Rebecca T. Hahn

Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: The Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document

OBJECTIVES The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection. BACKGROUND A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous. METHODS AND RESULTS Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and noninterventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints. CONCLUSIONS This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement.

BACKGROUND The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, the 1-year survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical replacement. However, longer-term follow-up is necessary to determine whether TAVR has prolonged benefits. METHODS At 25 centers, we randomly assigned 699 high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to undergo either surgical aortic-valve replacement or TAVR. All patients were followed for at least 2 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes and echocardiographic evaluation. RESULTS The rates of death from any cause were similar in the TAVR and surgery groups (hazard ratio with TAVR, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 1.15; P=0.41) and at 2 years (Kaplan-Meier analysis) were 33.9% in the TAVR group and 35.0% in the surgery group (P=0.78). The frequency of all strokes during follow-up did not differ significantly between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.67 to 2.23; P=0.52). At 30 days, strokes were more frequent with TAVR than with surgical replacement (4.6% vs. 2.4%, P=0.12); subsequently, there were 8 additional strokes in the TAVR group and 12 in the surgery group. Improvement in valve areas was similar with TAVR and surgical replacement and was maintained for 2 years. Paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR (P<0.001), and even mild paravalvular regurgitation was associated with increased late mortality (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS A 2-year follow-up of patients in the PARTNER trial supports TAVR as an alternative to surgery in high-risk patients. The two treatments were similar with respect to mortality, reduction in symptoms, and improved valve hemodynamics, but paravalvular regurgitation was more frequent after TAVR and was associated with increased late mortality. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00530894.).

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

BACKGROUND Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. We evaluated the two procedures in a randomized trial involving intermediate-risk patients. METHODS We randomly assigned 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, at 57 centers, to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke at 2 years. The primary hypothesis was that TAVR would not be inferior to surgical replacement. Before randomization, patients were entered into one of two cohorts on the basis of clinical and imaging findings; 76.3% of the patients were included in the transfemoral-access cohort and 23.7% in the transthoracic-access cohort. RESULTS The rate of death from any cause or disabling stroke was similar in the TAVR group and the surgery group (P=0.001 for noninferiority). At 2 years, the Kaplan-Meier event rates were 19.3% in the TAVR group and 21.1% in the surgery group (hazard ratio in the TAVR group, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.09; P=0.25). In the transfemoral-access cohort, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of death or disabling stroke than surgery (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P=0.05), whereas in the transthoracic-access cohort, outcomes were similar in the two groups. TAVR resulted in larger aortic-valve areas than did surgery and also resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury, severe bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation; surgery resulted in fewer major vascular complications and less paravalvular aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS In intermediate-risk patients, TAVR was similar to surgical aortic-valve replacement with respect to the primary end point of death or disabling stroke. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

Updated Standardized Endpoint Definitions for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

OBJECTIVES The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection. BACKGROUND A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous. METHODS AND RESULTS Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiography recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints. CONCLUSIONS This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).

Angiogenesis Gene Therapy Phase I Assessment of Direct Intramyocardial Administration of an Adenovirus Vector Expressing VEGF121 cDNA to Individuals With Clinically Significant Severe Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND Therapeutic angiogenesis, a new experimental strategy for the treatment of vascular insufficiency, uses the administration of mediators known to induce vascular development in embryogenesis to induce neovascularization of ischemic adult tissues. This report summarizes a phase I clinical experience with a gene-therapy strategy that used an E1(-)E3(-) adenovirus (Ad) gene-transfer vector expressing human vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) 121 cDNA (Ad(GV)VEGF121.10) to induce therapeutic angiogenesis in the myocardium of individuals with clinically significant coronary artery disease. METHODS AND RESULTS Ad(GV)VEGF121.10 was administered to 21 individuals by direct myocardial injection into an area of reversible ischemia either as an adjunct to conventional coronary artery bypass grafting (group A, n=15) or as sole therapy via a minithoracotomy (group B, n=6). There was no evidence of systemic or cardiac-related adverse events related to vector administration. In both groups, coronary angiography and stress sestamibi scan assessment of wall motion 30 days after therapy suggested improvement in the area of vector administration. All patients reported improvement in angina class after therapy. In group B, in which gene transfer was the only therapy, treadmill exercise assessment suggested improvement in most individuals. CONCLUSIONS The data are consistent with the concept that direct myocardial administration of Ad(GV)VEGF121.10 to individuals with clinically significant coronary artery disease appears to be well tolerated, and initiation of phase II evaluation of this therapy is warranted.

5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial showed that mortality at 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years is much the same with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. We report here the 5-year outcomes. METHODS We did this randomised controlled trial at 25 hospitals, in Canada (two), Germany (one), and the USA (23). We used a computer-generated randomisation sequence to randomly assign high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis to either SAVR or TAVR with a balloon-expandable bovine pericardial tissue valve by either a transfemoral or transapical approach. Patients and their treating physicians were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome of the trial was all-cause mortality in the intention-to-treat population at 1 year, we present here predefined outcomes at 5 years. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00530894. FINDINGS We screened 3105 patients, of whom 699 were enrolled (348 assigned to TAVR, 351 assigned to SAVR). Overall mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 11·7%. At 5 years, risk of death was 67·8% in the TAVR group compared with 62·4% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·86-1·24; p=0·76). We recorded no structural valve deterioration requiring surgical valve replacement in either group. Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation occurred in 40 (14%) of 280 patients in the TAVR group and two (1%) of 228 in the SAVR group (p<0·0001), and was associated with increased 5-year risk of mortality in the TAVR group (72·4% for moderate or severe aortic regurgitation vs 56·6% for those with mild aortic regurgitation or less; p=0·003). INTERPRETATION Our findings show that TAVR as an alternative to surgery for patients with high surgical risk results in similar clinical outcomes. FUNDING Edwards Lifesciences.

