Search

Objectives: The aim of this study was to characterize the feasibility of coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute settings among patients who have undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: Impaired coronary access after TAVR may be challenging and particularly in acute settings could have deleterious consequences., Methods: In this international registry, data from patients with prior TAVR requiring urgent or emergent CA were retrospectively collected. A total of 449 patients from 25 sites with acute coronary syndromes (89.1%) and other acute cardiovascular situations (10.9%) were included., Results: Success rates were high for CA of the right coronary artery (98.3%) and left coronary artery (99.3%) and were higher among patients with short stent-frame prostheses (SFPs) than in those with long SFPs for CA of the right coronary artery (99.6% vs 95.9%; P = 0.005) but not for CA of the left coronary artery (99.7% vs 98.7%; P = 0.24). PCI of native coronary arteries was successful in 91.4% of cases and independent of valve type (short SFP 90.4% vs long SFP 93.4%; P = 0.44). Guide engagement failed in 6 patients, of whom 3 underwent emergent coronary artery bypass grafting and another 3 died in the hospital. Among patients requiring revascularization of native vessels, independent predictors of 30-day all-cause mortality were prior diabetes, cardiogenic shock, and failed PCI but not valve type or success of coronary engagement., Conclusions: CA or PCI after TAVR in acute settings is usually successful, but selective coronary engagement may be more challenging in the presence of long SFPs. Among patients requiring PCI, prior diabetes, cardiogenic shock, and failed PCI were predictors of early mortality., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Kim has received proctor and speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Meril Lifesciences. Dr Ludwig has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Möllmann has received proctor fees and/or speaker honoraria from Abbott, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Leuschner has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic. Dr Amat-Santos is a proctor for Boston Scientific; Dr Dabrowski has received proctor fees from Boston Scientific; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Rudolph has received proctor fees and/or lecture honoraria from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott. Dr Toggweiler is a consultant and/or proctor for New Valve Technology/Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Medtronic, Carag, and Medira; has received institutional research grants from Boston Scientific and Fumedica; and holds equity in Hi-D Imaging. Dr Frank is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic; and has received an institutional research grant from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Webb is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and has received research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences; and an advisory board member for Medtronic. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants to the institution from Biotronik and Boston Scientific; has received speaker fees from Biotronik and Boston Scientific; is a consultant for HighLife SAS; and is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr Seiffert is a consultant for JenaValve and Boston Scientific; has received travel compensation from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, JenaValve, Boston Scientific, and Biotronik; and has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic. Dr Werner is a proctor for Medtronic; and has received speaker honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, Medtronic. Dr Allali has received proctor and speaker fees from Boston Scientific. Dr Makkar has received consultant fees from Abbott; and has received research grants and consulting and speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific. Dr Leuschner has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic. Dr Nef has received proctor or speaker honoraria from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Hamm is an advisory board member for Medtronic. Dr Sinning has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards, and Medtronic; and has received speaker honoraria from Abbott, Abiomed, Boston Scientific, Edwards, and Medtronic. 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 purpose of this study was to examine the impact of residual mitral regurgitation (MR) on mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: MR is common in patients undergoing TAVR. Data on optimal management of patients with significant MR after TAVR are limited., Methods: The registry consisted of 16 TAVR centers (n = 7,303). Outcomes of patients with ≥ moderate versus lesser grade MR after TAVR were compared., Results: In 1,983 (27.2%) patients, baseline MR grade was ≥ moderate. MR regressed in 874 (44.1%) patients and persisted in 1,109 (55.9%) after TAVR. Four-year mortality was higher for those with MR persistence, but not for those with MR regression after TAVR, compared with nonsignificant baseline MR (43.8% vs. 35.1% vs. 32.4%; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.38; p = 0.008; HR: 1.02; p = 0.383, respectively). New York Heart Association functional class III to IV after TAVR was more common in those with MR persistence vs. regression (14.4% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001). In a propensity score-matched cohort (91 patients' pairs), with significant residual MR after TAVR who did or did not undergo staged mitral intervention, staged intervention was associated with a better functional class through 1 year of follow-up (82.4% vs. 33.3% New York Heart Association functional class I or II; p < 0.001), and a numerically lower 4-year mortality, which was not statistically significant (64.6% vs. 37.5%; HR: 1.66; p = 0.097)., Conclusions: Risk stratification based on improvement in MR and symptoms after TAVR can identify patients at increased mortality risk after TAVR. These patients may benefit from a staged transcatheter mitral intervention, but this requires further proof from future studies. (Transcatheter Treatment for Combined Aortic and Mitral Valve Disease. The Aortic+Mitral TRAnsCatheter [AMTRAC] Valve Registry [AMTRAC]; NCT04031274)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr. Barbanti has received consultant fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Grasso has served as a proctor for Abbott Vascular. Dr. De Backer has received research grants and consultant fees from Abbott and Boston Scientific. Dr. Andreas has served as a proctor for Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received advisory board fees from Medtronic. Dr. Estévez-Loureiro has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. Dr. Amat-Santos has served as a proctor for Boston Scientific. Dr. Nombela-Franco has received consultant fees from Edwards Lifesciences; and has served as a proctor for Abbott. Dr. Søndergaard has received consultant fees and institutional research from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Van Mieghem has received research grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and has received advisory fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Ancora, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi-Sankyo. 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.)

Background: Among patients with acute coronary syndrome following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), those presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are at highest risk., Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine the clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of STEMI after TAVR., Methods: This was a multicenter study including 118 patients presenting with STEMI at a median of 255 days (interquartile range: 9 to 680 days) after TAVR. Procedural features of STEMI after TAVR managed with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were compared with all-comer STEMI: 439 non-TAVR patients who had primary PCI within the 2 weeks before and after each post-TAVR STEMI case in 5 participating centers from different countries., Results: Median door-to-balloon time was higher in TAVR patients (40 min [interquartile range: 25 to 57 min] vs. 30 min [interquartile range: 25 to 35 min]; p = 0.003). Procedural time, fluoroscopy time, dose-area product, and contrast volume were also higher in TAVR patients (p < 0.01 for all). PCI failure occurred more frequently in patients with previous TAVR (16.5% vs. 3.9%; p < 0.001), including 5 patients in whom the culprit lesion was not revascularized owing to coronary ostia cannulation failure. In-hospital and late (median of 7 months [interquartile range: 1 to 21 months]) mortality rates were 25.4% and 42.4%, respectively (20.6% and 38.2% in primary PCI patients), and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.42 to 6.43; p = 0.004), Killip class ≥2 (HR: 2.74; 95% CI: 1.37 to 5.49; p = 0.004), and PCI failure (HR: 3.23; 95% CI: 1.42 to 7.31; p = 0.005) determined an increased risk., Conclusions: STEMI after TAVR was associated with very high in-hospital and mid-term mortality. Longer door-to-balloon times and a higher PCI failure rate were observed in TAVR patients, partially due to coronary access issues specific to the TAVR population, and this was associated with poorer outcomes., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr. Faroux has received fellowship support from Institut Servier and the Association Régionale de Cardiologie de Champagne-Ardenne (ARCCA); and has received research grants from Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Abdel-Wahab has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr. Windecker has received research and educational grants from Abbott, Amgen, BMS, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, and Sinomed. Dr. Auffret has received lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr. Trillo-Nouche has served as a proctor for Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr. Toggweiler has served as a consultant and proctor for Abbott, Boston Scientific, Biosensors, and Medtronic. Dr. Tarantini has received lecture fees from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Gada, and Medtronic. Dr. Saia has served as a member of advisory boards for Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Durand has served as a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Asmarats has served as a proctor for Abbott. Dr. Nejjari has served as a proctor for Abbott and Boston Scientific. Dr. Muntané-Carol was supported by a grant from the Fundación Alfonso Martín Escudero (Madrid, Spain). Dr. Mangieri has received an institutional grant from Boston Scientific. Dr. Rodés-Cabau has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; and holds the Research Chair “Fondation Famille Jacques Larivière” for the Development of Structural Heart Disease Interventions. 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: To define the incidence of high residual gradient (HRG) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in BAVs and their impact on short term outcome and 1-year mortality., Background: Transcatheter heart valves (THVs) offer good performance in tricuspid aortic valves with low rate of HRG. However, data regarding their performance in bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) are still lacking., Methods: The BEAT (Balloon vs Self-Expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid Aortic valve sTenosis) registry included 353 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR (Evolut R/PRO or Sapien 3 valves) in BAV between June 2013 and October 2018. The primary endpoint was device unsuccess with post-procedural HRG (mean gradient ≥ 20 mmHg). The secondary endpoint was to identify the predictors of HRG following the procedure., Results: Twenty patients (5.6%) showed HRG after TAVR. Patients with HRG presented higher body mass index (BMI) (30.7 ± 9.3 vs. 25.9 ± 4.8; p < 0.0001) and higher baseline aortic mean gradients (57.6 ± 13.4 mmHg vs. 47.7 ± 16.6, p = 0.013) and more often presented with BAV of Sievers type 0 than patients without HRG. At multivariate analysis, BMI [odds ratio (OR) 1.12; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.20, p = 0.001] and BAV type 0 (OR 11.31, 95% CI 3.45-37.06, p < 0.0001) were confirmed as independent predictors of high gradient., Conclusion: HRG following TAVR in BAVs is not negligible and is higher among patients with high BMI and with BAV 0 anatomy.

