Search

Background: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) and morphologic presence of relevant mitral annular calcification (MAC) represent a challenging phenotypic subset with limited treatment options., Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using dedicated devices for the treatment of MAC patients., Methods: Consecutive patients with symptomatic MR receiving TMVR and with available computed tomography data from the CHOICE-MI (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency) multicenter registry were stratified by the presence of none or mild mitral annular calcification (MAC none/mild ) vs moderate or severe mitral annular calcification (MAC mod/sev )., Results: Among 279 eligible patients (median age = 76.0 years [Q1-Q3: 71.0-81.0 years], EuroSCORE II = 6.2% [Q1-Q3: 3.9%-12.1%]), 222 (79.6%) presented with MAC none/mild and 57 (20.4%) with MAC mod/sev . Patients with MAC mod/sev  had a higher prevalence of extracardiac arteriopathy (P = 0.011) and primary MR (P < 0.001). Although the technical success rate and the extent of MR elimination did not differ, TMVR treatment in MAC mod/sev patients was associated with higher rates of postprocedural bleeding complications (P = 0.02) and renal failure (P < 0.001). Functional improvement at the 1- and 2-year follow-up did not differ between groups. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no differences between patients with MAC mod/sev and MAC none/mild regarding all-cause mortality (38.5% vs 37.7%; P = 0.76), cardiovascular mortality (21.3% vs 24.9%; P = 0.97), and all-cause mortality or heart failure hospitalization (52.4% vs 46.7%; P = 0.28) CONCLUSIONS: TMVR in patients with MAC mod/sev is associated with higher rates of postprocedural complications but similar rates of survival, MR resolution, and functional improvement compared to MAC none/mild . Further studies are necessary to define the role of dedicated TMVR devices in this population. (Choice of Optimal Transcatheter Treatment for Mitral Insufficiency Registry [CHOICE-MI]; NCT04688190)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was supported by a grant from the German Heart Foundation. Dr Coisne is a proctor for Abbott Vascular; and has received speaker fees for Abbot Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, GE Healthcare, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Pfizer. Dr Ludwig has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences; has received honoraria from Bayer and Abbott; is a consultant for NVT; and was supported by a research grant from the German Heart Foundation. Dr Ali has received research grants from Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Duncan is a consultant for and has received honoraria from Abbott Laboratories, Edward Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Kalbacher has received personal fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Pi-Cardia Ltd, and Medtronic. Dr Rudolph has received speaker honoraria from Abbott Vascular. Dr Hausleiter has received consulting fees, speaker honoraria, and support of research projects paid to the institution from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Ruge serves as a physician proctor for Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; is a consultant for Medtronic, Abbott, and Edwards Lifesciences; and is a member of the Abbott Advisory Board. Dr Schmidt has received consultant fees and travel support from Cardiovalve. Dr Taramasso is consultant or has received consultancy fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Shenqi Medical, MEDIRA, PiCardia, CoreMedic, Cardiovalve, Simulands, CoreQuest, HiD Imaging, and OneCrea Medical. Dr Denti has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received consultant fees from Approxima, HVR, InnovHeart, and Pi-Cardia Ltd. Dr Andreas is a proctor, consultant, and speaker for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston, and Zoll; and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and LSI. 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: The latest generation ultrathin Supraflex Cruz (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Limited, Surat, India) sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) has shown early healing properties and represents an attractive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device in a high bleeding risk (HBR) population. The aim of this Cruz HBR registry was to assess safety and efficacy of the Supraflex Cruz SES in a large cohort of all-comer patients, of whom about one third were patients at HBR., Methods: Patients undergoing PCI were enrolled in this prospective, multi-centre, open label registry and stratified into non-HBR and HBR groups. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target vessel and clinically driven target lesion revascularization within 12 months after PCI. The predefined aims were to show non-inferiority of the non-HBR group to the Supraflex arm of the TALENT Trial, and of the HBR group to polymer-free biolimus-coated stent arm of LEADERS FREE Trial., Results: A total of 1203 patients were enrolled across 26 European centers, including a significant proportion (38.7%; N.=466) of HBR patients. A total of 1745 lesions were treated in 1203 patients and 2235 stents were implanted. The DOCE occurred within the total cohort in 5.8% of patients with a significant difference between HBR patients and non-HBR patients (8.1% vs. 4.4%; P<0.001). All-cause mortality at 12 months was significantly (P<0.0001) different among HBR (9.0%) and non-HBR patients (1.7%), respectively. At 12 months, the overall incidence of definite and probable stent thrombosis was 1.0%. Major bleeding occurred in 5.9% patients of the HBR group. These results met the non-inferiority criteria with respect to the TALENT trial for the non-HBR group (P<0.0001), and the LEADERS FREE trial for the HBR group (P<0.0001)., Conclusions: The Cruz HBR registry confirms that PCI with the Supraflex Cruz SES is associated with a favorable clinical outcome in an all-comer population, including complex patients with HBR.

