Lars Søndergaard

Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients

Background Although transcatheter aortic‐valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk, less is known about comparative outcomes among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate surgical risk. Methods We evaluated the clinical outcomes in intermediate‐risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis in a randomized trial comparing TAVR (performed with the use of a self‐expanding prosthesis) with surgical aortic‐valve replacement. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or disabling stroke at 24 months in patients undergoing attempted aortic‐valve replacement. We used Bayesian analytical methods (with a margin of 0.07) to evaluate the noninferiority of TAVR as compared with surgical valve replacement. Results A total of 1746 patients underwent randomization at 87 centers. Of these patients, 1660 underwent an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 79.8±6.2 years, and all were at intermediate risk for surgery (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 4.5±1.6%). At 24 months, the estimated incidence of the primary end point was 12.6% in the TAVR group and 14.0% in the surgery group (95% credible interval [Bayesian analysis] for difference, ‐5.2 to 2.3%; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). Surgery was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and transfusion requirements, whereas TAVR had higher rates of residual aortic regurgitation and need for pacemaker implantation. TAVR resulted in lower mean gradients and larger aortic‐valve areas than surgery. Structural valve deterioration at 24 months did not occur in either group. Conclusions TAVR was a noninferior alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, with a different pattern of adverse events associated with each procedure. (Funded by Medtronic; SURTAVI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01586910.)

Stem Cell Mobilization Induced by Subcutaneous Granulocyte-Colony Stimulating Factor to Improve Cardiac Regeneration After Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Result of the Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Stem Cells in Myocardial Infarction (STEMMI) Trial

Background— Phase 1 clinical trials of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatment after myocardial infarction have indicated that G-CSF treatment is safe and may improve left ventricular function. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial aimed to assess the efficacy of subcutaneous G-CSF injections on left ventricular function in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Methods and Results— Seventy-eight patients (62 men; average age, 56 years) with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were included after successful primary percutaneous coronary stent intervention <12 hours after symptom onset. Patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with G-CSF (10 &mgr;g/kg of body weight) or placebo for 6 days. The primary end point was change in systolic wall thickening from baseline to 6 months determined by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). An independent core laboratory analyzed all MRI examinations. Systolic wall thickening improved 17% in the infarct area in the G-CSF group and 17% in the placebo group (P=1.0). Comparable results were found in infarct border and noninfarcted myocardium. Left ventricular ejection fraction improved similarly in the 2 groups measured by both MRI (8.5 versus 8.0; P=0.9) and echocardiography (5.7 versus 3.7; P=0.7). The risk of severe clinical adverse events was not increased by G-CSF. In addition, in-stent late lumen loss and target vessel revascularization rate in the follow-up period were similar in the 2 groups. Conclusions— Bone marrow stem cell mobilization with subcutaneous G-CSF is safe but did not lead to further improvement in ventricular function after acute myocardial infarction compared with the recovery observed in the placebo group.

Possible Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis in Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves

BACKGROUND A finding of reduced aortic-valve leaflet motion was noted on computed tomography (CT) in a patient who had a stroke after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) during an ongoing clinical trial. This finding raised a concern about possible subclinical leaflet thrombosis and prompted further investigation. METHODS We analyzed data obtained from 55 patients in a clinical trial of TAVR and from two single-center registries that included 132 patients who were undergoing either TAVR or surgical aortic-valve bioprosthesis implantation. We obtained four-dimensional, volume-rendered CT scans along with data on anticoagulation and clinical outcomes (including strokes and transient ischemic attacks [TIAs]). RESULTS Reduced leaflet motion was noted on CT in 22 of 55 patients (40%) in the clinical trial and in 17 of 132 patients (13%) in the two registries. Reduced leaflet motion was detected among patients with multiple bioprosthesis types, including transcatheter and surgical bioprostheses. Therapeutic anticoagulation with warfarin, as compared with dual antiplatelet therapy, was associated with a decreased incidence of reduced leaflet motion (0% and 55%, respectively, P=0.01 in the clinical trial; and 0% and 29%, respectively, P=0.04 in the pooled registries). In patients who were reevaluated with follow-up CT, restoration of leaflet motion was noted in all 11 patients who were receiving anticoagulation and in 1 of 10 patients who were not receiving anticoagulation (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the incidence of stroke or TIA between patients with reduced leaflet motion and those with normal leaflet motion in the clinical trial (2 of 22 patients and 0 of 33 patients, respectively; P=0.16), although in the pooled registries, a significant difference was detected (3 of 17 patients and 1 of 115 patients, respectively; P=0.007). CONCLUSIONS Reduced aortic-valve leaflet motion was shown in patients with bioprosthetic aortic valves. The condition resolved with therapeutic anticoagulation. The effect of this finding on clinical outcomes including stroke needs further investigation. (Funded by St. Jude Medical and Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute; Portico-IDE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02000115; SAVORY registry, NCT02426307; and RESOLVE registry, NCT02318342.).

Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis 1-Year Results From the All-Comers NOTION Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an option in certain high-risk surgical patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. It is unknown whether TAVR can be safely introduced to lower-risk patients. OBJECTIVES The NOTION (Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Trial) randomized clinical trial compared TAVR with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in an all-comers patient cohort. METHODS Patients ≥ 70 years old with severe aortic valve stenosis and no significant coronary artery disease were randomized 1:1 to TAVR using a self-expanding bioprosthesis versus SAVR. The primary outcome was the composite rate of death from any cause, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year. RESULTS A total of 280 patients were randomized at 3 Nordic centers. Mean age was 79.1 years, and 81.8% were considered low-risk patients. In the intention-to-treat population, no significant difference in the primary endpoint was found (13.1% vs. 16.3%; p = 0.43 for superiority). The result did not change in the as-treated population. No difference in the rate of cardiovascular death or prosthesis reintervention was found. Compared with SAVR-treated patients, TAVR-treated patients had more conduction abnormalities requiring pacemaker implantation, larger improvement in effective orifice area, more total aortic valve regurgitation, and higher New York Heart Association functional class at 1 year. SAVR-treated patients had more major or life-threatening bleeding, cardiogenic shock, acute kidney injury (stage II or III), and new-onset or worsening atrial fibrillation at 30 days than did TAVR-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS In the NOTION trial, no significant difference between TAVR and SAVR was found for the composite rate of death from any cause, stroke, or MI after 1 year. (Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention Trial [NOTION]; NCT01057173).

Antiremodeling effects on the left ventricle during beta-blockade with metoprolol in the treatment of chronic heart failure.

OBJECTIVES The purpose of the study was to investigate the effects of beta1-blockade on left ventricular (LV) size and function for patients with chronic heart failure. BACKGROUND Large-scale trials have shown that a marked decrease in mortality can be obtained by treatment of chronic heart failure with beta-adrenergic blocking agents. Possible mechanisms behind this effect remain yet to be fully elucidated, and previous studies have presented insignificant results regarding suspected LV antiremodeling effects. METHODS In this randomized, placebo-controlled and double-blind substudy to the Metoprolol CR/XL Randomized Intervention Trial in Heart Failure (MERIT-HF), 41 patients were examined with magnetic resonance imaging three times in a six-month period, assessing LV dimensions and function. RESULTS Decreases in both LV end-diastolic volume index (150 ml/m2 at baseline to 126 ml/m2 after six months, p = 0.007) and LV end-systolic volume index (107 ml/m2 to 81 ml/m2, p = 0.001) were found, whereas LV ejection fraction increased in the metoprolol CR/XL group (29% to 37%, p = 0.005). No significant changes were seen in the placebo group regarding these variables. Left ventricular stroke volume index remained unchanged, whereas LV mass index decreased in both groups (175 g/m2 to 160 g/m2 in the placebo group [p = 0.005] and 179 g/m2 to 164 g/m2 in the metoprolol CR/XL group [p = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS This study is the first randomized study to demonstrate that the beta1-blocker metoprolol CR/XL has antiremodeling effects on the LV in patients with chronic heart failure and consequently provides an explanation for the highly significant decrease in mortality from worsening heart failure found in the MERIT-HF trial.

Patent Foramen Ovale Closure or Antiplatelet Therapy for Cryptogenic Stroke

BACKGROUND The efficacy of closure of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) in the prevention of recurrent stroke after cryptogenic stroke is uncertain. We investigated the effect of PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy versus antiplatelet therapy alone on the risks of recurrent stroke and new brain infarctions. METHODS In this multinational trial involving patients with a PFO who had had a cryptogenic stroke, we randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to undergo PFO closure plus antiplatelet therapy (PFO closure group) or to receive antiplatelet therapy alone (antiplatelet‐only group). Imaging of the brain was performed at the baseline screening and at 24 months. The coprimary end points were freedom from clinical evidence of ischemic stroke (reported here as the percentage of patients who had a recurrence of stroke) through at least 24 months after randomization and the 24‐month incidence of new brain infarction, which was a composite of clinical ischemic stroke or silent brain infarction detected on imaging. RESULTS We enrolled 664 patients (mean age, 45.2 years), of whom 81% had moderate or large interatrial shunts. During a median follow‐up of 3.2 years, clinical ischemic stroke occurred in 6 of 441 patients (1.4%) in the PFO closure group and in 12 of 223 patients (5.4%) in the antiplatelet‐only group (hazard ratio, 0.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.62; P=0.002). The incidence of new brain infarctions was significantly lower in the PFO closure group than in the antiplatelet‐only group (22 patients [5.7%] vs. 20 patients [11.3%]; relative risk, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.91; P=0.04), but the incidence of silent brain infarction did not differ significantly between the study groups (P=0.97). Serious adverse events occurred in 23.1% of the patients in the PFO closure group and in 27.8% of the patients in the antiplatelet‐only group (P=0.22). Serious device‐related adverse events occurred in 6 patients (1.4%) in the PFO closure group, and atrial fibrillation occurred in 29 patients (6.6%) after PFO closure. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with a PFO who had had a cryptogenic stroke, the risk of subsequent ischemic stroke was lower among those assigned to PFO closure combined with antiplatelet therapy than among those assigned to antiplatelet therapy alone; however, PFO closure was associated with higher rates of device complications and atrial fibrillation. (Funded by W.L. Gore and Associates; Gore REDUCE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00738894.)

