Julia Seeger

Transfemoral aortic valve implantation with the repositionable Lotus valve compared with the balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve

BACKGROUND The rate of paravalvular aortic insufficiency (AI) with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with first generation devices was higher compared with surgical replacement. Residual AI after TAVI has been linked to an increased mortality rate. We compared two second generation TAVI devices - the repositionable Lotus valve with the balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve - regarding procedural and 30 day outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS In 78 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVI we evaluated post-procedural paravalvular AI, device success and early safety according to VARC criteria. Valve size was based on a 256-multislice computed tomography. Patients were followed for 30 days. The Lotus valve (N = 26) and the Edwards Sapien 3 valve (N = 52) were implanted under fluoroscopic guidance. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Perimeter derived annulus diameter did not differ with 25.7 ± 1.6mm for Lotus and 25.2 ± 2.1mm for Edwards Sapien 3 patients. After TAVI aortography and transthoracic echocardiography revealed no moderate or severe AI. The rate of mild AI was 12% for Lotus and 15% for Edwards Sapien 3 (p = 0.62). There were no deaths, stroke, annulus rupture or coronary obstruction. Device success was 96% and 98% (p = 0.61), early safety according to VARC 11.5% in both groups (p = 1.0) and the need for pacemaker implantation 27% and 4% (p < 0.003), respectively. CONCLUSIONS TAVI with second-generation devices was associated with no moderate or severe AI and a low rate of mild AI. Device success was high for Lotus and Edwards Sapien 3 while the need for permanent pacemaker was significantly higher with the Lotus valve.

Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis Treated With the Repositionable and Retrievable Lotus Valve

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe aortic stenosis is a well-established and safe therapeutic option. However, data on TAVI in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis are limited and show a higher rate of moderate-severe aortic regurgitation compared with TAVI for tricuspid aortic valve stenosis. We report for the first time, to our knowledge, the use of the mechanically deployed Lotus valve in bicuspid aortic stenosis. In our patient who had severe bicuspid aortic stenosis and was at high surgical risk, the implantation of the repositionable and completely retrievable Lotus valve was a safe and controlled procedure resulting in no relevant aortic regurgitation.

Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation with the New Edwards Sapien 3 Valve for Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis—Impact of Valve Size in a Single Center Experience

Aims The third generation Edwards Sapien 3 (Edwards Lifesciences Inc., Irvine, California) system was optimized to reduce residual aortic regurgitation and vascular complications. Methods and Results 235 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis were prospectively enrolled. Transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI) were performed without general anesthesia by transfemoral approach. Patients were followed for 30 days. Patients received 23mm (N = 77), 26mm (N = 91) or 29mm (N = 67) valve based on pre-procedural 256 multislice computer tomography. Mean oversizing did not differ between the 3 valves. There was no residual moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. Rate of mild aortic regurgitation and regurgitation index did not differ between groups. There was no switch to general anesthesia or conversion to surgery. Rate of major vascular complication was 3.0% with no difference between valve and delivery sheath sizes. Within 30 days rates of all cause mortality (2.6%) and stroke (2.1%) were low. Conclusions In patients with severe aortic stenosis transfemoral TAVI with the Edwards Sapien 3 valve without general anesthesia was associated with a high rate of device success, no moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation, low rates of major vascular complication, mortality and stroke within 30 days with no difference between the 3 valve sizes. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02162069

Midregional-proAtrial Natriuretic Peptide and High Sensitive Troponin T Strongly Predict Adverse Outcome in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Repair of Mitral Valve Regurgitation

