Marco Barbanti

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Failed Bioprosthetic Surgical Valves

IMPORTANCE Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed. OBJECTIVE To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 [SD, 9.8] years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% [interquartile range, 7.7%-16%]). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (>21 and <25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class. RESULTS Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 [39.4%]), regurgitation (n = 139 [30.3%]), and combined (n = 139 [30.3%]). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% [95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%]; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: 3-year outcomes of self-expanding CoreValve prosthesis

AIMS The paucity of evidences about the long-term durability of currently available transcatheter prostheses is one of the main issues of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We sought to assess 3-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI with the third generation CoreValve prosthesis (Medtronic Incorporation, MN, USA). METHODS AND RESULTS From the Italian CoreValve registry, 181 who underwent TAVI from June 2007 to August 2008 and eligible for 3-year follow-up were analysed. All outcomes were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium. All-cause mortality at 1, 2, and 3 years was 23.6, 30.3, and 34.8%, respectively. Cardiovascular death at 1, 2, and 3 years was 11.2, 12.1, and 13.5%, respectively. The actuarial survival free from a composite of death, major stroke, myocardial infarction, and life-threatening bleeding was 69.6% at 1 year, 63.5% at 2 years, and 59.7% at 3 years. Patients with renal insufficiency had a higher mortality at 3-year follow-up (49.0 vs. 29.2%, P = 0.007); moreover, patients experiencing post-procedural major or life-threatening bleeding had a higher rate of mortality already seen at 30 days (21.6 vs. 2.8%; P < 0.001) and this result was sustained at 3-year follow-up (62.2 vs. 27.7%; P < 0.001). Mean pressure gradients decreased from 52.2 ± 18.1 mmHg (pre-TAVI) to 10.3 ± 3.1 mmHg (1-year post-TAVI) (P < 0.001); aortic valve area increased from 0.6 ± 0.2 cm(2) (pre-TAVI) to 1.8 ± 0.4 cm(2) (1-year post-TAVI); these results remained stable over the 3 years of follow-up. Paravalvular leak was observed in the majority of patients. There were no cases of progression to moderate or severe regurgitation. No cases of structural valve deterioration were observed. CONCLUSION This multicentre study demonstrates that TAVI with the 18-Fr CoreValve ReValving System is associated with sustained clinical and functional cardiovascular benefits in high-risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis up to 3-year follow-up. Non-cardiac causes accounted for the majority of deaths at follow-up.

The Impact of Integration of a Multidetector Computed Tomography Annulus Area Sizing Algorithm on Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement A Prospective, Multicenter, Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES This study prospectively investigated the impact of integration of a multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) annular area sizing algorithm on transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) outcomes. BACKGROUND Appreciation of the 3-dimensional, noncircular geometry of the aortic annulus is important for transcatheter heart valve (THV) sizing. METHODS Patients being evaluated for TAVR in 4 centers underwent pre-procedural MDCT. Recommendations for balloon-expandable THV size selection were based on an MDCT sizing algorithm with an optimal goal of modest annulus area oversizing (5% to 10%). Consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with the algorithm (MDCT group) were compared with consecutive patients without the algorithm (control group). The primary endpoint was the incidence of more than mild paravalvular regurgitation (PAR), and the secondary endpoint was the composite of in-hospital death, aortic annulus rupture, and severe PAR. RESULTS Of 266 patients, 133 consecutive patients underwent TAVR (SAPIEN XT THV) in the MDCT group and 133 consecutive patients were in the control group. More than mild PAR was present in 5.3% (7 of 133) of the MDCT group and in 12.8% (17 of 133) in the control group (p = 0.032). The combined secondary endpoint occurred in 3.8% (5 of 133) of the MDCT group and in 11.3% (15 of 133) of the control group (p = 0.02), driven by the difference of severe PAR. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of an MDCT annulus area sizing algorithm for TAVR reduces PAR. Three-dimensional aortic annular assessment and annular area sizing should be considered for TAVR.

Percutaneous mitral valve repair with the MitraClip system: acute results from a real world setting.

Aims This study sought to evaluate the feasibility and early outcomes of a percutaneous edge-to-edge repair approach for mitral valve regurgitation with the MitraClip® system (Evalve, Inc., Menlo Park, CA, USA). Methods and results Patients were selected for the procedure based on the consensus of a multidisciplinary team. The primary efficacy endpoint was acute device success defined as clip placement with reduction of mitral regurgitation to ≤2+. The primary acute safety endpoint was 30-day freedom from major adverse events, defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, non-elective cardiac surgery for adverse events, renal failure, transfusion of >2 units of blood, ventilation for >48 h, deep wound infection, septicaemia, and new onset of atrial fibrillation. Thirty-one patients (median age 71, male 81%) were treated between August 2008 and July 2009. Eighteen patients (58%) presented with functional disease and 13 patients (42%) presented with organic degenerative disease. A clip was successfully implanted in 19 patients (61%) and two clips in 12 patients (39%). The median device implantation time was 80 min. At 30 days, there was an intra-procedural cardiac tamponade and a non-cardiac death, resulting in a primary safety endpoint of 93.6% [95% confidence interval (CI) 77.2–98.9]. Acute device success was observed in 96.8% of patients (95% CI 81.5–99.8). Compared with baseline, left ventricular diameters, diastolic left ventricular volume, diastolic annular septal–lateral dimension, and mitral valve area significantly diminished at 30 days. Conclusion Our initial results with the MitraClip device in a very small number of patients indicate that percutaneous edge-to-edge mitral valve repair is feasible and may be accomplished with favourable short-term safety and efficacy results.