Background: The extent of myocardial fibrosis in patients with severe aortic stenosis might have an important prognostic value. Non-invasive imaging to quantify myocardial fibrosis by measuring extracellular volume fraction might have an important clinical utility prior to aortic valve intervention., Methods: Seventy-five consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis, and 19 normal subjects were prospectively recruited and underwent pre- and post-contrast computed tomography for estimating myocardial extracellular volume fraction. Serum level of galectin-3 was measured and 2-dimensional echocardiography was performed to characterize the extent of cardiac damage using a recently published aortic stenosis staging classification., Results: Extracellular volume fraction was higher in patients with aortic stenosis compared to normal subjects (40.0±11% vs. 21.6±5.6%; respectively, p<0.001). In patients with aortic stenosis, extracellular volume fraction correlated with markers of left ventricular decompensation including New York Heart Association functional class, left atrial volume, staging classification of aortic stenosis and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. Out of 75 patients in the AS group, 49 underwent TAVI, 6 surgical AVR, 2 balloon valvuloplasty, and 18 did not undergo any type of intervention. At 12-months after aortic valve intervention, extracellular volume fraction predicted the combined outcomes of stroke and hospitalization for heart failure with an area under the curve of 0.77 (95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.88). A trend for correlation between serum galectin-3 and extracellular volume was noted., Conclusion: In patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing computed tomography before aortic valve intervention, quantification of extracellular volume fraction correlated with functional status and markers of left ventricular decompensation, and predicted the 12-months composite adverse clinical outcomes. Implementation of this novel technique might aid in the risk stratification process before aortic valve interventions., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Importance: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is prevalent in the population of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Data on the association of TAVR with kidney function are scarce, as are data on the relationship between changes in kidney function after TAVR and mortality., Objective: To describe the changes in kidney function (both periprocedural and at steady state) after TAVR and to explore the association of TAVR with midterm mortality., Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at a public, tertiary academic medical center, which serves as a regional referral center for valvular heart interventions. Consecutive cases of patients undergoing TAVR from November 5, 2008, to December 31, 2019, were included in the study, with available baseline and post-TAVR data on kidney function., Exposures: Steady state (1 month) change in kidney function after TAVR. Significant improvement or deterioration in renal function was defined as a greater than or equal to 10% change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)., Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall mortality at 2-year follow-up., Results: A total of 894 patients (mean [SD] age, 82.2 [7.1] years; 452 women ([51.2%]) were evaluated. A total of 362 patients (40.5%) were treated from 2017 to 2019, 348 patients (38.9%) were treated from 2013 to 2016, and 184 patients (20.5%) were treated from 2008 and 2012. Patients had a mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score of 5.2% (4.0%) and a mean (SD) eGFR of 65.1 (23.1) mL/min/1.73 m2. Acute kidney injury occurred in 115 (11.1%) patients by 48 hours, of whom 73 (63.5%) resolved by discharge. One month after TAVR, eGFR improved by at least 10% in 329 patients (36.8%) and deteriorated by at least 10% in 233 patients (26.1%). Overall, CKD stage remained stable or improved in 720 patients (80.6%), and only 5 patients (0.97%) progressed to stage 5 CKD 1 month after TAVR. A deterioration of 10% or greater in eGFR 1 month after TAVR was associated with a hazard ratio of 2.16 (95% CI, 1.24-5.24; P = .04) at 2-year mortality. Patients who showed CKD status resolution (eGFR improvement to >60 mL/min/1.73 m2 after TAVR) had a similar 2-year mortality to those with baseline eGFR greater than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and vice versa. Factors associated with steady state CKD status resolution after TAVR included lower STS score, higher left ventricular ejection fraction, higher baseline eGFR, no acute kidney injury at discharge from the TAVR admission, and lower contrast-eGFR ratio., Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, kidney outcomes after TAVR were reassuring; greater than 80% of patients showed stable or improved kidney function 1 month after the procedure. Improvement in kidney function was associated with a lower 2-year mortality, whereas deterioration in kidney function was associated with increased mortality. Our data suggest that cardiorenal syndrome was a possible cause of CKD in patients in need of TAVR and that there was potential for improvement in both renal and cardiac function after this procedure.

Background: Although bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is not considered a "sweet spot" to trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), a certain number of BAV underwent TAVR. Whether BAV phenotype affects outcomes following TAVR remains debated. We aimed at evaluating the impact of BAV phenotype on procedural and clinical outcomes after TAVR using new generation trans-catheter heart valves (THVs)., Methods: patients included in the BEAT registry were classified according to the BAV phenotype revealed at multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) in type 0 (no raphe) vs. type 1 (1 raphe). Primary end-point was Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) device success. Secondary end-points included procedural complications, rate of permanent pacemaker implantation, clinical outcomes at 30-day and 1-year., Results: Type 0 BAV was present in 25(7.1%) cases, type 1 in 218(61.8%). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. Moderate-severe aortic valve calcifications at MSCT were less frequently present in type 0 vs. type 1 (52%vs.71.1%,p = 0.05). No differences were reported for THV type, size, pre and post-dilation between groups. VARC-2 success tended to be lower in type 0 vs. type 1 BAV (72%vs86.7%;p = 0.07). Higher rate of mean transprosthetic gradient ≥20 mmHg was observed in type 0 vs. type 1 group (24%vs6%,p = 0.007). No differences were reported in the rate of post-TAVR moderate-severe aortic regurgitation and clinical outcomes between groups., Conclusions: Our study confirms TAVR feasibility in both BAV types, however a trend toward a lower VARC-2 device success and a higher rate of mean transprosthetic gradient ≥20 mmHg was observed in type 0 vs. type 1 BAV., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR., Methods: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate., Results: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76-996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510-1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR ( P <0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients ( P =0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; P <0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; P =0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; P =0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74-12.56; P =0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88-21.53; P <0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement., Conclusions: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.

Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are now both used to treat aortic stenosis in patients in whom life expectancy may exceed valve durability. The choice of initial bioprosthesis should therefore consider the relative safety and efficacy of potential subsequent interventions., Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare TAVR in failed transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) versus surgical aortic valves (SAVs)., Methods: Data were collected on 434 TAV-in-TAV and 624 TAV-in-SAV consecutive procedures performed at centers participating in the Redo-TAVR international registry. Propensity score matching was applied, and 330 matched (165:165) patients were analyzed. Principal endpoints were procedural success, procedural safety, and mortality at 30 days and 1 year., Results: For TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV, procedural success was observed in 120 (72.7%) versus 103 (62.4%) patients (p = 0.045), driven by a numerically lower frequency of residual high valve gradient (p = 0.095), ectopic valve deployment (p = 0.081), coronary obstruction (p = 0.091), and conversion to open heart surgery (p = 0.082). Procedural safety was achieved in 116 (70.3%) versus 119 (72.1%) patients (p = 0.715). Mortality at 30 days was 5 (3%) after TAV-in-TAV and 7 (4.4%) after TAV-in-SAV (p = 0.570). At 1 year, mortality was 12 (11.9%) and 10 (10.2%), respectively (p = 0.633). Aortic valve area was larger (1.55 ± 0.5 cm 2 vs. 1.37 ± 0.5 cm 2 ; p = 0.040), and the mean residual gradient was lower (12.6 ± 5.2 mm Hg vs. 14.9 ± 5.2 mm Hg; p = 0.011) after TAV-in-TAV. The rate of moderate or greater residual aortic regurgitation was similar, but mild aortic regurgitation was more frequent after TAV-in-TAV (p = 0.003)., Conclusions: In propensity score-matched cohorts of TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV patients, TAV-in-TAV was associated with higher procedural success and similar procedural safety or mortality., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Dr. Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and ViVitro Labs. Dr. Kim has received proctor or speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards; and is an Advisory Board member for Biotronik. Dr. Sondergaard has received consultant 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. 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. Wood is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. 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. Leipsic is a consultant to Circle CVI and Edwards Lifesciences; and provides institutional core laboratory services to Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Neovasc. Dr. Andreas is a proctor for Edwards and Abbott; and is an Advisory Board member for Medtronic. Dr. Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kodali has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular and JenaValve; has received personal fees from Meril Lifesciences; has received personal fees from and holds equity in Admedus; and holds equity in Supira, Microinterventional Devices, Dura Biotech, and Thubrikar Aortic Valve. Dr. Conradi is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Neovasc, and JenaValve. Dr. Nazif has received consulting fees or honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and has received consulting fees from 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 or 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 to 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 © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to describe baseline characteristics, and periprocedural and mid-term outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve interventions post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and examine their clinical benefit., Background: The optimal management of residual mitral regurgitation (MR) post-TAVR is challenging., Methods: This was an international registry of 23 TAVR centers., Results: In total, 106 of 24,178 patients (0.43%) underwent mitral interventions post-TAVR (100 staged, 6 concomitant), most commonly percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (PMVR). The median interval post-TAVR was 164 days. Mean age was 79.5 ± 7.2 years, MR was >moderate in 97.2%, technical success was 99.1%, and 30-day device success rate was 88.7%. There were 18 periprocedural complications (16.9%) including 4 deaths. During a median follow-up of 464 days, the cumulative risk for 3-year mortality was 29.0%. MR grade and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class improved dramatically; at 1 year, MR was moderate or less in 90.9% of patients (mild or less in 69.1%), and 85.9% of patients were in NYHA functional class I/II. Staged PMVR was associated with lower mortality versus medical treatment (57.5% vs. 30.8%) in a propensity-matched cohort (n = 156), but this was not statistically significant (hazard ratio: 1.75; p = 0.05)., Conclusions: For patients who continue to have significant MR, remain symptomatic post-TAVR, and are anatomically suitable for transcatheter interventions, these interventions are feasible, safe, and associated with significant improvement in MR grade and NYHA functional class. These results apply mainly to PMVR. A staged PMVR strategy was associated with markedly lower mortality, but this was not statistically significant. (Transcatheter Treatment for Combined Aortic and Mitral Valve Disease. The Aortic+Mitral TRAnsCatheter Valve Registry [AMTRAC]; NCT04031274)., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Dr. Barbanti has received consultant fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. De Backer has received research grants and consultant fees from Abbott and Boston Scientific. Dr. Sievert has received institutional honoraria, travel expenses, and consulting fees from 4tech Cardio, Abbott, Ablative Solutions, Ancora Heart, Append Medical, Bavaria Medizin Technologie GmbH, Bioventrix, Boston Scientific, Carag, CardiacDimensions, Cardimed, Celonova, Comed B.V., Contego, CVRx, Dinova, Edwards Lifesciences, Endologix, Hemoteq, Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech, Holistick Medical, Lifetech, Maquet Getinge Group, Medtronic, Mokita, Occlutech, Recor, RenalGuard, Terumo, Vascular Dynamics, Vectorious Medtech, Venus, Venock, and Vivasure Medical. Dr. Grasso has been a proctor for Abbott Vascular. Dr. Andreas has been a proctor for Abbott and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received advisory board fees from Medtronic. Dr. Guerrero has received research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Van Mieghem has received research grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and advisory fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Ancora, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi-Sankyo. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for aortic stenosis (AS) risk assessment is still developing and mostly concerned with mortality in the periprocedural period. We therefore sought to develop and then validate a score to predict 1-year adverse outcome., Methods: Patients that underwent TAVI for severe AS in the Israeli registry. Patients with unsuccessful/suboptimal implantation were excluded. The cohort was split to derivation/validation cohorts by a ratio of 70:30. The outcome was defined as 1-year composite of mortality, stroke, and no improvement in NYHA class (vs. baseline). Logistic regression was used to fit the prediction model., Results: Out of 2,440 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 276 were excluded, leaving 2,160 patients for both cohorts. At 1 year, 299 (14%) patients experienced the adverse ("futile") outcome. The derived prediction model included mean aortic valve (AV) gradient, previous pacemaker, previous oncological disease, need for diuretics, baseline NYHA class, hemoglobin and creatinine levels, and nonfemoral access site. The model's area under the curve (AUC) was 0.69 in the derivation and 0.70 in the validation cohort. Performance of other scores in the validation cohort were lower (0.60 for STS, 0.55 for Euroscore2, 0.56 for TVT score, and 0.53 for TAVI2-score, p = .03). Based on three risk tiers, patients had a low risk (20/306, 7% futility), a medium risk (50/304, 17%), and high risk (18/37, 49%) for futility., Conclusions: The TAVI futility risk model can be used to provide further insight regarding prediction measures and/or patients' outcomes outside of the periprocedural period (NCT02023060)., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess coronary accessibility after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)-in-TAVR using multidetector computed tomography., Background: Expanding TAVR to patients with longer life expectancy may involve more frequent bioprosthetic valve failure and need for redo TAVR. Coronary access after TAVR-in-TAVR may be challenging, particularly as the leaflets from the initial transcatheter heart valve (THV) will form a neo-skirt following TAVR-in-TAVR., Methods: In 45 patients treated with different combinations of CoreValve and Evolut (CV/EV) THVs with supra-annular leaflet position and SAPIEN THVs with intra-annular leaflet position, post-TAVR-in-TAVR multidetector computed tomographic scans were analyzed to examine coronary accessibility., Results: After TAVR-in-TAVR, the coronary arteries originated below the top of the neo-skirt in 90% of CV/EV-first cases compared with 67% of SAPIEN-first cases (p = 0.009). For these coronary arteries originating below the top of the neo-skirt, the distance between the THV and the aortic wall was <3 mm in 56% and 25% of CV/EV-first and SAPIEN-first cases, respectively (p = 0.035). Coronary access may be further complicated by THV-THV stent frame strut misalignment in 53% of CV/EV-in-CV/EV cases. The risk for technically impossible coronary access was 27% and 10% in CV/EV-first and SAPIEN-first cases, respectively (p = 0.121). Absence of THV interference with coronary accessibility can be expected in 8% and 33% of CV/EV-first and SAPIEN-first cases, respectively (p = 0.005)., Conclusions: Coronary access after TAVR-in-TAVR may be challenging in a significant proportion of patients. THVs with intra-annular leaflet position or low commissural height and large open cells may be preferable in terms of coronary access after TAVR-in-TAVR., Competing Interests: Author Relationship With Industry Dr. De Backer has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kim has been a proctor for and has received speaking fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Thomas Pilgrim has received institutional research grants and speaking fees from Biotronik and Boston Scientific; and is a consultant for HighLife SAS. Dr. Barbanti has received consulting fees from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Nombela-Franco has received consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Kofoed has received institutional grants from AP Møller og Hustru Chastine McKinney Møllers Fond, the John and Birthe Meyer Foundation, The Research Council of Rigshopitalet, the University of Copenhagen, the Danish Heart Foundation, the Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation by The Danish Council for Strategic Research, and Canon Medical Corporation. Dr. Windecker has received research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, and Sinomed. Dr. Sinning has received speaking honoraria and research grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Webb has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Prof. Dr. Søndergaard has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal revascularization strategy is not clearly defined for patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction with multivessel disease (MV-STEMI). We aimed to develop a simple angiographic risk score for identifying patients with MV-STEMI that might benefit from a multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI), compared to a PCI for only the infarct-related artery (IRA-PCI)., Methods and Results: This retrospective study acquired data from a single-center STEMI registry on 841 consecutive patients with MV-STEMI (645 IRA-PCI and 196 MV-PCI). Patients were stratified according to high- and low-risk scores. We devised a score based on three characteristics of non-culprit lesions previously reported to predict overall mortality (proximal left anterior descending artery involvement, maximal % stenosis, and number of involved vessels). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs: a composite of death/MI/urgent repeat revascularization). After a median follow-up of 1909 days, MACE occurred in 205/841 (24.4%) patients. MACE risk was higher in the high-risk than in the low-risk group (HR 1.43, P < 0.001). In comparing the IRA-PCI and MV-PCI approaches within each risk group, we found that these revascularization strategies had differential effects on outcome. Compared to the MV-PCI, IRA-PCI was associated with less MACE in the low-risk group (HR 0.597, P = 0.033), and more MACE in the high-risk group (HR 3.14, P < 0.001)., Conclusion: For patients with MV-STEMI that undergo primary PCI, a simple risk score based on three angiographic characteristics could identify patients at high risk of future adverse events. This score might facilitate choosing the optimal revascularization strategy.

