TransCatheter aortic valve implantation and fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention versus conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting for treatment of patients with aortic valve stenosis and multivessel or advanced coronary disease: The transcatheter valve and vessels trial (TCW trial): Design and rationale.

Background: Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) frequently present with concomitant obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). In those, current guidelines recommend combined coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as the preferred treatment option, although this surgical approach is associated with a high rate of clinical events. Combined transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with or without FFR have evolved as a valid alternative for cardiac surgery in patients with AS and multivessel or advanced CAD. To date, no dedicated trial has prospectively evaluated the outcomes of a percutaneous versus surgical treatment for patients with both severe AS and CAD.
Aims: To investigate whether fractional-flow reserve (FFR)-guided PCI and TAVI is noninferior to combined CABG and SAVR for the treatment of severe AS and multivessel or advanced CAD.
Methods: The Transcatheter Valve and Vessels (TCW) trial (clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03424941) is a prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, international trial. Patients ≥ 70 years with severe AS and multivessel (≥ 2 vessels) or advanced CAD, deemed feasible by the heart team for both; a full percutaneous or surgical treatment, will be randomised in a 1:1 fashion to either FFR-guided PCI followed by TAVI (intervention arm) vs. CABG and SAVR (control arm). The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, unscheduled clinically-driven target vessel revascularization, valve reintervention, and life threatening or disabling bleeding at 1 year. The TCW trial is powered for noninferiority, and if met, superiority will be tested. Assuming a primary endpoint rate of 30% in the CABG-SAVR arm, with a significance level α of 5%, a noninferiority limit delta of 15% and a loss to follow-up of 2%, a total of 328 patients are needed to obtain a power of 90%. The primary endpoint analysis is performed on an intention-to-treat basis.
Summary: The TCW Trial is the first prospective randomized trial that will study if a less invasive percutaneous treatment for severe AS and concomitant advanced CAD (i.e., FFR-guided PCI-TAVI) is noninferior to the guidelines recommended approach (CABG-SAVR).
Competing Interests: Conflict of interest E.K. reports institutional research grants support from Abbott Vascular Laboratories and Medtronic as well as proctor/lecture fees from Abbott Vascular. R.H. reports lecture fees from Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Novartis. M.H. reports proctor for Meril Life. I.A.S. reports proctor for Boston Scientific, Medtronic and Meril Life. M.A. reports proctor/speaker/consultant fees from Edwards, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston, Zoll, Abbvie and received institutional research grants Edwards, Abbott, Medtronic, LSI. L.C: Advisory Board member for Abbott, Medtronic and JenaValve, consultant for Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, PiCardia, MicroPort, MicroInterventions. W. Wojakowski: Medtronic advisory board, lecture fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic; E.L.Institutional Research from Abbott Medical Netherlands. All other authors don't report any conflict of interest.
(Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)