Case report of snaring-assisted TAVR under cerebral embolic protection: the "Chaperone" with "Top Hat" technique.

Symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with intermediate-to-high surgical risk is currently being treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We present a case of a TAVR in a severe calcific AS with porcelain aorta and 'gothic' aortic arch. Pre-operative thoraco-abdominal computed tomography angiography showed also severe calcification at the sinotubular junction with protruding huge calcified nodules extending in ascending aorta and multiple calcific stenosis of both iliac-femoral vessels, severely tortuous. The choice of the interventional access was not easy and the high risk of an acute intra-procedural brain event guided the procedural planning. To our knowledge, this is the first case of TAVR with complete cerebral protection with Triguard system device and 'snaring-assisted' valve advancement.

Case report: Self-expanding transcatheter valve implantation (Acurate Neo 2) in a very small native aortic annulus.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment of choice in patients with symptomatic severe aortic valve stenosis (AS) and intermediate-to-high surgical risk. The presence of a small aortic annulus (SAA) has been associated with a higher incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) when surgical aortic valve replacement (sAVR) is performed. TAVR might be a treatment option offering better hemodynamics with a lower incidence of PPM. When a severe AS with a SAA is treated, TAVR-related risk as the coronary obstruction and the annulus rupture, must be also prevented. We present a case of a TAVR in a very small aortic annulus; to our knowledge, this is the smallest native aortic annulus treated percutaneously in a tricuspid stenotic aortic valve with a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve (THV) Acurate Neo 2.

Percutaneous treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm and aortic valve stenosis with 'staged' EVAR and TAVR: a case series.

Symptomatic aortic valve stenosis (AS) and abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) are critical clinical conditions, increasingly more prevalent with aging of the population. Calcific aortic stenosis is the most common structural cardiac disease in the elderly population, and medical management of severe aortic stenosis of the elderly population is associated with poor outcomes as compared to surgical treatment. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a treatment of choice in inoperable, often elderly, patients with symptomatic severe AS and in intermediate-to-high surgical risk patients. It is not yet clarified the incidence of AAA and its impact on procedural and clinical outcomes among patients undergoing TAVR. It is known that after AS resolution with aortic valve replacement or TAVR there is an increase in blood pressure that increases the risk of dissection or abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture if AAA repair is delayed. The purpose of this report is to describe the anatomical details and technical and procedural considerations when proposing totally endovascular strategies dedicated to the treatment of patients with AS and AAA.

Clinical Comparison of a Novel Balloon-Expandable Versus a Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve for the Treatment of Patients with Severe Aortic Valve Stenosis: The EVAL Registry.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an effective treatment option for patients with severe, symptomatic AS, regardless of the transcatheter heart valve (THV) implanted. Prior studies demonstrated a higher device success with lower paravalvular leak (PVL) using the balloon-expandable (BE) Sapien/XT THV vs. a self-expanding (SE) THV. However, few data are available on the performance of a novel BE THV. PURPOSE: to compare early clinical performance and safety of the newly available BE Myval THV (Myval, Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., India) vs. the commonly used SE (Evolut R, Medtronic) THV. METHODS:  A single-center, retrospective cohort analysis was performed with 166 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR from March 2019 to March 2021 for severe symptomatic AS treated with either the novel BE Myval or the SE Evolut R (ER) bioprosthesis. The primary endpoint was device success at day 30 according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3). Secondary endpoints included 30-day all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, more than mild PVL, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates and a composite of all-cause mortality and disabling stroke at 6 months. RESULTS:  Among the 166 included patients, 108 patients received the SE ER THV and 58 patients were treated with the BE Myval THV. At baseline, the two groups showed comparable demographic characteristics. The primary composite endpoint of early device success occurred in 55 patients (94.8%) in the BE Myval group and in 90 patients (83.3%) in the SE ER group (OR 3.667, 95% CI 1.094-12.14; p = 0.048). At day 30, the BE Myval THV group exhibited a significantly lower incidence of more than mild PVL (BE Myval 3.45% vs. SE ER 14.8%, OR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05-0.8; p = 0.0338), along with a lower rate of PPI (BE Myval 11% vs. SE ER 24.2%, OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.15-0.99; p = 0.0535). At the 6-month follow-up, the incidence of all-cause mortality and disabling stroke did not significantly differ between the two groups, while the incidence of PPI (BE Myval 11% vs. SE ER 27.5%, OR 0.32, CI 95% 0.1273-0.8; p = 0.02) and ≥moderate PVL (BE Myval 6.9% vs. SE ER 19.8%, OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.1-0.94; p = 0.0396) was significantly lower in the BE Myval group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe symptomatic AS undergoing TAVR, the novel Myval BE THV provided a comparable performance to the well-known ER SE THV, and it was associated with a lower rate of PPI and ≥moderate PVL within 30 days and 6 months after the procedure. Randomized, head-to-head comparison trials are needed to confirm our results.