Objectives: To assess the safety and efficacy of the Wattson temporary pacing guidewire., Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) requires a guidewire for device delivery and generally requires temporary pacing wire for burst and back-up pacing. The Wattson wire provides concomitant support and bipolar pacing without the need to place a temporary venous pacemaker (TVP)., Methods: This was a single-center nonrandomized prospective clinical trial enrolling 20 patients. The primary endpoint was defined as successful rapid pacing and transcatheter heart valve (THV) delivery with no loss of capture. Safety, qualitative and quantitative secondary outcomes were also analyzed., Results: Mean age was 77.4 ± 9.0 years. Mean Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) score was 3.0 ± 1.5%. All patients received a balloon-expandable valve via a transfemoral approach. All patients met the primary end-point. One patient (5%) had balloon predilatation and six patients (30%) had postdilatation, all using the wire. Mean pacing threshold was 2.2 ± 1.2 mA that was evaluated prior to placing an insulating catheter over the wire. One patient required TVP placement and subsequent permanent pacemaker implantation due to complete heart block post THV deployment. There were no incidences of cardiac perforation or tamponade. One patient required valve reintervention, which was not related to the device., Conclusions: The Wattson wire offered predictable guidewire support with concomitant reliable bipolar pacing at low thresholds to allow safe THV delivery in this patient cohort. It has the potential to make TAVR a safer and more efficient procedure., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The commonly used valve-in-valve (VIV) app recommends sizing based on dimensions of both the transcatheter heart valve (THV) and bioprosthetic surgical valve. The implications of hydrodynamic testing to guide VIV sizing are poorly understood. This bench study assessed the hydrodynamic performance of different sizes of self-expanding supra-annular THVs in three different surgical aortic bioprostheses at different implantation depths., Methods: A small versus medium ACURATE neo (ACn), and a 26 mm versus 29 mm Evolut R were assessed after VIV implantation in 25 mm Mitroflow, Mosaic, and Magna Ease aortic surgical bioprostheses, at three implantation depths (+2 mm, -2 mm, and -6 mm)., Results: The medium-sized ACn had lower gradients compared to the small ACn when the THV was implanted high (+2 mm, or -2 mm). The 29 mm Evolut R had lower gradients compared to a 26 mm Evolut R for all implantation depths, except for a depth of -2 mm in the 25 mm Mitroflow. The medium ACn and 29 mm Evolut R had larger effective orifice areas compared to the small ACn and 26 mm Evolut R, respectively. Both Evolut R sizes had acceptable regurgitant fractions (<15%), while both ACn sizes were above the acceptable performance criteria (>15%), at all implantation depths., Conclusions: Use of a larger self-expanding THV was associated with superior hydrodynamic performance if the THV was implanted high. Hydrodynamic testing can provide additional information to the VIV app to help guide VIV sizing., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Large data comparing the performance of new-generation self-expandable versus balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in bicuspid aortic stenosis are lacking. We aim to compare the safety and performance of balloon-expandable and self-expandable transcatheter heart valves in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis., Methods: The BEAT (balloon versus self-expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid aortic valve stenosis) registry included 353 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation using new-generation Evolut R/PRO or Sapien 3 valves in bicuspid aortic valve., Results: A total of 353 patients (n=242 [68.6%] treated with Sapien 3 and n=111 [68.6%] treated with Evolut R (n=70)/PRO [n=41]) were included. Mean age was 77.8±8.3 years and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 4.4±3.3%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 device success was similar between Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO (85.6% versus 87.2%; P =0.68). In the Sapien 3 group, 4 patients experienced annular rupture whereas this complication did not occur in the Evolut R/PRO group. After propensity score matching, Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 device success was similar between both groups (Sapien 3=85.7% versus Evolut R/Pro=84.4%; P =0.821). Both in the overall and in the matched population, no differences in the rate of permanent pacemaker implant were observed. At 1-year follow-up, the rate of overall death and cardiovascular death were similar between the 2 groups. In the unmatched population, the 1-year echocardiographic follow-up demonstrated similar rate of moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation (Evolut R/PRO 10.5% versus Sapien 3 4.2%, P =0.077); however, after propensity matching, the rate of moderate-to-severe paravalvular leak became significantly higher among patients treated with self-expandable valves (9.3% versus 0%; P =0.043)., Conclusions: Our study confirms the feasibility of both Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO implantation in bicuspid aortic valve anatomy; a higher rate of moderate-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation was observed in the Evolut R/PRO group at 1-year follow-up in the matched cohort, although patients treated with balloon-expandable valve had a higher rate of annular rupture.

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) use is increasing in patients with longer life expectancy, yet robust data on the durability of transcatheter heart valves (THVs) are limited. Redo-TAVR may play a key strategy in treating patients in whom THVs fail., Objectives: The authors sought to examine outcomes following redo-TAVR., Methods: The Redo-TAVR registry collected data on consecutive patients who underwent redo-TAVR at 37 centers. Patients were classified as probable TAVR failure or probable THV failure if they presented within or beyond 1 year of their index TAVR, respectively., Results: Among 63,876 TAVR procedures, 212 consecutive redo-TAVR procedures were identified (0.33%): 74 within and 138 beyond 1 year of the initial procedure. For these 2 groups, TAVR-to-redo-TAVR time was 68 (38 to 154) days and 5 (3 to 6) years. The indication for redo-TAVR was THV stenosis in 12 (16.2%) and 51 (37.0%) (p = 0.002) and regurgitation or combined stenosis-regurgitation in 62 (83.8%) and 86 (62.3%) (p = 0.028), respectively. Device success using VARC-2 criteria was achieved in 180 patients (85.1%); most failures were attributable to high residual gradients (14.1%) or regurgitation (8.9%). At 30-day and 1-year follow-up, residual gradients were 12.6 ± 7.5 mm Hg and 12.9 ± 9.0 mm Hg; valve area 1.63 ± 0.61 cm 2 and 1.51 ± 0.57 cm 2 ; and regurgitation ≤mild in 91% and 91%, respectively. Peri-procedural complication rates were low (3 stroke [1.4%], 7 valve malposition [3.3%], 2 coronary obstruction [0.9%], 20 new permanent pacemaker [9.6%], no mortality), and symptomatic improvement was substantial. Survival at 30 days was 94.6% and 98.5% (p = 0.101) and 83.6% and 88.3% (p = 0.335) at 1 year for patients presenting with early and late valve dysfunction, respectively., Conclusions: Redo-TAVR is a relatively safe and effective option for selected patients with valve dysfunction after TAVR. These results are important for applicability of TAVR in patients with long life expectancy in whom THV durability may be a concern., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of different transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on valve leaflet displacement when deployed within bioprosthetic surgical valves and, thereby, risk for coronary obstruction., Background: Coronary obstruction is a potentially devastating complication during valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Strategies such as provisional stenting and intentional bioprosthetic valve leaflet laceration have been developed to mitigate this risk. Alternatively, the use of a THV that retracts the bioprosthetic leaflet away from the coronary ostium may prevent coronary obstruction., Methods: A 25-mm J-Valve, a 26-mm Evolut Pro, and a 23-mm JenaValve were implanted into both a 25-mm Trifecta surgical valve and a 25-mm Mitroflow surgical valve. A 23-mm and a 26-mm SAPIEN 3 were deployed into the Trifecta and Mitroflow, respectively. Displacement of the surgical valve leaflets (retraction vs. expansion) was measured with implantation of each THV by measuring displacement angle and maximal displacement distance., Results: Within both the Trifecta and Mitroflow valves, implantation of the J-Valve and JenaValve resulted in retraction of the surgical valve leaflets, and placement of the Evolut Pro and SAPIEN 3 resulted in tubular expansion of the surgical valve leaflets. There were significant differences in displacement angles and distances between both the J-Valve and JenaValve and the SAPIEN 3 and Evolut Pro (p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: ViV implantation with new-generation THVs that directly interact with bioprosthetic valve leaflets results in surgical valve leaflet retraction. This might mitigate the risk for coronary obstruction in selected cases of ViV transcatheter aortic valve replacement and also facilitate coronary reaccess after ViV TAVR., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Background: Frequent occurrence of paravalvular leak (PVL) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was the main concern with early-generation devices and focused technological improvements. Current systematic review and meta-analysis sought to compare outcomes of TAVR for severe native valve stenosis with next-generation devices: Lotus and Sapien 3., Methods: Electronic databases were screened for studies comparing outcomes of TAVR with Lotus and Sapien 3. In a random-effects meta-analysis, the pooled incidence rates of procedural, clinical and functional outcomes according to VARC-2 definitions were assessed., Results: Eleven observational studies including 2,836 patients (Lotus N=862 vs. Sapien 3 N=1,974) met inclusion criteria. No differences were observed regarding composite endpoints-device success and early safety. Similarly, 30-day mortality, major vascular complications, acute kidney injury and serious bleeding events were similar with both devices. Lotus valve demonstrated 35% reduction of the risk for mild PVL: risk ratio (RR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.49-0.85, P=0.002; but there were no statistical differences with regard to moderate/severe PVL (RR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.18-1.77, P=0.320). Lotus valves produced significantly higher mean transaortic gradients: mean difference (MD) 0.88 mmHg, 95% CI, 0.24-1.53 mmHg, P=0.007; however, without translation into higher rate of prosthesis-patient mismatch (RR 1.10, 95% CI: 0.82-1.47, P=0.540). As compared to Sapien 3, Lotus device placement was associated with significantly higher rate of permanent pacemaker implantation (RR 2.30, 95% CI: 1.95-2.71, P<0.00001) and cerebrovascular events (RR 1.76, 95% CI: 1.03-2.99, P=0.040)., Conclusions: Lotus valve, as compared with Sapien 3, was associated with lower risk for PVL but higher risk for permanent pacemaker implantation and cerebrovascular events., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: MK serves as the unpaid editorial board member of Journal of Thoracic Disease from Sep 2018 to Aug 2020. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (2020 Journal of Thoracic Disease. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We aimed to assess the impact of implant depth on hydrodynamic function following valve-in-valve (VIV) intervention using the ALLEGRA transcatheter heart valve (THV) in three different surgical valve designs., Methods and Results: Multiple implantation depths (+2 mm, -2 mm and -6 mm) were tested using a 23 mm ALLEGRA THV for VIV intervention in 19 mm, 21 mm, 23 mm, and 25 mm Epic, Mitroflow and Magna Ease bioprosthetic valves. Multimodality imaging and hydrodynamic evaluation was performed at each implantation depth. The 23 mm ALLEGRA valve had gradients <20 mmHg in the Mitroflow and Epic valves sized ≥21 mm, and in all sizes of the Magna Ease valve. Gradients did not increase significantly at lower implantation depths. The 19 mm Epic (+2 mm: 20.1±0.6 mmHg, -2 mm: 18.8±0.5 mmHg, -6 mm: 22.8±0.3 mmHg) and 19 mm Mitroflow (+2 mm: 24.1±0.2 mmHg, -2 mm: 31.5±0.3 mmHg, -6 mm: 25.6±0.2 mmHg) valves had elevated mean gradients. In larger sized surgical valves (≥23 mm) the regurgitant fraction was higher at low implantation depths. Pinwheeling was significantly worse in the smaller sized (≤21 mm) surgical valves and also at low (<-2 mm) implantation depth., Conclusions: The 23 mm ALLEGRA valve had favourable (<20 mmHg) gradients in all surgical valves sized ≥21 mm, even when the THV was implanted low. In 19 mm sized Mitroflow and Epic valves, gradients were elevated (>20 mmHg). While there was no major difference in mean transvalvular gradients, leaflet pinwheeling was worse at lower implantation depths.

