Johanna J.M. Takkenberg

Standardized Endpoint Definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Clinical Trials : A Consensus Report From the Valve Academic Research Consortium

Objectives To propose standardized consensus definitions for important clinical endpoints in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), investigations in an effort to improve the quality of clinical research and to enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. To make these consensus definitions accessible to all stakeholders in TAVI clinical research through a peer reviewed publication, on behalf of the public health. Background Transcatheter aortic valve implantation may provide a worthwhile less invasive treatment in many patients with severe aortic stenosis and since its introduction to the medical community in 2002, there has been an explosive growth in procedures. The integration of TAVI into daily clinical practice should be guided by academic activities, which requires a harmonized and structured process for data collection, interpretation, and reporting during well-conducted clinical trials. Methods and results The Valve Academic Research Consortium established an independent collaboration between Academic Research organizations and specialty societies (cardiology and cardiac surgery) in the USA and Europe. Two meetings, in San Francisco, California (September 2009) and in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (December 2009), including key physician experts, and representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and device manufacturers, were focused on creating consistent endpoint definitions and consensus recommendations for implementation in TAVI clinical research programs. Important considerations in developing endpoint definitions included (i) respect for the historical legacy of surgical valve guidelines; (ii) identification of pathophysiological mechanisms associated with clinical events; (iii) emphasis on clinical relevance. Consensus criteria were developed for the following endpoints: mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, and prosthetic valve performance. Composite endpoints for TAVI safety and effectiveness were also recommended. Conclusion Although consensus criteria will invariably include certain arbitrary features, an organized multidisciplinary process to develop specific definitions for TAVI clinical research should provide consistency across studies that can facilitate the evaluation of this new important catheter-based therapy. The broadly based consensus endpoint definitions described in this document may be useful for regulatory and clinical trial purposes.

Standardized Endpoint Definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES To propose standardized consensus definitions for important clinical endpoints in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), investigations in an effort to improve the quality of clinical research and to enable meaningful comparisons between clinical trials. To make these consensus definitions accessible to all stakeholders in TAVI clinical research through a peer reviewed publication, on behalf of the public health. BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve implantation may provide a worthwhile less invasive treatment in many patients with severe aortic stenosis and since its introduction to the medical community in 2002, there has been an explosive growth in procedures. The integration of TAVI into daily clinical practice should be guided by academic activities, which requires a harmonized and structured process for data collection, interpretation, and reporting during well-conducted clinical trials. METHODS AND RESULTS The Valve Academic Research Consortium established an independent collaboration between Academic Research organizations and specialty societies (cardiology and cardiac surgery) in the USA and Europe. Two meetings, in San Francisco, California (September 2009) and in Amsterdam, the Netherlands (December 2009), including key physician experts, and representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and device manufacturers, were focused on creating consistent endpoint definitions and consensus recommendations for implementation in TAVI clinical research programs. Important considerations in developing endpoint definitions included: 1) respect for the historical legacy of surgical valve guidelines; 2) identification of pathophysiological mechanisms associated with clinical events; 3) emphasis on clinical relevance. Consensus criteria were developed for the following endpoints: mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, bleeding, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, and prosthetic valve performance. Composite endpoints for TAVI safety and effectiveness were also recommended. CONCLUSIONS Although consensus criteria will invariably include certain arbitrary features, an organized multidisciplinary process to develop specific definitions for TAVI clinical research should provide consistency across studies that can facilitate the evaluation of this new important catheter-based therapy. The broadly based consensus endpoint definitions described in this document may be useful for regulatory and clinical trial purposes.