Snaring the Transcatheter Heart Valve Delivery System During Aortic Valve Replacement: When and Why.

None of the commercially available self-expanding (SE)-trans-catheter heart valve (THVs) used for trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has a deflectable delivery system. This aspect can represent a shortcoming, especially in some anatomical scenario where THV advancement is challenging. The use of a snare catheter (SC), applying an external traction force, can increase THV trackability. We describe three different TAVR cases, in which a SE-THV was the only available option and where the THV delivery system advancement in the aortic arch was not feasible, if not with the combined use of a SC.

Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation With a Novel Balloon-Expandable Device in Patients With Bioprosthetic Heart Valve Failure: A Case Series.

Trans-catheter valve-in-valve (ViV) is a treatment option for patients affected by bioprosthetic heart valve (BHV) failure. Both aortic and mitral ViV procedures present several challenges compared to native valve replacement. To date, no data concerning the balloon-expandable MyVal (Meril, Vapi, India) trans-catheter heart valve (THV) use in ViV procedure have been provided. In this case series, we described for the first time its use in five different BHV failures.

Bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) for in-stent chronic total occlusion: Antegrade recanalization and IVUS-guided BVS implantation by radial access.

The completely absorbable stents represent one of the latest innovations in the field of interventional cardiology, prospecting the possibility of "vascular repair". In the published trials (ABSORB Cohort A and B, ABSORB EXTEND, and ABSORB II, III and IV) chronic total occlusions (CTOs) were considered an exclusion criteria. More recently the CTO-ABSORB pilot study demonstrated the safety and feasibility of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) use in case of CTO recanalization. We present the first case, to our knowledge, of in-stent occlusion successfully treated with an everolimus-eluting BVS and discuss its potential advantages in such kind of lesions.

[The radial access approach in complex coronary anatomy: case report and literature review]. / L'accesso arterioso radiale nell'anatomia coronarica complessa: caso clinico e revisione della letteratura.

The radial artery approach has been accepted as an alternative to the traditional femoral approach in both diagnostic and interventional procedures, including treatment of complex coronary lesions such as chronic total occlusions. Catheterization of the left internal mammary artery (LIMA) graft is frequently performed through this route in order to limit catheter manipulation and avoid dissection of the subclavian and mammary artery, a dramatic event rarely reported in the literature. Nonetheless, indication for this approach should be carefully evaluated, especially if an unfavorable angle of origin of the mammary artery is present. We report the case of a patient who, following iatrogenic dissection of the LIMA during catheterization through the left radial artery, was electively treated with percutaneous coronary angioplasty on a complex anatomy, rather than with high-risk redo coronary artery bypass surgery. Using a combined radial and femoral approach, retrograde disobstruction of the left anterior descending artery, followed by plaque debulking with rotational atherectomy through the struts of a previously implanted stent in the left main-left circumflex artery, was performed. Although the radial approach might be considered even for the treatment of complex coronary anatomy subsets, appropriate use in diagnostic and interventional settings should always be carefully evaluated.

Coronary artery bypass graft versus percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation for diabetic patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: the D-DELTA registry.