Background: Post-pericardiotomy syndrome (PPS) is a major cause of pericarditis, yet data on the risk of recurrence are limited, and the impact of steroids and colchicine in this context is unknown., Objectives: To examine the effect of prednisone and colchicine on the rate of recurrence of PPS., Methods: Medical files of patients diagnosed with PPS were reviewed to extract demographic, echocardiographic, X-ray imaging, and follow-up data., Results: The study comprised 132 patients (57% men), aged 27-86 years. Medical treatment included prednisone in 80 patients, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agents in 41 patients, colchicine monotherapy in 2 patients, and no anti-inflammatory therapy in 9 patients. Fifty-nine patients were given colchicine for prevention of recurrence. The patients were followed for 5-110 months (median 64 months). Recurrent episodes occurred in 15 patients (11.4%), 10 patients had a single episode, 4 patients had two episodes, and one patient had three episodes. The rate of recurrence was lower in patients receiving colchicine compared to patients who did not (8.5% vs. 13.7%), and in patients not receiving vs. receiving prednisone (7.7% vs. 13.8%) but the differences were non-significant. Twenty-three patients died and there were no recurrence-related deaths., Conclusions: The rate of recurrence after PPS is low and multiple recurrences are rare. The survival of patients with recurrent PPS is excellent. Prednisone pre-treatment was associated with a numerically higher rate of recurrence and colchicine treatment with a numerically lower rate, but the differences were non-significant.

Background: Randomized clinical trials demonstrated the benefits of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in diverse clinical settings. Patients with cancer were not routinely included in these studies., Methods/results: Literature search of PubMed, Cochrane, Medline, SCOPUS, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials was conducted to identify studies that assessed one-year all-cause, cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality in patients with historical or active cancer. Using the random effects model, we computed risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean differences and their 95% confidence intervals for the dichotomous and continuous measures and outcomes, respectively. Of 171 articles evaluated in total, 5 eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. In total, 33,175 patients receiving PCI were analyzed, of whom 3323 patients had cancer and 29,852 no cancer history. Patients in the cancer group had greater all-cause mortality [RR 2.22 (1.51-3.26; p<0.001)], including cardiovascular mortality [RR 1.34 (1.1-1.65; p=0.005)] and non-cardiovascular mortality [RR 3.42 (1.74-6.74; p≤0.001], at one-year compared to non-cancer patients. Patients in the cancer group had greater one-month all-cause mortality [RR 2.01 (1.24-3.27; p=0.005)] and greater non-cardiovascular mortality [RR 6.87 (3.10-15.21; p≤0.001)], but no difference in one-month cardiovascular mortality compared to non-cancer patients. Meta-regression analyses showed that the difference in one-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality between both groups was not attributable to differences in baseline characteristics, index PCI characteristics, or medications prescribed at discharge., Conclusions: Patients with cancer undergoing PCI have worse mid-term outcomes compared to non-cancer patients. Cancer patients should be managed by a multi-specialist team, in an effort to close the mortality gap., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study assessed the long-term durability of nominally deployed transcatheter heart valves (THV) to 1 billion cycles (equivalent to 25 years) and non-nominal (overexpansion, underexpansion, and elliptical) THV deployments to 200 million cycles (equivalent to 5 years) with accelerated wear testing., Background: The long-term durability of THVs is currently unknown. As transcatheter aortic valve replacement expands to lower-risk patients, durability will be of increasing importance., Methods: SAPIEN 3 THVs, sized 20, 23, 26, and 29 mm were assessed. Nominally deployed THVs underwent hydrodynamic performance and mechanical durability as assessed with accelerated wear testing to 1 billion cycles. Magna Ease surgical valves were used as comparators. Durability of non-nominal THV deployments was tested to 200 million cycles. Valves were tested to International Standards Organization 5840:2013 standard., Results: THV durability was excellent for both the nominal and non-nominal THV deployments to 1 billion and 200 million cycles, respectively. At 1 billion cycles the regurgitant fraction for the 20-, 23-, 26-, and 29-mm SAPIEN 3 was 0.92 ± 0.47%, 1.29 ± 0.04%, 1.73 ± 0.46%, and 2.47 ± 0.15%, respectively. There was also excellent durability in the comparator Magna Ease valves. The regurgitant fraction of non-nominal overexpanded (20 mm, 4.36 ± 0.53; 23 mm, 7.68 ± 1.39; 26 mm, 6.80 ± 1.17; 29 mm, 9.00 ± 0.37), underexpanded (20 mm, 3.06 ± 0.28; 23 mm, 4.46 ± 0.45; 26 mm, 7.72 ± 0.48; 29 mm, 8.65 ± 2.01), and elliptical (20 mm, 3.30 ± 0.38; 23 mm, 6.13 ± 0.94; 26 mm, 6.77 ± 1.22; 29 mm, 8.72 ± 0.24) THVs were excellent at 200 million cycles., Conclusions: Nominal SAPIEN 3 THVs demonstrated excellent durability, to an equivalent of 25-years wear. THV durability was similar to the comparator surgical valves tested. Non-nominal (overexpansion, underexpansion, and elliptical) THV deployments also had excellent durability to an equivalent of 5 years wear., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Although transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is officially indicated for severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients at intermediate or higher surgical risk, the procedure is now increasingly being performed in patients who are at low surgical risk. Data on the benefit of TAVI in this patient population are limited. We therefore aimed to perform an updated meta-analysis of all published randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and propensity score-matched studies comparing TAVI versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients at low surgical risk., Methods and Results: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies with propensity score matching (PSM) of TAVI versus SAVR in patients who are at low surgical risk (mean STS score <4% and/or logistic EuroSCORE <10%). The primary outcome was mortality (examined at 30 days, one year and the longest available follow-up). The secondary outcomes included procedural complications. Nine studies (n=6,124) were included. TAVI was associated with a numerically, but not statistically, significant reduced mortality at 30 days (1.45% vs 2.1%, p=0.05), and similar mortality at one year (5.1% vs 5.0%, p=0.74) and a median of two years (10.8% vs 9.8%, p=0.15). For both time points, there was significant heterogeneity between RCT/PSM studies, with the former suggesting survival advantage for TAVI and the latter for SAVR. In terms of periprocedural complications, TAVI was associated with reduced risk for stroke, bleeding and renal failure and an increase in vascular complications and pacemaker implantation., Conclusions: In patients who are at low surgical risk, TAVI seems to be associated with equivalent mortality up to a median follow-up of two years compared to SAVR. More data are required before TAVI can be routinely considered as an alternative to SAVR in low-risk patients.