Guidelines for Reporting Mortality and Morbidity After Cardiac Valve Interventions

uidelines for Reporting Mortality and Morbidity fter Cardiac Valve Interventions ary W. Akins, MD, D. Craig Miller, MD, Marko I. Turina, MD, icholas T. Kouchoukos, MD, Eugene H. Blackstone, MD, ary L. Grunkemeier, PhD, Johanna J. M. Takkenberg, MD, PhD, irone E. David, MD, Eric G. Butchart, MD, David H. Adams, MD, avid M. Shahian, MD, Siegfried Hagl, MD, John E. Mayer, MD, and ruce W. Lytle, MD The American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Beverly, Massachusetts; The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois; and The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, Windsor, Berks, United Kingdom

The Ross Procedure A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background— Reports on outcome after the Ross procedure are limited by small study size and show variable durability results. A systematic review of evidence on outcome after the Ross procedure may improve insight into outcome and potential determinants. Methods and Results— A systematic review of reports published from January 2000 to January 2008 on outcome after the Ross procedure was undertaken. Thirty-nine articles meeting the inclusion criteria were allocated to 3 categories: (1) consecutive series, (2) adult patient series, and (3) pediatric patient series. With the use of an inverse variance approach, pooled morbidity and mortality rates were obtained. Pooled early mortality for consecutive, adult, and pediatric patients series was 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8 to 4.9), 3.2% (95% CI, 1.5 to 6.6), and 4.2% (95% CI, 1.4 to 11.5). Autograft deterioration rates were 1.15% (95% CI, 1.06 to 2.06), 0.78% (95% CI, 0.43 to 1.40), and 1.38%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.68 to 2.80), respectively, and for right ventricular outflow tract conduit were 0.91% (95% CI, 0.56 to 1.47), 0.55% (95% CI, 0.26 to 1.17), and 1.60%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.84 to 3.05), respectively. For studies with mean patient age >18 years versus mean patient age ≤18 years, pooled autograft and right ventricular outflow tract deterioration rates were 1.14% (95% CI, 0.83 to 1.57) versus 1.69% (95% CI, 1.02 to 2.79) and 0.65% (95% CI, 0.41 to 1.02) versus 1.66%/patient-year (95% CI, 0.98 to 2.82), respectively. Conclusions— The Ross procedure provides satisfactory results for both children and young adults. Durability limitations become apparent by the end of the first postoperative decade, in particular in younger patients.

Survival Comparison of the Ross Procedure and Mechanical Valve Replacement With Optimal Self-Management Anticoagulation Therapy Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

Background— It is suggested that in young adults the Ross procedure results in better late patient survival compared with mechanical prosthesis implantation. We performed a propensity score-matched study that assessed late survival in young adult patients after a Ross procedure versus that after mechanical aortic valve replacement with optimal self-management anticoagulation therapy. Methods and Results— We selected 918 Ross patients and 406 mechanical valve patients 18 to 60 years of age without dissection, aneurysm, or mitral valve replacement who survived an elective procedure (1994 to 2008). With the use of propensity score matching, late survival was compared between the 2 groups. Two hundred fifty-three patients with a mechanical valve (mean follow-up, 6.3 years) could be propensity matched to a Ross patient (mean follow-up, 5.1 years). Mean age of the matched cohort was 47.3 years in the Ross procedure group and 48.0 years in the mechanical valve group (P=0.17); the ratio of male to female patients was 3.2 in the Ross procedure group and 2.7 in the mechanical valve group (P=0.46). Linearized all-cause mortality rate was 0.53% per patient-year in the Ross procedure group compared with 0.30% per patient-year in the mechanical valve group (matched hazard ratio, 1.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 5.91; P=0.32). Late survival was comparable to that of the general German population. Conclusions— In comparable patients, there is no late survival difference in the first postoperative decade between the Ross procedure and mechanical aortic valve implantation with optimal anticoagulation self-management. Survival in these selected young adult patients closely resembles that of the general population, possibly as a result of highly specialized anticoagulation self-management, better timing of surgery, and improved patient selection in recent years.

Autograft Reinforcement to Preserve Autograft Function After the Ross Procedure A Report From the German-Dutch Ross Registry