Predictive factors, management, and clinical outcomes of coronary obstruction following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Insights from a large multicenter registry

OBJECTIVES This study sought to evaluate the main baseline and procedural characteristics, management, and clinical outcomes of patients from a large cohort of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) who suffered coronary obstruction (CO). BACKGROUND Very little data exist on CO following TAVI. METHODS This multicenter registry included 44 patients who suffered symptomatic CO following TAVI of 6,688 patients (0.66%). Pre-TAVI computed tomography data was available in 28 CO patients and in a control group of 345 patients (comparisons were performed including all patients and a cohort matched 1:1 by age, sex, previous coronary artery bypass graft, transcatheter valve type, and size). RESULTS Baseline and procedural variables associated with CO were older age (p < 0.001), female sex (p < 0.001), no previous coronary artery bypass graft (p = 0.043), the use of a balloon-expandable valve (p = 0.023), and previous surgical aortic bioprosthesis (p = 0.045). The left coronary artery was the most commonly involved (88.6%). The mean left coronary artery ostia height and sinus of Valsalva diameters were lower in patients with obstruction than in control subjects (10.6 ± 2.1 mm vs. 13.4 ± 2.1 mm, p < 0.001; 28.1 ± 3.8 mm vs. 31.9 ± 4.1 mm, p < 0.001). Differences between groups remained significant after the case-matched analysis (p < 0.001 for coronary height; p = 0.01 for sinus of Valsalva diameter). Most patients presented with persistent severe hypotension (68.2%) and electrocardiographic changes (56.8%). Percutaneous coronary intervention was attempted in 75% of the cases and was successful in 81.8%. Thirty-day mortality was 40.9%. After a median follow-up of 12 (2 to 18) months, the cumulative mortality rate was 45.5%, and there were no cases of stent thrombosis or reintervention. CONCLUSIONS Symptomatic CO following TAVI was a rare but life-threatening complication that occurred more frequently in women, in patients receiving a balloon-expandable valve, and in those with a previous surgical bioprosthesis. Lower-lying coronary ostium and shallow sinus of Valsalva were associated anatomic factors, and despite successful treatment, acute and late mortality remained very high, highlighting the importance of anticipating and preventing the occurrence of this complication.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Versus Aspirin Alone in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with clopidogrel and aspirin is a widely accepted strategy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), but this approach is not evidence based. The goal of the present study was to determine whether DAPT in patients undergoing TAVI is associated with improved outcomes compared to aspirin alone. From May 2009 to August 2010, consecutive patients were randomized to receive a 300-mg loading dose of clopidogrel on the day before TAVI followed by a 3-month maintenance daily dose of 75 mg plus aspirin 100 mg lifelong (DAPT group) or aspirin 100 mg alone (ASA group). The primary end point was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, major stroke, urgent or emergency conversion to surgery, or life-threatening bleeding. The cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events at 30 days and 6 months was 14% and 16%, respectively. No significant differences between the DAPT and ASA groups were noted at both 30 days (13% vs 15%, p = 0.71) and 6 months (18% vs 15%; p = 0.85). In conclusion, the strategy of adding clopidogrel to aspirin for 3 months after TAVI was not found to be superior to aspirin alone. These results must be confirmed in a larger randomized trial.

Treatment and Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Heart Valve Thrombosis