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.)

Objective: Management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) may differ according to the patient sex. This study aimed to describe patterns of aortic valve replacement (AVR) for severe AS across Europe, including stratification by sex., Methods: Procedure volume data for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for six years (2015-2020) were extracted from national databases for Austria, Czech Republic, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland and stratified by sex. Patients per million population (PPM) undergoing AVR per year were calculated using population estimates from Eurostat., Results: Between 2015 and 2019, AVR procedures grew at an average annual rate of 3.9%. In 2020, the average total PPM undergoing AVR across all countries was 339, with 51% of procedures being TAVI and 49% SAVR. AVR PPM varied widely between countries, with the highest and lowest in Germany and Poland, respectively. The average total PPM was higher for men than women (423 vs. 258), but a higher proportion of women (62%) than men (44%) received TAVI. The proportion of TAVI among total AVR procedures increased with age, with an overall average of 96% of men and 98% of women aged ≥85 years receiving TAVI; however, adoption of TAVI varied by country., Conclusions: The analysis of temporal trends in the adoption of TAVI vs. SAVR across Europe showed significant variations. Despite the higher use of TAVI vs. SAVR in women, overall rates of AV intervention in women were lower compared to men., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Nathan Petersen and Jana Kurucova are employees of Edwards Lifesciences, a manufacturer of TAVI and SAVR valves. Peter Bramlage is a research consultant and received funding for performing clinical research into the safe use of aortic valves by Edwards Lifesciences. Sabine Bleiziffer and Tanja Rudolph have held lecture and were part of advisory boards which were held and compensated by Edwards Lifesciences. No specific payment was associated with the development of this manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of manuscript for publication in international journal of cardiology., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: There is an increasing awareness of gender-related differences in patients with severe aortic stenosis and their outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)., Methods: Data from the IMPULSE registry were analysed. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were enrolled between March 2015 and April 2017 and stratified by gender. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the impact of age., Results: Overall, 2171 patients were enrolled, and 48.0% were female. Women were characterised by a higher rate of renal impairment (31.7 vs 23.3%; p<0.001), were at higher surgical risk (EuroSCORE II: 4.5 vs 3.6%; p=0.001) and more often in a critical preoperative state (7.0vs 4.2%; p=0.003). Men had an increased rate of previous cardiac surgery (9.4 vs 4.7%; p<0.001) and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (4.9 vs 1.3%; p<0.001). Concomitant mitral and tricuspid valve disease was substantially more common among women. Symptoms were highly prevalent in both women and men (83.6 vs 77.3%; p<0.001). AVR was planned in 1379 cases. Women were more frequently scheduled to undergo TAVI (49.3 vs 41.0%; p<0.001) and less frequently for SAVR (20.3 vs 27.5%; p<0.001)., Conclusions: The present data show that female patients with severe AS have a distinct patient profile and are managed in a different way to males. Gender-based differences in the management of patients with severe AS need to be taken into account more systematically to improve outcomes, especially for women., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed, Cloppenburg, Germany. NF, RPS and DM-Z have received honoraria for advisory board meetings and TKR speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centres have received funding for employing a study nurse. JK and MT are employees of the funder of this registry. As this is a disease registry, neither the type of intervention (SAVR, TAVI or medical management) nor on the valves to be used was pre-specified., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) is a widely recognized complication associated with TAVI (incidence up to 20%). Smaller registries have identified several variables associated with PPI. The objective was to validate patient- and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)-related procedural variables associated with PPI. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients from six European centers undergoing TAVI with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 prosthesis. Baseline variables and pre-procedural ECG characteristics and CT-scans were taken into account. Data for 1745 patients were collected; 191 (10.9%) required PPI after TAVI. The baseline variables pulmonary hypertension (OR 1.64; 95% CI 1.01-2.59), QRS duration > 117 ms (OR 2.58; 95% CI 1.73-3.84), right bundle branch block (RBBB; OR 5.14; 95% CI 3.39-7.72), left anterior hemi block (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.19-3.02) and first-degree atrioventricular block (AVB, OR 1.63; 95%CI 1.05-2.46) were significantly associated with PPI. RBBB (OR 8.11; 95% CI 3.19-21.86) and first-degree AVB (OR 2.39; 95% CI 1.18-4.66) remained significantly associated in a multivariate analysis. Procedure-related variables included access site (TF; OR 1.97; 95% CI 1.07-4.05), implanted valve size (29 mm; OR 1.88; 95% CI 1.35-2.59), mean TAVI valve implantation depth below the annulus > 30% (OR 3.75; 95% CI 2.01-6.98). Patients receiving PPI had longer ICU stays and later discharges. Acute kidney injury stage 2/3 was more common in patients with PPI until discharge (15.2 vs. 3.1%; p = 0.007), but was not statistically significant thereafter. Further differences in outcomes at 30 days did not reach significance. The data will aid pre- and post-procedural patient management and prevent adverse long-term outcomes.Clinical Trial: NCT03497611.

Background: An investigation into differences in the management and treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS) between Germany, France and the UK may allow benchmarking of the different healthcare systems and identification of levers for improvement., Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of severe AS under management at centres within the IMPULSE and IMPULSE enhanced registries were eligible., Results: Data were collected from 2052 patients (795 Germany; 542 France; 715 UK). Patients in Germany were older (79.8 years), often symptomatic (89.5%) and female (49.8%) and had a lower EF (53.8%) than patients in France and UK. Comorbidities were more common and they had a higher mean Euroscore II.Aortic valve replacement (AVR) was planned within 3 months in 70.2%. This was higher (p<0.001) in Germany than France/ UK. Of those with planned AVR, 82.3% received it within 3 months with a gradual decline (Germany>France> UK; p<0.001). In 253 patients, AVR was not performed, despite planned. Germany had a strong transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) preference (83.2%) versus France/ UK (p<0.001). Waiting time for TAVI was shorter in Germany (24.9 days) and France (19.5 days) than UK (40.3 days).Symptomatic patients were scheduled for an AVR in 79.4% (Germany> France> UK; p<0.001) and performed in 83.6% with a TAVI preference (73.1%). 20.4% of the asymptomatic patients were intervened., Conclusion: Patients in Germany had more advanced disease. The rate of intervention within 3 months after diagnosis was startlingly low in the UK. Asymptomatic patients without a formal indication often underwent an intervention in Germany and France., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB has received research funding for the present project and honoraria for consultancy from Edwards Lifesciences. NF, RPS and DM-Z have received honoraria for advisory board meetings and TKR speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centers have received funding for employing a study nurse., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Contemporary data regarding the impact of comorbidities on the clinical presentation and management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce., Methods: Prospective registry of severe patients with AS across 23 centres in nine European countries., Results: Of the 2171 patients, chronic kidney disease (CKD 27.3%), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% (22.0%), atrial fibrillation (15.9%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (11.4%) were the most prevalent comorbidities (49.3% none, 33.9% one and 16.8% ≥2 of these). The decision to perform aortic valve replacement (AVR) was taken in a comparable proportion (67%, 72% and 69%, in patients with 0, 1 and ≥2 comorbidities; p=0.186). However, the decision for TAVI was more common with more comorbidities (35.4%, 54.0% and 57.0% for no, 1 and ≥2; p<0.001), while the decision for surgical AVR (SAVR) was decreased with increasing comorbidity burden (31.9%, 17.4% and 12.3%; p<0.001). The proportion of patients with planned AVRs that were performed within 3 months was significantly higher in patients with 1 or ≥2 comorbidities than in those without (8.7%, 10.0% and 15.7%; p<0.001). Furthermore, the mean time to AVR was significantly shorter in patients with one (30.5 days) or ≥2 comorbidities (30.8 days) than in those without (35.7 days; p=0.012). Patients with reduced LVEF tended to be offered an