Background It is not known whether biomarkers of hemodynamic stress, myocardial necrosis, and renal function might predict adverse outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous repair of severe mitral valve insufficiency. Thus, we aimed to assess the predictive value of various established and emerging biomarkers for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in these patients. Methods Thirty-four patients with symptomatic severe mitral valve insufficiency with a mean STS-Score for mortality of 12.6% and a mean logistic EuroSCORE of 19.7% undergoing MitraClip therapy were prospectively included in this study. Plasma concentrations of mid regional-proatrial natriuretic peptide (MR-proANP), Cystatin C, high-sensitive C-reactive protein (hsCRP), high-sensitive troponin T (hsTnT), N-terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), galectin-3, and soluble ST-2 (interleukin 1 receptor-like 1) were measured directly before procedure. MACE was defined as cardiovascular death and hospitalization for heart failure (HF). Results During a median follow-up of 211 days (interquartile range 133 to 333 days), 9 patients (26.5%) experienced MACE (death: 7 patients, rehospitalization for HF: 2 patients). Thirty day MACE-rate was 5.9% (death: 2 patients, no rehospitalization for HF). Baseline concentrations of hsTnT (Median 92.6 vs 25.2 ng/L), NT-proBNP (Median 11251 vs 1974 pg/mL) and MR-proANP (Median 755.6 vs 318.3 pmol/L, all p<0.001) were clearly higher in those experiencing an event vs event-free patients, while other clinical variables including STS-Score and logistic EuroSCORE did not differ significantly. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, NT-proBNP and in particular hsTnT and MR-proANP above the median discriminated between those experiencing an event vs event-free patients. This was further corroborated by C-statistics where areas under the ROC curve for prediction of MACE using the respective median values were 0.960 for MR-proANP, 0.907 for NT-proBNP, and 0.822 for hsTnT. Conclusions MR-proANP and hsTnT strongly predict cardiovascular death and rehospitalization for HF in patients undergoing percutaneous repair of mitral valve insufficiency. Both markers might be useful components in new scoring systems to better predict short- and potentially long-term mortality and morbidity after MitraClip procedure.

Transfemoral valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves using the new balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 valve

Surgical aortic bioprosthetic valves deteriorate 10 to 20 years after operation. Valve‐in‐valve implantation with first generation transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices has shown to be feasible. We report a first case series with the new Edwards Sapien 3 valve for transfemoral aortic valve‐in‐valve implantation.

Impact of suture mediated femoral access site closure with the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide system on outcome in transfemoral aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND Management of femoral access site is an important issue in transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and crucial for acute and long-term outcome. Data on vascular closure devices in this setting are limited. We evaluated safety and efficacy of the Prostar XL compared to the ProGlide suture-based vascular closure device. METHODS AND RESULTS We enrolled 585 patients undergoing percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Outcomes were defined according to Valve academic research consortium (VARC)-2 criteria. In 237 (40.5%) patients femoral access site closure was performed using the Prostar and in 348 patients (59.6%) using the ProGlide vascular closure device. There was no significant difference in patient baseline characteristics including single and dual antiplatelet therapies. Sheath outer diameter was significantly larger in the ProGlide compared with the Prostar group (7.7±1.5 vs. 7.9±0.5mm; p=0.001). Closure device failure according to VARC-2 criteria was significantly more frequent with the Prostar versus ProGlide device (19% vs. 4.6%; p<0.01). Need for surgical repair (11.8% vs. 0%, p<0.01), major (12.2% vs. 2.3%, p<0.01) and minor (17.3% vs. 5.7%, p<0.01) vascular complications and bleeding complications (5.5% vs. 2.0%, p=0.02) occurred significantly more often with the Prostar device compared with the ProGlide system. In addition, in-hospital mortality was higher with Prostar compared with ProGlide (5.9% vs. 2.0%; p=0.01). CONCLUSION Femoral access site closure with the ProGlide device compared with the Prostar device in transfemoral aortic valve implantation was associated with significantly lower rates of closure device failure, minor and major bleedings and a significantly lower in-hospital mortality. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.govNCT02162069.

Transfemoral aortic valve implantation with the repositionable Lotus valve for treatment of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: results from a single-centre experience.

AIMS The aim of the study was to evaluate the procedural and 30-day results for the repositionable Lotus valve in patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve implantation in a single-centre experience. METHODS AND RESULTS We prospectively enrolled 110 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (NCT02162069). All procedures were performed without general anaesthesia by the transfemoral approach. Patients were followed for 30 days. Patients received the 23 mm (n=20), 25 mm (n=43) or 27 mm (n=47) Lotus device. Mean oversizing in relation to annulus or left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) did not differ among groups. There was no residual moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. The rate of mild aortic regurgitation was low at 9.1%. There was no valve embolisation, no need for a second valve and no conversion to surgery. The need for a new pacemaker implantation due to complete (third degree) or type II (Mobitz) second degree atrioventricular block was 24.1%, excluding patients with previously implanted devices. Within 30 days the rates of all-cause mortality and stroke were low. CONCLUSIONS In patients with severe aortic stenosis, transfemoral TAVI with the repositionable Lotus valve was associated with a high rate of device success, no moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation, low rates of major vascular complications and mortality within 30 days.