Background—Valve thrombosis has yet to be fully evaluated after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. This study aimed to report the prevalence, timing, and treatment of transcatheter heart valve (THV) thrombosis. Methods and Results—THV thrombosis was defined as follows (1) THV dysfunction secondary to thrombosis diagnosed based on response to anticoagulation therapy, imaging modality or histopathology findings, or (2) mobile mass detected on THV suspicious of thrombus, irrespective of dysfunction and in absence of infection. Between January 2008 and September 2013, 26 (0.61%) THV thromboses were reported out of 4266 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation in 12 centers. Of the 26 cases detected, 20 were detected in the Edwards Sapien/Sapien XT cohort and 6 in the Medtronic CoreValve cohort. In patients diagnosed with THV thrombosis, the median time to THV thrombosis post–transcatheter aortic valve implantation was 181 days (interquartile range, 45–313). The most common clinical presentation was exertional dyspnea (n=17; 65%), whereas 8 (31%) patients had no worsening symptoms. Echocardiographic findings included a markedly elevated mean aortic valve pressure gradient (40.5±14.0 mm Hg), presence of thickened leaflets or thrombotic apposition of leaflets in 20 (77%) and a thrombotic mass on the leaflets in the remaining 6 (23%) patients. In 23 (88%) patients, anticoagulation resulted in a significant decrease of the aortic valve pressure gradient within 2 months. Conclusions—THV thrombosis is a rare phenomenon that was detected within the first 2 years after transcatheter aortic valve implantation and usually presented with dyspnea and increased gradients. Anticoagulation seems to have been effective and should be considered even in patients without visible thrombus on echocardiography.

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.

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Background— Very few data exist on the clinical impact of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of PPI after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on late outcomes in a large cohort of patients. Methods and Results— A total of 1556 consecutive patients without prior PPI undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation were included. Of them, 239 patients (15.4%) required a PPI within the first 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. At a mean follow-up of 22±17 months, no association was observed between the need for 30-day PPI and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.30; P=0.871), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–1.17; P=0.270), and all-cause mortality or rehospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.77–1.30; P=0.980). A lower rate of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death was observed in patients with PPI (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.11–0.85; P=0.023). Patients with new PPI showed a poorer evolution of left ventricular ejection fraction over time (P=0.017), and new PPI was an independent predictor of left ventricular ejection fraction decrease at the 6- to 12-month follow-up (estimated coefficient, −2.26; 95% confidence interval, −4.07 to −0.44; P=0.013; R2=0.121). Conclusions— The need for PPI was a frequent complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, but it was not associated with any increase in overall or cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for heart failure after a mean follow-up of ≈2 years. Indeed, 30-day PPI was a protective factor for the occurrence of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death. However, new PPI did have a negative effect on left ventricular function over time.Background— Very few data exist on the clinical impact of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The objective of this study was to assess the impact of PPI after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on late outcomes in a large cohort of patients. Methods and Results— A total of 1556 consecutive patients without prior PPI undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation were included. Of them, 239 patients (15.4%) required a PPI within the first 30 days after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. At a mean follow-up of 22±17 months, no association was observed between the need for 30-day PPI and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–1.30; P =0.871), cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–1.17; P =0.270), and all-cause mortality or rehospitalization for heart failure (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% confidence interval, 0.77–1.30; P =0.980). A lower rate of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death was observed in patients with PPI (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.11–0.85; P =0.023). Patients with new PPI showed a poorer evolution of left ventricular ejection fraction over time ( P =0.017), and new PPI was an independent predictor of left ventricular ejection fraction decrease at the 6- to 12-month follow-up (estimated coefficient, −2.26; 95% confidence interval, −4.07 to −0.44; P =0.013; R 2=0.121). Conclusions— The need for PPI was a frequent complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation, but it was not associated with any increase in overall or cardiovascular death or rehospitalization for heart failure after a mean follow-up of ≈2 years. Indeed, 30-day PPI was a protective factor for the occurrence of unexpected (sudden or unknown) death. However, new PPI did have a negative effect on left ventricular function over time. # CLINICAL PERSPECTIVE {#article-title-43}

Quality of life assessment after percutaneous aortic valve implantation

AIMS To assess the NYHA class and the quality of life (QoL) scores after percutaneous aortic valve implantation (PAVI) with the 18-Fr CoreValve prosthesis. METHODS AND RESULTS From April 2007 until August 2008, 57 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis were evaluated for PAVI. Of these, 30 patients with successfully prosthesis implantation had more than 5-month follow-up. QoL assessment was realized with the SF-12v2 Health-Survey, a simple questionnaire designed for self-administration that provides easily interpretable scales for physical [physical component summary (PCS)] and mental [mental component summary (MCS)] health. The questionnaire was administered before and 5 months after PAVI. All 30 patients had a marked upgrading in haemodynamic and echocardiographic parameters (peak-to-peak gradient from 64 +/- 23 to 2 +/- 0.4; P < 0.001; aortic valve area index from 0.3 +/- 0.1 to 0.9 +/- 0.3; P < 0.001), with an improvement in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class at discharge and after 5 months. Mean pre-operative SF-12v2 scores showed a severe impairment of perceived quality of life compared with general Italian population >75 years, both for physical (PCS-baseline 28.5 vs. 37.9, P < 0.001) and mental scores (MCS-baseline 37.8 vs. 45.4, P < 0.001). After 5 months, a striking improvement in both scores (PCS 41.3-MCS 48.3; P < 0.001) was observed. CONCLUSION Our preliminary results show a marked short-term improvement in functional status and physical and mental health in patients underwent PAVI.