EAE/ASE Recommendations for the Use of Echocardiography in New Transcatheter Interventions for Valvular Heart Disease.

The introduction of devices for transcatheter aortic valve implantation, mitral repair, and closure of prosthetic paravalvular leaks has led to a greatly expanded armamentarium of catheter-based approaches to patients with regurgitant as well as stenotic valvular disease. Echocardiography plays an essential role in identifying patients suitable for these interventions and in providing intra-procedural monitoring. Moreover, echocardiography is the primary modality for post-procedure follow-up. The echocardiographic assessment of patients undergoing trans-catheter interventions places demands on echocardiographers that differ from those of the routine evaluation of patients with native or prosthetic valvular disease. Consequently, the European Association of Echocardiography in partnership with the American Society of Echocardiography has developed the recommendations for the use of echocardiography in new transcatheter interventions for valvular heart disease. It is intended that this document will serve as a reference for echocardiographers participating in any or all stages of new transcatheter treatments for patients with valvular heart disease.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis

BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 valve demonstrates good 30 day clinical outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at intermediate risk of surgical mortality. Here we report longer-term data in intermediate-risk patients given SAPIEN 3 TAVR and compare outcomes to those of intermediate-risk patients given surgical aortic valve replacement. METHODS In the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 1077 intermediate-risk patients at 51 sites in the USA and Canada were assigned to receive TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 valve [952 [88%] via transfemoral access) between Feb 17, 2014, and Sept 3, 2014. In this population we assessed all-cause mortality and incidence of strokes, re-intervention, and aortic valve regurgitation at 1 year after implantation. Then we compared 1 year outcomes in this population with those for intermediate-risk patients treated with surgical valve replacement in the PARTNER 2A trial between Dec 23, 2011, and Nov 6, 2013, using a prespecified propensity score analysis to account for between-trial differences in baseline characteristics. The clinical events committee and echocardiographic core laboratory methods were the same for both studies. The primary endpoint was the composite of death from any cause, all strokes, and incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation. We did non-inferiority (margin 7·5%) and superiority analyses in propensity score quintiles to calculate pooled weighted proportion differences for outcomes. FINDINGS At 1 year follow-up of the SAPIEN 3 observational study, 79 of 1077 patients who initiated the TAVR procedure had died (all-cause mortality 7·4%; 6·5% in the transfemoral access subgroup), and disabling strokes had occurred in 24 (2%), aortic valve re-intervention in six (1%), and moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation in 13 (2%). In the propensity-score analysis we included 963 patients treated with SAPIEN 3 TAVR and 747 with surgical valve replacement. For the primary composite endpoint of mortality, strokes, and moderate or severe aortic regurgitation, TAVR was both non-inferior (pooled weighted proportion difference of -9·2%; 90% CI -12·4 to -6; p<0·0001) and superior (-9·2%, 95% CI -13·0 to -5·4; p<0·0001) to surgical valve replacement. INTERPRETATION TAVR with SAPIEN 3 in intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis is associated with low mortality, strokes, and regurgitation at 1 year. The propensity score analysis indicates a significant superiority for our composite outcome with TAVR compared with surgery, suggesting that TAVR might be the preferred treatment alternative in intermediate-risk patients. FUNDING None.

Guidelines for Performing a Comprehensive Transesophageal Echocardiographic Examination: Recommendations from the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists

Scott T. Reeves, MD, FASE, Kathryn E. Glas, MD, FASE, Holger Eltzschig, MD, Joseph P. Mathew, MD, FASE, David S. Rubenson, MD, FASE, Gregg S. Hartman, MD, and Stanton K. Shernan, MD, FASE, for the Council for Intraoperative Echocardiography of the American Society of Echocardiography, Charleston, South Carolina; Atlanta, Georgia; Tubingen, Germany; Durham, North Carolina; La Jolla, California; and Lebanon, New Hampshire

Association of aortic dilation with regurgitant, stenotic and functionally normal bicuspid aortic valves

To determine whether aortic root dilation associated with a bicuspid aortic valve occurs independently of valvular hemodynamic abnormality, aortic root dimensions were measured by two-dimensional echocardiography in 83 adults with a functionally normal (n = 19), mildly regurgitant (n = 26), severely regurgitant (n = 27) or stenotic (n = 11) bicuspid aortic valve and compared with findings in normal subjects matched for age and gender. Aortic root measurements were made at four levels: anulus, sinuses of Valsalva, supraaortic ridge and proximal ascending aorta. Seventy-one percent of patients with a bicuspid aortic valve were men. When compared with control subjects, all hemodynamic subgroups showed a significantly larger aortic root size at three levels: sinuses of Valsalva, supraaortic ridge and proximal ascending aorta (p less than 0.05 to p less than 0.001). The prevalence of aortic root enlargement among all hemodynamic subgroups ranged from 9% to 59% at the level of the anulus, 36% to 78% at the sinuses, 47% to 79% at the supraaortic ridge and 50% to 64% in the ascending aorta. Thus, there is a high prevalence of aortic root enlargement in patients with a bicuspid aortic valve that occurs irrespective of altered hemodynamics or age. These findings support the hypothesis that bicuspid aortic valve and aortic root dilation may reflect a common developmental defect.