Background: The SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valve (THV) can be over-expanded beyond its labeled diameter. Overexpansion can be achieved with use of either a compliant or non-compliant balloon. Objective data regarding the ability to over-expand older generation balloon expandable valves are limited. We sought to assess the effects of over-expanding the SAPIEN and SAPIEN XT (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) valve beyond labeled size (diameter) through an ex-vivo bench study., Methods and Results: We assessed SAPIEN and SAPIEN XT THVs, sized 23/26 mm and 23/26/29 mm, respectively. The SAPIEN THVs were explanted samples. Valves were expanded to nominal dimensions, and then incrementally overexpanded with balloons sized 1-, 2-, and 3-mm larger than the recommended diameter. When an appropriate sized non-compliant balloon was not available, a compliant balloon was utilized. Valves underwent visual and radiographic assessment of overexpansion. SAPIEN THVs with labeled size of 23 and 26 mm could be incrementally overexpanded to midvalve (MV) diameters of 26.7 and 27.4 mm, respectively. SAPIENT XT THVs with labeled size of 23, 26, and 29 mm could be incrementally overexpanded to MV diameters of 26.8, 28.3, and 28.8 mm, respectively. The desired degree of overexpansion was only achieved with use of non-compliant balloons and not with compliant balloons. The outflow of the SAPIEN and SAPIEN XT had larger diameters than the MV and inflow of the THV., Conclusion: Overexpansion of older generation SAPIEN and SAPIEN XT THVs is possible. Achieving the desired degree of overexpansion was only achieved with use of non-compliant balloons. This has potential implications for the treatment of failed THVs., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation performance in rapid deployment (ViVr) vs. conventional (ViVc) surgical heart valves., Methods and Results: A multicentre registry was developed as part of the VIVID international registry. A total of 30 ViVr patients (Perceval, n=24, ATS 3f Enable™, n=5, and the INTUITY, n=1) were evaluated and compared with 2,288 ViVc patients. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to adjust further for bias. Compared with ViVc, ViVr patients presented twice as early after surgical heart valve (SHV) implantation (55.2±36.1 vs. 118.4±57.7 months, p<0.001), were more commonly female (82.8% vs. 41.3%, p<0.001), and had shorter body stature and reduced body weight (p<0.05 for both) prior to PS. Implantation was successful in all ViVr cases and, compared with ViVc, was associated with equally favourable haemodynamic outcomes (mean gradient: 14.6±8.3 vs. 16.2±8.9 mmHg, p=0.356; regurgitation ≥mild: 3.7% vs. 5.2%, p=0.793). Periprocedural complication rates were similar and low in both groups. There was no coronary obstruction event in any ViVr case; one patient (3.6%) died during one year of follow-up., Conclusions: ViVr appears effective, safe and associated with favourable haemodynamic outcome.

Aims: To compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement TAVR with self-expandable first-generation Medtronic CoreValve with new-generation Evolut R devices in patients with aortic stenosis., Methods: Multiple databases were screened for all available reports directly or indirectly comparing CoreValve vs Evolut R. Primary endpoint was device success. Procedural, functional and clinical outcomes were assessed as well., Results: Ten retrospective series including 12 294 pts. were found. Overall device success rate was 95.5% and was statistically higher in the Evolut R treated patients as compared with CoreValve: 96.6 vs. 94.8%, respectively; RR (risk ratio) 95%CIs (confidence intervals): 1.02 (1.00-1.04); P = 0.01. There were no statistical differences with regard to postoperative mean aortic gradients 8.5 +/- 5.3 vs 7.9 +/- 4.6 with Evolut R and CoreValve. Evolut R valve demonstrated nearly 50% reduction of the risk for moderate-to-severe paravalvilar leak 0.55 (0.39-0.79); P = 0.001; 60% statistically significant lower risk of developing myocardial injury 0.40 (0.22-0.72); P = 0.002 and numerical reductions in the risk of acute kidney injury, vascular complications and bleeding. Together with significantly reduced risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (0.80 [0.67-0.96]; P = 0.02) the above benefits were associated with 40% reduction in the risk of 30-day all-cause mortality with Evolut R as compared to CoreValve: 0.60 (0.37-1.00); P = 0.05., Conclusions: The use of new-generation Evolut R was associated with improved procedural, functional and clinical outcomes compared with the CoreValve device.

Objectives: The authors sought to collect data on contemporary practice and outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in oncology patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS)., Background: Oncology patients with severe AS are often denied valve replacement. TAVR may be an emerging treatment option., Methods: A worldwide registry was designed to collect data on patients who undergo TAVR while having active malignancy. Data from 222 cancer patients from 18 TAVR centers were compared versus 2,522 "no-cancer" patients from 5 participating centers. Propensity-score matching was performed to further adjust for bias., Results: Cancer patients' age was 78.8 ± 7.5 years, STS score 4.9 ± 3.4%, 62% men. Most frequent cancers were gastrointestinal (22%), prostate (16%), breast (15%), hematologic (15%), and lung (11%). At the time of TAVR, 40% had stage 4 cancer. Periprocedural complications were comparable between the groups. Although 30-day mortality was similar, 1-year mortality was higher in cancer patients (15% vs. 9%; p < 0.001); one-half of the deaths were due to neoplasm. Among patients who survived 1 year after the TAVR, one-third were in remission/cured from cancer. Progressive malignancy (stage III to IV) was a strong mortality predictor (hazard ratio: 2.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.74 to 3.23; p < 0.001), whereas stage I to II cancer was not associated with higher mortality compared with no-cancer patients., Conclusions: TAVR in cancer patients is associated with similar short-term but worse long-term prognosis compared with patients without cancer. Among this cohort, mortality is largely driven by cancer, and progressive malignancy is a strong mortality predictor. Importantly, 85% of the patients were alive at 1 year, one-third were in remission/cured from cancer. (Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Oncology Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis [TOP-AS]; NCT03181997)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) carries a risk of Vascular Complications (VCs) at the access site. The currently used measures for assessing the risk for VCs are not accurate enough, and sometimes fail to predict them. We therefore aimed to examine whether Iliofemoral artery lumen volume (IFV) assessment with 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) predicts VCs after transfemoral TAVR., Methods: We identified 45/560 trans-femoral TAVR patients with VC, then performed nearest neighbor 1:1 matching for patients with no VC, matching for age, sex, TAVR year, valve size and type, closure-device, sheath size and peripheral vascular disease. IFV, minimal diameter, tortuosity, and calcification were measured, and their diagnostic performance assessed., Results: The final analysis included 45 patients with and 45 patients without VCs. The two groups were well balanced. For all patients, median IFV was 8.65 ml (IQR 6.5-11.95). IFV was lower in patients with VC compared to patients without VC: 7.10 ml (IQR 5.4-9.0) vs. 10.10 ml (IQR 8.3-13.3), p < 0.001. VC risk had marginal association with iliofemoral artery minimal diameter (p = 0.06) and no association with tortuosity or calcification. Compared with other measurements, IFV had the most favorable receiver operating curve for the prediction of VC, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.78., Conclusion: IFV measurement using 3-dimensional CT is significantly associated with VCs in transfemoral TAVR patients and might be superior to currently accepted parameters. IFV should be further studied among extended cohorts of TAVR treated patients as a novel tool for VC risk assessment prior to transfemoral TAVR., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Sizing for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) remains controversial., Methods and Results: The aim of the BAVARD (Bicuspid Aortic Valve Anatomy and Relationship With Devices) retrospective registry is to capture the sizing ratios used for transcatheter aortic valve implantation in BAV and analyze the second-generation prostheses geometry postimplantation. About 101 patients with BAV along with available pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation multidetector computed tomography were compared with 88 tricuspid aortic valves (TAV) patients. Preprocedural multidetector computed tomography diagnosed type 0 and type 1 BAV in, respectively, 12.9% and 86.1 % of BAV. At baseline, the ellipticity index was similar between BAV and TAV patients: 1.2±0.1 versus 1.2±0.1, P=0.09. The mean annular oversizing was, respectively, 1.14±0.04 and 1.04±0.04, P<0.001, in TAV and BAV patients. The mean prosthesis intercommissural distance, ratio was 1.03±0.1. The mean diameter of the prostheses at the annulus matched the mean perimeter-derived diameter of the aortic annulus at baseline with TAV (23.3±2.2 versus 23.6±1.9, P=0.4) and was smaller with BAV (24±2.8 versus 26.8±3.1, P<0.01), confirming 11% underexpansion in BAV. Finally, in situ, prosthesis diameter and ellipticity followed the same pattern, with stable values from the distal edge to 12 mm above, in both groups., Conclusions: Second-generation prostheses similarly reshape the aortic annulus in TAV and BAV. Prostheses keep consistent diameters from distal edge to 12 mm in TAV and BAV. Prosthesis underexpansion is constantly observed in BAV. Annular-based sizing is accurate in BAV with minimal oversizing. The intercommissural distance, 4 mm above the annulus, could be integrated in gray zones., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT03495050.

