural data, and 1-year outcomes of all patients in the international multicenter TriValve registry and the German multicenter TRAMI registry, who presented with both severe MR and TR, were retrospectively compared. Patients in TRAMI (n = 106) underwent isolated TMVR, while those in TriValve (n = 122) additionally underwent concurrent TMTVR in compassionate and/or off-label use., Results: All 228 patients (mean age 77 ± 8 years, 44.3% women) presented with significant dyspnea at baseline (New York Heart Association functional class III or IV in 93.9%), without any differences in the rates of pulmonary hypertension and chronic pulmonary disease. The proportion of patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <30% was higher in the TMVR group (34.9% vs. 18.0%; p < 0.001), while patients in the TMTVR group had lower glomerular filtration rates. At discharge, MR was comparably reduced in both groups. At 1 year, overall all-cause mortality was 34.0% in the TMVR group and 16.4% in the TMTVR group (p = 0.035, Cox regression). On multivariate analysis, TMTVR was associated with a 2-fold lower mortality rate (hazard ratio: 0.52; p = 0.02). The rate of patients in New York Heart Association functional class ≤II at 1 year did not differ (69.4% vs. 67.0%; p = 0.54)., Conclusions: Concurrent TMTVR was associated with a higher 1-year survival rate compared with isolated TMVR in patients with both MR and TR. Further randomized trials are needed to confirm these results., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: To evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) in a real-world setting through a patient-level meta-analysis., Methods: The meta-analysis included patients of three European multicenter, prospective, observational registry studies that compared outcomes after Edwards SAPIEN 3 or XT TAVI with (n = 339) or without (n = 355) BAV. Unadjusted and adjusted pooled odds ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) were calculated for procedural and 30-day outcomes., Results: Median procedural time was shorter in the non-BAV group than in the BAV group (73 versus 93 min, p = 0.001), as was median fluoroscopy time (7 versus 11 min, p = 0.001). Post-delivery balloon dilation (15.5% versus 22.4%, p = 0.02) and catecholamine use (9.0% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.016) was required less often in the non-BAV group than in the BAV group with the difference becoming insignificant after multiple adjustment. There was a reduced risk for periprocedural atrioventricular block during the intervention (1.4% versus 4.1%, p = 0.035) which was non-significant after adjustment. The rate of moderate/severe paravalvular regurgitation post-TAVI was 0.6% in the no-BAV group versus 2.7% in the BAV group. There were no between-group differences in the risk of death, stroke or other adverse clinical outcomes at day 30., Conclusions: This patient-level meta-analysis of real-world data indicates that TAVI performed without BAV is advantageous as it has an adequate device success rate, reduced procedure time and no adverse effects on short-term clinical outcomes.

Objectives: The purpose of this article is to report early and mid-term outcomes of the ACCESS-EU study (ACCESS-Europe A Two-Phase Observational Study of the MitraClip System in Europe), a European prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized post-approval study of MitraClip therapy (Abbott Vascular, Inc., Santa Clara, California)., Background: MitraClip has been increasingly performed in Europe after approval; the ACCESS-EU registry provides a snapshot of the real-world clinical demographic data and outcomes., Methods: A total of 567 patients with significant mitral valve regurgitation (MR) underwent MitraClip therapy at 14 European sites. Mean logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation at baseline was 23.0 ± 18.3; 84.9% patients were in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV, and 52.7% of patients had an ejection fraction ≤40%., Results: The MitraClip implant rate was 99.6%. A total of 19 patients (3.4%) died within 30 days after the MitraClip procedure. The Kaplan-Meier survival at 1 year was 81.8%. Intensive care unit and hospital length of stay was 2.5 ± 6.5 days and 7.7 ± 8.2 days, respectively. Single leaflet device attachment was reported in 27 patients (4.8%). There were no MitraClip device embolizations. Thirty-six subjects (6.3%) required mitral valve surgery within 12 months after the MitraClip implant procedure. There was improvement in the severity of MR at 12 months, compared with baseline (p < 0.0001), with 78.9% of patients free from MR, severity of >2+ at 12 months. At 12 months, 71.4% of patients had New York Heart Association functional class II or class I. Six-min-walk-test improved 59.5 ± 112.4 m, and Minnesota-living-with-heart-failure score improved 13.5 ± 20.5 points., Conclusions: In the real-world, post-approval experience in Europe, patients undergoing the MitraClip therapy are high-risk, elderly patients, mainly affected by functional MR. In this patient population, the MitraClip procedure is effective with low rates of hospital mortality and adverse events., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)