AVR more frequently and with a shorter delay while patients with CKD were less frequently treated., Conclusions: Comorbidities in severe patients with AS affect the presentation and management of patients with severe AS. TAVI was offered more often than SAVR and performed within a shorter time period., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed, Cloppenburg, Germany. NF, RPS, DM-Z and TKR are consultants to Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centres have received funding for employing a study nurse., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: Contemporary data on patients with previously undiagnosed severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce. We aimed to address this gap by gathering data from consecutive patients diagnosed with severe AS on echocardiography., Methods: This was a prospective, multicentre, multinational, registry in 23 tertiary care hospitals across 9 European countries. Patients with a diagnosis of severe AS were included using echocardiography (aortic valve area (AVA) <1 cm 2 , indexed AVA <0.6 cm 2 /m 2 , maximum jet-velocity (V max ) >4 m/s and/or mean transvalvular gradient >40 mm Hg)., Results: The 2171 participants had a mean age of 77.9 years and 48.0% were female. The mean AVA was 0.73 cm 2 , V max 4.3 m/s and mean gradient 47.1 mm Hg; 62.1% had left ventricular hypertrophy and 27.3% an ejection fraction (EF) <50%. 1743 patients (80.3%) were symptomatic (shortness-of-breath 91.0%; dizziness 30.2%, chest pain 28.9%). Patients had a EuroSCORE II of 4.0; 25.3% had a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min, and 3.2% had an EF <30%. Symptomatic patients were older and had more comorbidities than asymptomatic patients. Despite European Society of Cardiology 2017 valvular heart disease guideline class I recommendation, in only 76.2% a decision was made for an intervention (transcatheter 50.4%, surgical aortic valve replacement 25.8%). In asymptomatic patients, 57.7% with a class I/IIa indication were scheduled for a procedure, while 36.3% patients without an indication had their valve replaced., Conclusions: The majority of patients with severe AS presented at an advanced disease stage. Management of severe AS remained suboptimal in a significant proportion of contemporary patients with severe AS., Trial Registration Number: NCT02241447;Results., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed. NF, RPS, TKR and DM-Z have received speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centers have received funding from the sponsor for employing a study nurse for the duration of the study. IPPMed designed and executed the study, collected and analysed the data and drafted/revised the manuscript in collaboration with the other authors., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis are referred late with advanced symptoms or inappropriately denied intervention. The objective was to investigate whether a structured communication to referring physicians (facilitated data relay) might improve the rate and timeliness of intervention. Methods and Results A prospective registry of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis at 23 centers in 9 European countries with transcatheter as well as surgical aortic valve replacement being available was performed. The study included a 3-month documentation of the status quo (phase A), a 6-month intervention phase (implementing facilitated data relay), and a 3-month documentation of a legacy effect (phase-B). Two thousand one hundred seventy-one patients with severe aortic stenoses were enrolled (phase A: 759; intervention: 905; phase-B: 507). Mean age was 77.9±10.0 years, and 80% were symptomatic, including 52% with severe symptoms. During phase A, intervention was planned in 464/696 (67%), 138 (20%) were assigned to watchful waiting, 8 (1%) to balloon aortic valvuloplasty, 60 (9%) were listed as not for active treatment, and in 26 (4%), no decision was made. Three hundred sixty-three of 464 (78%) patients received the planned intervention within 3 months. Timeliness of the intervention improved as shown by the higher number of aortic valve replacements performed within 3 months (59% versus 51%, P =0.002) and a significant decrease in the time to intervention (36±38 versus 30±33 days, P =0.002). Conclusions A simple, low-cost, facilitated data relay improves timeliness of treatment for patients diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis, resulting in a shorter time to transcatheter aortic valve replacement. This effect was mainly driven by a significant improvement in timeliness of intervention in transcatheter aortic valve replacement but not surgical aortic valve replacement. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02241447.

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.