Background: The last decade, regarded as the DES era in PCI, has witnessed significant advances in the management of coronary disease. We aimed to assess temporal trends in the practice and outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during the drug eluting stent (DES) era., Methods: We analyzed 18,641 consecutive PCI's performed between January 2004 and December 2016, distinguished by procedural date (Q 1 : 2004-2006, n = 4,865; Q 2 : 2007-2009, n = 4,977; Q 3 : 2010-2012, n = 4,230; Q 4 : 2013-2016, n = 4,569)., Results: At presentation, mean patients age was 65 (±11) years and 22.8% were females. Over time, there was a rise in the relative number of octogenarians (Q 1 : 10.7% vs Q 4 : 15.5%, P < 0.001) and an increase in the burden of most comorbidities (e.g., left ventricular dysfunction ≥ moderate and chronic kidney disease, P < 0.001 for both). Despite a 2-fold increase in the rate of complex interventions, and a 3-fold increase in the rate of unprotected left-main angioplasty (P < 0.001 for both), the radial approach was increasingly adopted (Q 1 : 2% to Q 4 : 63.5%, P < 0.001). DES implantation increased from 43% to 83% at the expense of bare metal stent (BMS) application, and accompanied by drug coated balloon sprout to 1.8%, P < 0.001. Kaplan-Meier survival curves revealed a time-based enhanced outcome, with a decreased rate of death, MI, target vessel revascularization and CABG over the years., Conclusions: In the last decade, PCI has evolved to offer better outcome to more elderly, sicker patient population, with more complex coronary disease interventions. The shift to second generation DES and to enhanced PCI techniques may explain part of this progress., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Family history of premature cardiovascular disease (FHpCVD) is a well-established risk factor for development of coronary artery disease. However, little is known about the impact of FHpCVD on the outcome of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We therefore aimed to evaluate the outcomes of ACS patients grouped by the presence and/or absence of FHpCVD. All patients ≤65 at admission who had an ACS event and were enrolled in the national ACS Israel Survey registry from 2000 to 2013 were included. Patients were grouped by the presence or absence of self-reported FHpCVD. Nearest neighbor propensity score matching was applied to create an evenly matched cohort of patients. Outcomes included 30-day MACE (defined as the composite of death, unstable angina pectoris, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and urgent revascularization) and its individual components. Of 7,173 ACS patients, 33.9% reported FHpCVD. These patients were younger, with lower prevalence of diabetes, previous cerebrovascular and kidney diseases, but had higher prevalence of smoking and hyperlipidemia (p <0.001 for each). The propensity score-matching cohort included 1,793 pairs of evenly matched patients. The rate of 30-day MACE did not differ in the groups, as well as 1-year mortality (2.4% vs 2.2%, with vs without FHpCVD, respectively). During long-term follow-up (median 7.6 years), mortality rate was lower in the FHpCVD group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence intervals 0.69 to 0.99). In conclusion, we observed no differences in short- and intermediate-term outcomes based on the presence and/or absence of FHpCVD. However, patients with FHpCVD had better long-term survival., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: The risk assessment tools currently used to predict mortality in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) were designed for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We aimed to assess the accuracy of the TAVI dedicated risk score in predicting mortality outcomes., Methods and Results: Consecutive patients (n=1,038) undergoing TAVI at a single institution from 2014 to 2016 were included. The ACC/TVT registry mortality risk score, the STS-PROM score and the EuroSCORE II were calculated for all patients. In-hospital and 30-day all-cause mortality rates were 1.3% and 2.9%, respectively. The ACC/TVT risk stratification tool scored higher for patients who died in-hospital than for those who survived the index hospitalisation (6.4±4.6 vs. 3.5±1.6, p=0.03, respectively). The ACC/TVT score showed a high level of discrimination, C-index for in-hospital mortality 0.74, 95% CI: (0.59-0.88). There were no significant differences between the performance of the ACC/TVT registry risk score, the EuroSCORE II and the STS-PROM score for in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates., Conclusions: The ACC/TVT registry risk model is a dedicated tool to aid in the prediction of in-hospital mortality risk after TAVI.

Sutureless aortic bioprostheses (SAB) are increasingly being used to provide shorter cross-clamp time. Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV-A) is shown to be effective and safe in the vast majority of patients with degenerated bioprosthetics, yet its' use in SAB failure is infrequent. We present a case of balloon-expandable VIV-A in an 80-year-old woman who suffered severe symptomatic aortic regurgitation in a failed Perceval S 21-mm valve. Computed tomography scan demonstrated a deformed valve. Our heart team favored a percutaneous VIV-A over reoperation due to the patients' high surgical risk. An Edwards-Sapien XT 23 mm was successfully deployed with excellent results. The patient remained asymptomatic following 6 months. As other bioprosthesis, some sutureless valves are condemned to structural valve degeneration. Because VIV-A is being established for managing degenerative bioprosthesis in high risk patients, it is cardinal to identify its role in novel degenerative sutureless valves. SAB were introduced to the clinical market only 5-7 years ago. The absence of sutures may theoretically impose risk for valve instability when adding a transcatheter sutureless valve inside the first one. Our successful experience was very reassuring. We report its feasibility because we believe it should provide support for further investigation on VIV-A within novel SAV. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Risk assessment for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains challenging, especially in elderly and high-risk candidates. Although several risk factors contribute to increased morbidity and mortality after TAVI, simple risk scores for routine use are lacking. Applying the CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥ 75 years, diabetes, prior stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, sex [female] category) score as a novel risk stratification tool for conditions other than atrial fibrillation and stroke prevention has been previously examined; however, its usefulness in a population of patients with aortic stenosis after TAVI has not been established. Thus, we investigated 633 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI between November 2008 and May 2017, and calculated the CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score. Patients were stratified according to their CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score into 3 categories (0 to 3, 4 to 6, 7 to 9), and the association between CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score and 1-year clinical outcomes (stroke, all-cause mortality, and combined outcome of stroke or mortality) was evaluated. We found that both stroke and mortality at 1 year were significantly more frequent with increasing CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score (p = 0.012 and p = 0.025, respectively). Each single-point rise in CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score was associated with a 38% increase in the 1-year combined outcome of mortality or stroke (p = 0.022; C index 0.615). In conclusion, CHA 2 DS 2 -VAS C score can be used as a simple and effective tool to predict 1-year clinical outcomes including death and stroke in patients who underwent TAVI., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Risk-benefit assessment for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still evolving. A sizeable group of patients do not fully benefit from intervention despite a technically successful procedure. All patients who underwent TAVI with device success and with no Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined complications were included. Various demographic data, clinical details, and echocardiographic findings were examined. The outcome was defined as 1-year composite of mortality, stroke, lack of functional-class improvement (by New York Heart Association class), and readmissions (≥1 month after the procedure). Logistic regression was used to fit the prediction model. We used a 10-fold cross-validation to validate our results. Of 543 patients, 435 met the inclusion criteria. The mean age was 82 (±6.5) years, 43% were men, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 6.6 (±4.7). At 1 year, 66 of 435 patients (15%) experienced the study end point. The final logistic regression model included diabetes, baseline New York Heart Association functional class, diastolic dysfunction, need for diuretics, mean gradient, hemoglobin level, and creatinine level. The area under the curve was 0.73 and was reduced to 0.71 after validation, with a 97% specificity using a single cutoff. Dividing to low-, medium-, and high-risk groups for futility produced a corresponding prevalence of 6%, 19%, and 59% futility. A web application for the prediction model was developed and provided. In conclusion, this prediction score may provide an important insight and may facilitate identification of patients who, despite a technically successful and uncomplicated procedure, have risk that may outweigh the benefit of a contemplated TAVI., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer might be particularly useful in diabetic patients who are at increased risk for target lesion/target vessel revascularization. We therefore aimed at assessing the safety and performance of a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in combination with comprehensive optimal medical therapy following coronary interventions., Methods: This prospective, multicenter registry was conducted at six centers in Israel. Aside of stent treatment, we aimed for an LDL-C level<70mg/dl; at one and six months post-intervention a diabetic consultancy was required, and follow-up data were collected at six and twelve months. The primary outcome measure was target vessel failure, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes were target lesion failure, its individual components, and stent thrombosis., Results: From August 2013 until May 2014, 120 diabetic patients with 158 lesions were treated with a BP-SES. Mean age was 63.9±9.2years, 27.5% were insulin dependent, 28.3% had a history of myocardial infarction, and 47.5% had prior coronary interventions. By visual estimation, lesions were 3.0±0.5mm in diameter and 15.2±7.4mm long; mean stent diameter and length were 3.0±0.5mm and 19.2±6.8mm. Target vessel failure and target lesion failure at 12months occurred in seven (6.4% [95% CI: 3.1-13.0]) and four patients (3.5% [95% CI: 1.3-9.2]), respectively, and definite stent thrombosis in one patient (1.0% [95% CI: 0.1-7.0])., Conclusion: Treatment with a BP-SES demonstrated excellent target-vessel and target-lesion revascularization rates in a high-risk diabetic patient population undergoing catheter-based revascularization followed by intensified medical care., Annotated Table of Contents: In 120 high-risk diabetic patients with coronary artery stenosis, treatment with the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer and comprehensive antidiabetic therapy resulted in excellent clinical outcomes. Target vessel revascularization occurred in 6.4% of patients and target lesion revascularization in 3.5%., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment for severe aortic stenosis in patients at high or prohibitive surgical risk. Nevertheless, long-term clinical and echocardiographic data are still lacking. We carried out an analysis of 560 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI at our institution from 2008 to 2016 to evaluate temporal changes in TAVI characteristics, predictors of 1-year and long-term outcomes, and to compare the performance of the early- and new-generation valve systems. With time, we have adopted lower risk threshold for patient selection and have been using conscious sedation and transfemoral access preferentially (p <0.001 for all). The incidence of greater than mild PVL decreased from 16% to 7.6%, p = 0.029. Within 5 years, 47% of the patients died, the majority (78%) due to noncardiac causes. Independent predictors of 1-year death included periprocedural aspects (i.e., vascular complications, stroke, and PVL), whereas death occurring later than 1 year was solely related to baseline co-morbidities. Transvalvular gradients and residual regurgitation remained nonclinically significant for up to 5 years of follow-up. New-generation valves were associated with less PVL compared with propensity score-matched early-generation valves (p <0.001). In conclusion, TAVI utilization at our institution has progressed to include lower risk patients with transfemoral access becoming applicable in the great majority. Poor long-term survival is attributable to population factors rather than to procedural factors. Intermediate- and long-term hemodynamics are excellent. PVL has diminished significantly with the new-generation valves. Efforts to improve long- and short-term outcomes remain a therapeutic challenge., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation (TVIV) is an attractive yet under-explored alternative to redo valve surgery., Objectives: To report the multicenter TVIV experience in Israel., Methods: We approached multiple centers and collected data regarding seven TVIV cases., Results: The study group comprised seven participants: five females and two males, with a mean age of 63 ± 12 years and EuroSCORE-II 13.6 ± 3.3%. Follow-up ranged from 3 to 21 months (mean 8 ± 6 months). All presented with advanced heart failure. The indication for valve intervention was a predominant tricuspid stenosis in three patients, significant tricuspid regurgitation in one and a mixture in three. Six procedures were conducted via a transfemoral approach and one by transatrial access. The Edwards SAPIENTM XT valve was used in four cases and the SAPIENTM 3 in three. Without pre-stenting/rapid pacing, all participants underwent successful valve implantation. Mean transvalvular gradient decreased from 11 ± 3 mmHg to 6 ± 3 mmHg (P = 0.003) and regurgitation decreased from moderate/severe (in four cases) to none/trace (in six of the seven cases). One patient remained severely symptomatic and died 3.5 months after the implantation. All others achieved a functional capacity improvement and amelioration of symptoms soon after the implantation, which persisted during follow-up., Conclusions: TVIV may be a safe and effective strategy to treat carefully selected patients with degenerated bioprosthetic tricuspid valve at high operative risk.