AIMS: Data regarding the impact on clinical outcomes of PCI with DES implantation vs. CABG to treat unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease in diabetic patients are still insufficient. The present study evaluated the short-term and long-term results of percutaneous and surgical revascularisation in diabetic patients with ULMCA disease in a large population. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 826 diabetic patients with ULMCA stenosis who received DES (n=520) or underwent CABG (n=306) were selected and analysed from the DELTA registry. In-hospital MACCE was significantly higher in the CABG group, mainly driven by a higher incidence of MI. At four-year follow-up, freedom from death and the composite endpoint of death, MI and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) was similar in the two treatment groups (CABG 87.4%, PCI 82.5%, p=0.124, and CABG 85.4%, PCI 78.9%, p=0.11, respectively). Conversely, freedom from TVR and MACCE was significantly higher in the CABG compared to the PCI group (CABG 95.4%, PCI 79.4%, p<0.001, and CABG 81.9%, PCI 64.7%, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In diabetic patients with ULMCA disease with/without concomitant multivessel disease, PCI and CABG led to similar results in terms of death, MI and CVA. However, CABG was associated with less MACCE at long-term follow-up, primarily due to the higher repeat revascularisation rate with DES.

Outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with both Edwards-SAPIEN and CoreValve devices in a single center: the Milan experience.

OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to assess clinical outcome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) performed with the 2 commercially available valves with 3 delivery approaches selected in a stepwise fashion. BACKGROUND: Limited data exist on the results of a comprehensive TAVI program using different valves with transfemoral, transapical, and transaxillary approaches for treatment of severe aortic stenosis. METHODS: We report 30-day and 6-month outcomes of high-risk patients consecutively treated in a single center with either the Medtronic-CoreValve (MCV) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) or Edwards-SAPIEN valve (ESV) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) delivered via the transfemoral or transaxillary approaches and ESV via the transapical approach. RESULTS: A total of 137 patients underwent TAVI: 107 via transfemoral (46 MCV and 61 ESV), 15 via transaxillary (12 MCV and 3 ESV), and 15 via transapical approach. After the transfemoral approach, the procedural success rate was 93.5%, and major vascular complication rate was 20.6%. No intra-procedural deaths occurred. The procedural success rates of transapical and transaxillary approaches were 86.6% and 93.3%, respectively. The 30-day mortality rate was 0.9% in transfemoral group and 13.3% in transapical, and no deaths occurred after transaxillary access. Cumulative death rate at 6 months was 12.2% in transfemoral, 26.6% in transapical, and 18.2% in transaxillary groups. At multivariable analysis, logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation, body surface area, and history of cerebrovascular disease were significantly associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: Routine TAVI using both MCV and ESV with a selection of approaches is feasible and allows treatment of a wide range of patients with good overall procedural success rates and 30-day and 6-month outcomes.

Percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation: past accomplishments, present achievements and applications, future perspectives.

Surgical aortic valve replacement remains the gold standard for the treatment of severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. However, percutaneous treatments are challenging this paradigm in high-risk surgical patients. Technological developments have been rapid in the field of percutaneous aortic valve intervention. Two devices have been approved for general use in Europe: the Edwards SAPIEN valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) and the CoreValve ReValving((R)) System (CoreValve ReValving((R)) Technology Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN), with 15 potential new designs for percutaneous aortic valves in development around the world. Both systems can be delivered via the transfemoral, transapical and the axillary/subclavian routes, depending upon patient characteristics, anatomy, and the device available to the operator. Careful selection of appropriate patients is essential to ensure a safe procedure. This necessitates a multidisciplinary approach, with multiple imaging modalities used to fully delineate the peripheral vasculature, aortic anatomy and the valve itself. It is important to remember, however, that just because we can treat aortic valve disease percutaneously, it does not mean that we necessarily should. The gold standard treatment for aortic stenosis remains thoracotomy and surgical replacement of the valve; to this end it is essential that surgeons play a central role in the decision-making processes for transcatheter aortic valve implantation and that they embrace this new and exciting technology, which promises to dramatically change the way their high-risk aortic valve patients are managed over the course of the next 10 years.