Subclinical leaflet thrombosis in surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves: an observational study

BACKGROUND Subclinical leaflet thrombosis of bioprosthetic aortic valves after transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) has been found with CT imaging. The objective of this study was to report the prevalence of subclinical leaflet thrombosis in surgical and transcatheter aortic valves and the effect of novel oral anticoagulants (NOACs) on the subclinical leaflet thrombosis and subsequent valve haemodynamics and clinical outcomes on the basis of two registries of patients who had CT imaging done after TAVR or SAVR. METHODS Patients enrolled between Dec 22, 2014, and Jan 18, 2017, in the RESOLVE registry, and between June 2, 2014, and Sept 28, 2016, in the SAVORY registry, had CT imaging done with a dedicated four-dimensional volume-rendered imaging protocol at varying intervals after TAVR and SAVR. We defined subclinical leaflet thrombosis as the presence of reduced leaflet motion, along with corresponding hypoattenuating lesions shown with CT. We collected data for baseline demographics, antithrombotic therapy, and clinical outcomes. We analysed all CT scans, echocardiograms, and neurological events in a masked fashion. FINDINGS Of the 931 patients who had CT imaging done (657 [71%] in the RESOLVE registry and 274 [29%] in the SAVORY registry), 890 [96%] had interpretable CT scans (626 [70%] in the RESOLVE registry and 264 [30%] in the SAVORY registry). 106 (12%) of 890 patients had subclinical leaflet thrombosis, including five (4%) of 138 with thrombosis of surgical valves versus 101 (13%) of 752 with thrombosis of transcatheter valves (p=0·001). The median time from aortic valve replacement to CT for the entire cohort was 83 days (IQR 33-281). Subclinical leaflet thrombosis was less frequent among patients receiving anticoagulants (eight [4%] of 224) than among those receiving dual antiplatelet therapy (31 [15%] of 208; p<0·0001); NOACs were equally as effective as warfarin (three [3%] of 107 vs five [4%] of 117; p=0·72). Subclinical leaflet thrombosis resolved in 36 (100%) of 36 patients (warfarin 24 [67%]; NOACs 12 [33%]) receiving anticoagulants, whereas it persisted in 20 (91%) of 22 patients not receiving anticoagulants (p<0·0001). A greater proportion of patients with subclinical leaflet thrombosis had aortic valve gradients of more than 20 mm Hg and increases in aortic valve gradients of more than 10 mm Hg (12 [14%] of 88) than did those with normal leaflet motion (seven [1%] of 632; p<0·0001). Although stroke rates were not different between those with (4·12 strokes per 100 person-years) or without (1·92 strokes per 100 person-years) reduced leaflet motion (p=0·10), subclinical leaflet thrombosis was associated with increased rates of transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs; 4·18 TIAs per 100 person-years vs 0·60 TIAs per 100 person-years; p=0·0005) and all strokes or TIAs (7·85 vs 2·36 per 100 person-years; p=0·001). INTERPRETATION Subclinical leaflet thrombosis occurred frequently in bioprosthetic aortic valves, more commonly in transcatheter than in surgical valves. Anticoagulation (both NOACs and warfarin), but not dual antiplatelet therapy, was effective in prevention or treatment of subclinical leaflet thrombosis. Subclinical leaflet thrombosis was associated with increased rates of TIAs and strokes or TIAs. Despite excellent outcomes after TAVR with the new-generation valves, prevention and treatment of subclinical leaflet thrombosis might offer a potential opportunity for further improvement in valve haemodynamics and clinical outcomes. FUNDING RESOLVE (Cedars-Sinai Heart Institute) and SAVORY (Rigshospitalet).