Background— Autograft reinforcement interventions (R) during the Ross procedure are intended to preserve autograft function and improve durability. The aim of this study is to evaluate this hypothesis. Methods and Results— 1335 adult patients (mean age:43.5±12.0 years) underwent a Ross procedure (subcoronary, SC, n=637; root replacement, Root, n=698). 592 patients received R of the annulus, sinotubular junction, or both. Regular clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed (mean:6.09±3.97, range:0.01 to 19.2 years). Longitudinal assessment of autograft function with time was performed using multilevel modeling techniques. The Root without R (Root−R) group was associated with a 6× increased reoperation rate compared to Root with R (Root+R), SC with R (SC+R), and without R (SC-R; 12.9% versus 2.3% versus 2.5%.versus 2.6%, respectively; P<0.001). SC and Root groups had similar rate of aortic regurgitation (AR) development over time. Root+R patients had no progression of AR, whereas Root−R had 6 times higher AR development compared to Root+R. In SC, R had no remarkable effect on the annual AR progression. The SC technique was associated with lower rates of autograft dilatation at all levels of the aortic root compared to the Root techniques. R did not influence autograft dilatation rates in the Root group. Conclusions— For the time period of the study surgical autograft stabilization techniques preserve autograft function and result in significantly lower reoperation rates. The nonreinforced Root was associated with significant adverse outcome. Therefore, surgical stabilization of the autograft is advisable to preserve long-term autograft function, especially in the Root Ross procedure.

Comparison of outcomes after aortic valve replacement with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis using microsimulation

Background: Mechanical valves and bioprostheses are widely used for aortic valve replacement. Though previous randomised studies indicate that there is no important difference in outcome after implantation with either type of valve, knowledge of outcomes after aortic valve replacement is incomplete. Objective: To predict age and sex specific outcomes of patients after aortic valve replacement with bileaflet mechanical valves and stented porcine bioprostheses, and to provide evidence based support for the choice of prosthesis. Methods: Meta-analysis of published results of primary aortic valve replacement with bileaflet mechanical prostheses (nine reports, 4274 patients, and 25 726 patient-years) and stented porcine bioprostheses (13 reports, 9007 patients, and 54 151 patient-years) was used to estimate the annual risks of postoperative valve related events and their outcomes. These estimates were entered into a microsimulation model, which was employed to calculate age and sex specific outcomes after aortic valve replacement. Results: Life expectancy (LE) and event-free life expectancy (EFLE) for a 65 year old man after implantation with a mechanical valve or a bioprosthesis were 10.4 and 10.7 years and 7.7 and 8.4 years, respectively. The lifetime risk of at least one valve related event for a mechanical valve was 48%, and for a bioprosthesis, 44%. For LE and EFLE, the age crossover point between the two valve types was 59 and 60 years, respectively. Conclusions: Meta-analysis based microsimulation provides insight into the long term outcome after aortic valve replacement and suggests that the currently recommended age threshold for implanting a bioprosthesis could be lowered further.

Right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction with an allograft conduit

BACKGROUND Allograft conduits are used for reconstruction of the right ventricular outflow tract in patients with congenital heart disease and in the pulmonary autograft procedure. A retrospective evaluation of our experience with the use of allograft conduits for reconstruction of the right ventricular outflow tract was conducted. METHODS Between August 1986 and March 1999, 316 allografts (246 pulmonary, 70 aortic) were implanted in 297 patients for reconstruction of the right ventricular outflow tract. Main diagnostic groups were aortic valve pathology (n = 112, 35%), tetralogy of Fallot (n = 71, 22%), and pulmonary atresia with ventricular septal defect (n = 46, 14%). Kaplan-Meier analyses were done for survival, valve-related reoperation, and valve-related events. In addition, Cox regression analysis was used for evaluation of potential risk factors. RESULTS Mean age at operation was 18 years (range, 7 days to 61 years). Mean follow-up was 4 years (range, 2 days to 12 years). Twelve patients (4%) died within 30 days after operation. Patient survival was 90% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86% to 94%) at 5 years and 88% (95% CI, 83% to 94%) at 8 years. Twenty-four reoperations were required for allograft dysfunction in 23 patients; 21 allografts were replaced. Freedom from valve-related reoperation was 91% (95% CI, 86% to 95) at 5 years and 87% (95% CI, 81% to 93%) at 8 years. Twenty-nine valve-related events were reported (2 deaths, 24 reoperations, 2 balloon dilatations, and 1 endocarditis). Freedom from valve-related events was 90% (95% CI, 85% to 94%) at 5 years after implantation, and 84% (95% CI, 77% to 91%) at 8 years. Risk factors for accelerated allograft failure were extra-anatomic position of the allograft (p = 0.03; hazard ratio, 9.7) and the use of an aortic allograft (p = 0.02; hazard ratio, 2.4). CONCLUSIONS Right ventricular outflow tract reconstruction with an allograft conduit has good medium-term results, although progression of allograft degeneration is noted. Aortic allografts should preferably not be used for reconstruction of the right ventricular outflow tract.