Objectives: The Evolut-R (Medtronic, Inc) is a transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) system that was built on the well-established foundation of Medtronic's CoreValve device platform. Although already in extensive clinical utilization, it is unknown if the Evolut-R improves TAVI outcomes. Herein, we compared TAVI outcomes of the Evolut-R and CoreValve devices., Methods: A propensity score 1:1 matching was conducted on 358 Evolut-R patients (n = 75) and CoreValve patients (n = 283). Thirty-day outcomes were compared using Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 criteria. A combined 30-day endpoint including all-cause death, stroke, major vascular complication, major bleeding, implantation failure, paravalvular leak (PVL) ≥ moderate, and new pacemaker implantation was also tested., Results: The final study group included 146 patients (73 Evolut-R; 73 CoreValve). Post matching, baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Mean patient age was 82 ± 6 years, mean STS score was 5.2 ± 3.8, 72% were female, and 17% were deemed frail. Implantation success reached 99% with Evolut-R and 94% with CoreValve (P=.10). Both groups had low periprocedural stroke/myocardial infarction/mortality rates and there was also no difference in 30-day vascular complications (P=.18), bleeding (P=.37), PVL (P=.24), and new pacemaker (P=.14). The combined outcome rate was 24% with Evolut-R and 37% with CoreValve (P=.10)., Conclusion: This study indicates that the efficacy and safety of the self-expandable second-generation Evolut-R transcatheter valve is at least comparable with the first-generation CoreValve. The observed improved performance in correct positioning of a single valve and the numerically lower chance to suffer a combined TAVI endpoint needs further investigation.

Background: About a decade past the first transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), data are limited regarding temporal trends accompanying its evolution from novel technology to mainstream therapy. We evaluated these trends in a large multicenter TAVI registry., Hypothesis: TAVI is changing and improving with time., Methods: Patients who underwent TAVI between January 2008 and December 2014 at 3 high-volume Israeli centers were divided into 5 time quintiles according to procedure date. Outcomes were analyzed and reported according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2., Results: A total of 1285 patients were studied (43% male; mean age, 83 ± 3 years; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons [STS] score, 5.5 ± 3.6). Over time, there was a shift toward treating patients at lower STS score, increased use of conscious sedation and transfemoral approach, and decreased use of balloon predilatation. The balloon-expandable to self-expandable valve utilization ratio decreased, the valve-in-valve experience increased from 4% to 17% of all TAVI volume, and length of hospital stay was halved (P = 0.006). Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed gradual decrease in mortality risk (P = 0.031), but there was no significant 1-year mortality decrease by multivariable analysis. Each year increment was associated with an adjusted 20%, 15%, and 12% decrease in new pacemaker obligation (P = 0.004), new pacemaker obligation or left bundle branch block (P = 0.008), and in-hospital infections (P = 0.082), respectively., Conclusions: Temporal trends accompanying TAVI evolution include its utilization in lower-risk patients, procedural simplification, improved overall survival, decreased pacemaker obligation, and shorter hospital stay., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Cancer patients are mostly excluded from percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) clinical trials and oncologic history is lacking from most PCI registries. Thus, little is known about the clinical outcomes following PCI among cancer survivors. Our aim was to examine the prevalence and long-term outcome of cancer survivors among a large PCI patient cohort., Methods: We retrospectively integrated and analyzed cardiovascular and oncologic data of 12 785 consecutive patients who underwent PCI between April 2004 and October 2014. Cancer survivors were compared with pair-matched cancer-naive patients., Results: Cancer survivors constituted 7.8% (1005) of the patients. The mean cancer diagnosis-to-PCI interval was 3.6±3.4 years and the mean post-PCI follow-up was 6.4±5.9 years. Postmatching baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Cancer survivors were referred to the catheterization laboratory because of acute coronary syndrome and were treated with bare-metal stents more often than cancer-naive patients. Cancer survivors to cancer-naive patients' hazard ratio and 95% confidence interval were 1.46 (1.24-1.72), P value less than 0.001 for all-cause mortality and 1.41 (1.23-1.63), P value less than 0.001 for the composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and coronary bypass surgery. Cardiac death was the leading cause of mortality in our hospital during follow-up in both groups, although more cancer survivors died of malignancy (25 vs. 5%, P<0.001)., Conclusion: Cancer survivors constitute a high proportion of the PCI population (one in every 13 patients) and have an ∼40% increased risk for cardiovascular morbidity and death. Cardiac disease was a leading cause of in-hospital mortality among these patients.

Aims: Transcatheter heart valve (THV) implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) offers an alternative therapy for high-risk patients. Elevated post-procedural gradients are a significant limitation of aortic ViV. Our objective was to assess the relationship between depth of implantation and haemodynamics., Methods and Results: Commercially available THVs used for ViV were included in the analysis (CoreValve Evolut, SAPIEN XT and the Portico valve). THVs were implanted in small surgical valves (label size 19 mm) to simulate boundary conditions. Custom-mounted pulse duplicators registered relevant haemodynamic parameters. Twenty-eight experiments were performed (13 CVE, 5 SXT and 10 Portico). Ranges of depth of implantation were: CVE: -1.2 mm to 15.7 mm; SXT: -2.2 mm to 7.5 mm; Portico: 1.4 mm to 12.1 mm. Polynomial regression established a relationship between depth of implantation and valvular mean gradients (CVE: p<0.001; SXT: p=0.01; Portico: p=0.002), as well as with EOA (CVE: p<0.001; SXT: p=0.02; Portico valve: p=0.003). In addition, leaflet coaptation was better in the high implantation experiments for all valves., Conclusions: The current comprehensive bench testing assessment demonstrates the importance of high device position for the attainment of optimal haemodynamics during aortic ViV procedures.