Quantification of aortic regurgitation by magnetic resonance velocity mapping

The use of magnetic resonance (MR) velocity mapping in the quantification of aortic valvular blood flow was examined in 10 patients with angiographically verified aortic regurgitation. MR velocity mapping succeeded in identifying and quantifying the regurgitation in all patients, and the regurgitant volume determined with MR velocity mapping agreed well with the grade obtained by aortic root angiography (p < 0.02). The accuracy in quantification of the aortic valvular flow rate was demonstrated by a significant correlation between the stroke volume (ml) measured by MR velocity mapping and calculated from MR imaging of the left ventricular end-diastolic and end-systolic volumes in eight patients (Y = 0.89 x X + 11, r = 0.97, p < 0.001). This finding was confirmed by a good agreement between the net cardiac output (L/min) quantified with MR velocity mapping and simultaneous 125I-indicator dilution measurement in all subjects (Y = 0.89 x X + 0.08, r = 0.82, p < 0.01). In conclusion, MR velocity mapping may be used as a noninvasive tool in the quantification of aortic regurgitation.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease.

BACKGROUND Limited information exists describing the results of transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease (TAV-in-BAV). OBJECTIVES This study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes of a large cohort of patients undergoing TAV-in-BAV. METHODS We retrospectively collected baseline characteristics, procedural data, and clinical follow-up findings from 12 centers in Europe and Canada that had performed TAV-in-BAV. RESULTS A total of 139 patients underwent TAV-in-BAV with the balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) (n = 48) or self-expandable THV (n = 91) systems. Patient mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality scores were 78.0 ± 8.9 years and 4.9 ± 3.4%, respectively. BAV stenosis occurred in 65.5%, regurgitation in 0.7%, and mixed disease in 33.8% of patients. Incidence of type 0 BAV was 26.7%; type 1 BAV was 68.3%; and type 2 BAV was 5.0%. Multislice computed tomography (MSCT)-based TAV sizing was used in 63.5% of patients (77.1% balloon-expandable THV vs. 56.0% self-expandable THV, p = 0.02). Procedural mortality was 3.6%, with TAV embolization in 2.2% and conversion to surgery in 2.2%. The mean aortic gradient decreased from 48.7 ± 16.5 mm Hg to 11.4 ± 9.9 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). Post-implantation aortic regurgitation (AR) grade ≥ 2 occurred in 28.4% (19.6% balloon-expandable THV vs. 32.2% self-expandable THV, p = 0.11) but was prevalent in only 17.4% when MSCT-based TAV sizing was performed (16.7% balloon-expandable THV vs. 17.6% self-expandable THV, p = 0.99). MSCT sizing was associated with reduced AR on multivariate analysis (odds ratio [OR]: 0.19, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.08 to 0.45; p < 0.0001). Thirty-day device safety, success, and efficacy were noted in 79.1%, 89.9%, and 84.9% of patients, respectively. One-year mortality was 17.5%. Major vascular complications were associated with increased 1-year mortality (OR: 5.66, 95% CI: 1.21 to 26.43; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS TAV-in-BAV is feasible with encouraging short- and intermediate-term clinical outcomes. Importantly, a high incidence of post-implantation AR is observed, which appears to be mitigated by MSCT-based TAV sizing. Given the suboptimal echocardiographic results, further study is required to evaluate long-term efficacy.

Combination therapy with bosentan and sildenafil in Eisenmenger syndrome: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial

AIMS To evaluate the efficacy of combining the dual endothelin receptor antagonist, bosentan, and the phosfodiesterase-5-inhibitor, sildenafil, in patients with Eisenmenger syndrome. METHODS AND RESULTS The study was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, cross-over design. Patients with Eisenmenger syndrome (n = 21) were treated open label with bosentan for 9 months. After 3 months, sildenafil/placebo was added for 3 months, and a cross-over was performed for the last 3 months. At baseline and after 3, 6, and 9 months, patients were examined with 6 min walk test, oxygen saturations, N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide, New York Heart Association (NYHA) classification, cardiac catheterization, and magnetic resonance imaging. The primary endpoint was changed in 6 min walk distance (MWD). Bosentan improved the 6 MWD (377 vs. 414 m, P = 0.001), pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) (28 vs. 22 wood, P = 0.01), and pulmonary blood flow (2.6 vs. 3.5 L/min, P = 0.01). Adding sildenafil to bosentan did not improve the 6 MWD significantly (21 vs. 8 m, P = 0.48), but increased saturation at rest (2.9 vs. -1.8%, P < 0.01). CONCLUSION In Eisenmenger syndrome, treatment with bosentan significantly improved walking distance, pulmonary blood flow, and PVR. Adding sildenafil to bosentan did not significantly improve walking distance but did increase saturation at rest. http://www.ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00303004.