Eosinophilic myocarditis in patients awaiting heart transplantation

ObjectiveTo determine the possible causative agents of eosinophilic or hypersensitivity myocarditis in patients awaiting heart transplantation. DesignConsecutive patient series. SettingLarge university-affiliated hospital. PatientsA total of 190 consecutive patients who had heart transplantation at our center. InterventionsThe myocardium of the explanted heart was examined for a mixed inflammatory cell infiltrate containing an identifiable component of eosinophils. The relative quantity of each cell type was evaluated by a semiquantitative grading system (scored 0 to 3). The clinical findings and medications were reviewed, and patients were followed after heart transplantation. Measurements and Main ResultsEosinophilic myocarditis (EM) was found in the explanted heart in 14 patients (7.4%). Myocardial infiltration by eosinophils ranged from mild (n = 6), often focal involvement to marked (n = 8), usually multifocal or widespread involvement. Twelve patients (86%) had peripheral blood eosinophilia before transplant, and in ten (71%), the eosinophil count at least doubled. Loop or thiazide diuretics were used in all 14 patients, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors were used in 12. Preoperative characteristics were similar in patients with and without EM, except for a higher frequency of inotropic support and assist devices in EM patients. Dobutamine was used in 12 (86%) and dopamine in seven (50%; one with dopamine alone), and one patient (7%) received neither dopamine nor dobutamine. In two patients receiving dobutamine and one receiving dopamine, tapering or discontinuation of the inotropic infusion resulted in a significant diminution of the peripheral eosinophilia and the EM before transplantation. Postoperative survival in patients with and without EM was similar at 8 yrs (50% ± 13% and 54% ± 4%, p = .34). No patient in this study has had EM on biopsy after transplant. ConclusionsEM is a complication of multiple drug therapy in patients awaiting heart transplantation, and should be suspected when peripheral blood eosinophilia is present or the eosinophil count increases by at least two-fold. EM may be related to intravenous inotropic therapy, and this is the first study to document improvement in myocardial pathology after inotropic drug withdrawal. Hypersensitivity to thiazide and loop diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, and antibiotics must also be considered. Survival after heart transplantation is not impaired, and postoperative steroid therapy may prevent EM.

Prognosis after aortic root replacement with cryopreserved allografts in adults

BACKGROUND Aortic root replacement with cryopreserved allografts is associated with excellent hemodynamics, little endocarditis, low thromboembolic event rates, and no need for anticoagulation. There is, however, concern regarding the long-term durability of this valve substitute, especially in younger patients. Meta-analysis and microsimulation were used to calculate age-specific long-term prognosis after allograft aortic root replacement based on current evidence. METHODS Our centers experience with cryopreserved allograft aortic root replacement in 165 adult patients was combined in a meta-analysis with reported and individual results from four other hospitals. Using this information, the microsimulation model predicted age- and gender-specific total and reoperation-free and event-free life expectancy. RESULTS The pooled results comprised 629 patients with a total follow-up of 1860 patient-years (range 0 to 12.8 years). Annual risks were 0.6% for thromboembolism, 0.05% for bleeding, 0.5% for endocarditis, and 0.5% for nonstructural valve failure. Structural allograft failure requiring reoperation occurred in 15 patients, and a patient age-specific Weibull function was constructed accordingly. Calculated total life expectancy varied from 27 years in a 25-year-old to 12 years in a 65-year-old male; corresponding actual lifetime risk of reoperation was 89% and 35%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Cryopreserved aortic allografts have an age-related limited durability. This results in a considerable lifetime risk of reoperation, especially in young patients. The combination of meta-analysis and microsimulation provides an appropriate tool for estimating individualized long-term outcome after aortic valve replacement and can be useful both for patient counseling and prognostic research purposes.