Paclitaxel-coated balloon plus bare-metal stent for de-novo coronary artery disease: final 5-year results of a randomized prospective multicenter trial.

BackgroundThe PERfECT Stent Study compared paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty plus bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation with BMS alone in de-novo lesions in native coronary artery disease. Angiographic follow-up after 6 months showed the superiority of the additional PCB. We evaluated a potential late catch-up phenomenon with the use of PCB. Methods and resultsIn the prospective, multicenter, single-blind, randomized PERfECT Stent trial, 120 patients were assigned to either PCB angioplasty plus BMS implantation or BMS alone. For BMS, the endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent was used. Dual antiplatelet therapy was recommended for 3 months. The clinical endpoint for 5-year follow-up was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction attributed to the target vessel, or target lesion revascularization. The follow-up rate after 5 years was 97%. Baseline and procedural characteristics did not differ. At the 5-year follow-up, clinically driven target lesion revascularization was 23.2% in the BMS group versus 15% with PCB plus BMS (P=0.26). The clinical endpoint (major adverse cardiac event) was 30.4% with BMS and with 23.5% lower with PCB plus BMS. No definite or probable stent thrombosis was found in either group with a dual antiplatelet therapy for 3 months for the total period. ConclusionPCB angioplasty plus BMS was superior to BMS alone for the treatment of de-novo lesions. The combined clinical endpoint was lower with PCB plus BMS at 6 months and remained lower after 5 years. There was no late catch-up phenomenon (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov; NCT 00732953).

TCT-744 New generation devices for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (Boston Scientific Lotus Valve and Edwards Sapien 3) are superior compared with last generation devices (Edwards XT and Medtronic Corevalve) with respect to VARC-2 outcome.

TCT-744 New generation devices for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (Boston Scientific Lotus Valve and Edwards Sapien 3) are superior compared with last generation devices (Edwards XT and Medtronic Corevalve) with respect to VARC-2 outcome Julia Seeger, Birgid Gonska, Christoph Rodewald, Wolfgang Rottbauer, Jochen Wöhrle Ulm University, Ulm, Germany; University hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany; Uniklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany; University Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Baden-Württemberg, Germany; University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Outcome With the Repositionable and Retrievable Boston Scientific Lotus Valve Compared With the Balloon-Expandable Edwards Sapien 3 Valve in Patients Undergoing Transfemoral Aortic Valve Replacement

Background— New generation devices for transfemoral aortic valve replacement were optimized on valve positioning and reduction of residual aortic regurgitation. We compared 30-day, 12-month, and 24-month outcomes of the Boston Scientific Lotus valve (Lotus) and the balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 (ES3) valve. Primary end point was all-cause mortality or disabling stroke within 12 months. Methods and Results— Between 2014 and 2016, 537 patients were enrolled at our center, and 202 patients received Lotus and 335 ES3. There was no residual moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. Rate of mild aortic regurgitation was lower with the repositionable and retrievable Lotus valve compared with the ES3. Rate of pacemaker implantation was significantly higher with the Lotus valve compared with the ES3 valve (36.1% versus 14.9%, P<0.01). Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 early safety end point at 30 days was 7.4% with both devices with no difference in all-cause mortality (Lotus, 1.9%; ES3, 1.8%; P=0.87), rate of disabling stroke (Lotus, 1.5%; ES3, 2.1%; P=0.62), or major vascular complications (Lotus, 2.9%; ES3, 2.4%; P=0.69). The primary end point at 12 months was similar between groups. In a propensity score–matched comparison, there was no difference in the primary end point within 12 months (Lotus, 15.5%; ES3, 18.6%; P=0.69) and 24 months (Lotus, 21.9%; ES3, 26.4%; P=0.49). Conclusions— Transfemoral aortic valve replacement with the ES3 and the Lotus were associated with similar 30-day, 12-month, and 24-month clinical outcomes. Need for permanent pacemaker implantation was significantly higher with the repositionable Lotus device. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02162069.