Application of the Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk criteria in patients treated with coronary bioresorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stents: Insights from the POEM trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have investigated a 1 to 6-month short dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with modern drug eluting-stents to reduce bleeding events. OBJECTIVES: To investigate cardiovascular outcomes in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) according to the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) criteria after PCI with the Synergy bioresorbable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (EES). METHODS: We applied ARC-HBR criteria in the population of the prospective, single-arm, multicenter POEM (Performance of Bioresorbable Polymer-Coated Everolimus-Eluting Synergy Stent in Patients at HBR Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization Followed by 1-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) trial. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite or probable stent thrombosis at 12 months. RESULTS: The original POEM cohort included 356 patients (80.4 %) fulfilling ARC-HBR criteria. Oral anticoagulant (OAC) usage and age ≥75 years were the most frequent major and minor ARC-HBR criteria, respectively. The ARC-HBR group was mainly represented by men (71.1 %), with 74.4 ± 9.3 years and a high burden of cardiovascular risk factors. DAPT was prescribed in 79.3 %, and single antiplatelet (SAPT) with OAC in 18.7 %. 12-month follow-up was completed in 96.2 %. The primary endpoint occurred in 5.2 % (95 % CI 3.29-8.10) of patients, whereas bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3-5 occurred in 2.7 % (95 % CI, 1.39 %-5.05 %). CONCLUSION: Previous results of the POEM trial showed positive outcomes regarding ischemic and bleeding events with an S-DAPT regimen after Synergy EES. These results are also confirmed in sub-group analysis when ARC-HBR criteria are applied.

Angulation and curvature of aortic landing zone affect implantation depth in transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

In transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), final device position may be affected by device interaction with the whole aortic landing zone (LZ) extending to ascending aorta. We investigated the impact of aortic LZ curvature and angulation on TAVI implantation depth, comparing short-frame balloon-expanding (BE) and long-frame self-expanding (SE) devices. Patients (n = 202) treated with BE or SE devices were matched based on one-to-one propensity score. Primary endpoint was the mismatch between the intended (HPre) and the final (HPost) implantation depth. LZ curvature and angulation were calculated based on the aortic centerline trajectory available from pre-TAVI computed tomography. Total LZ curvature ( k L Z , t o t ) and LZ angulation distal to aortic annulus ( α L Z , D i s t a l ) were greater in the SE compared to the BE group (P < 0.001 for both). In the BE group, HPost was significantly higher than HPre at both cusps (P < 0.001). In the SE group, HPost was significantly deeper than HPre only at the left coronary cusp (P = 0.013). At multivariate analysis, α L Z , D i s t a l was the only independent predictor (OR = 1.11, P = 0.002) of deeper final implantation depth with a cut-off value of 17.8°. Aortic LZ curvature and angulation significantly affected final TAVI implantation depth, especially in high stent-frame SE devices reporting, upon complete release, deeper implantation depth with respect to the intended one.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair With the MitraClip Device for Prior Mitral Valve Repair Failure: Insights From the GIOTTO-FAILS Study.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive mitral valve repair has a favorable risk-benefit profile in patients with significant de novo mitral regurgitation. Its role in patients with prior mitral valve repair is uncertain. We aimed to appraise the outcome of patients undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) with prior transcatheter or surgical mitral valve repair (SMVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: We queried the Italian multicenter registry on TEER with MitraClip, distinguishing naïve patients from those with prior TEER or (SMVR). Inhospital and long-term clinical/echocardiographic outcomes were appraised. The primary outcome was the occurrence of death or rehospitalization for heart failure. A total of 2238 patients were included, with 2169 (96.9%) who were naïve to any mitral intervention, 29 (1.3%) with prior TEER, and 40 (1.8%) with prior SMVR. Several significant differences were found in baseline clinical and imaging features. Respectively, device success was obtained in 2120 (97.7%), 28 (96.6%), and 38 (95.0%, P=0.261) patients; procedural success in 2080 (95.9%), 25 (86.2%), and 38 (95.0%; P=0.047); and inhospital death in 61 (2.8%), 1 (3.5%), and no (P=0.558) patients. Clinical follow-up after a mean of 14 months showed similar rates of death, cardiac death, rehospitalization, rehospitalization for heart failure, and their composite (all P>0.05). Propensity score-adjusted analysis confirmed unadjusted analysis, with lower procedural success for the prior TEER group (odds ratio, 0.28 [95% CI, 0.09-0.81]; P=0.019) but similar odds ratios and hazard ratios for all other outcomes in the naïve, TEER, and SMVR groups (all P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In carefully selected patients, TEER can be performed using the MitraClip device even after prior TEER or SMVR.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1·5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS: In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2-4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10·44% and assuming an event rate of 26·10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80·0 years (SD 5·7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80·4 years (5·4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2·6% [IQR 1·7-4·0] vs contemporary 2·6% [1·7-4·0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of -2·3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3·8, pnon-inferiority<0·0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION: In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days. FUNDING: Meril Life Sciences.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1•5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2­4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10•44% and assuming an event rate of 26•10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80•0 years (SD 5•7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80•4 years (5•4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2•6% [IQR 1•7­4•0] vs contemporary 2•6% [1•7­4•0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of ­2•3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3•8, pnon-inferiority<0•0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days.

Transcatheter mitral valve repair with MitraClip: comparison of NT, NTr, and XTr Devices.

OBJECTIVES: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) has become an established minimally invasive treatment for significant mitral regurgitation. Ongoing refinements and the availability of different clipping devices have expanded the indications for and effectiveness of TEER, but comprehensive comparative data on this issue are lacking. In this study, we compared NT, NTr, and XTr MitraClip devices (Abbot) for TEER. METHODS: Details on patient, imaging, and procedural details, as well as short- and long-term outcomes, were sought from a national prospective clinical registry on TEER with MitraClip. The primary outcome of interest was discharge after procedural success without major clinical complications. RESULTS: A total of 2236 patients were included, 1228 (54.9%) in whom NT implantation only was attempted, 233 (10.4%) in whom NTr but not XTr implantation was attempted, and 775 (34.7%) in whom XTr implantation was attempted. Clinical and imaging features differed substantially across the groups, reflecting expanding indications with NTr and XTr devices. In-hospital outcomes were largely similar among the 3 groups, including death. Long-term unadjusted estimates of effect showed significant differences in several outcomes, including death, rehospitalization, and their composite, which demonstrated that NT was associated with more unfavorable outcomes compared with the other devices (all P less than .05). However, most differences depended on baseline features, as adjusted analysis showed no significant differences for early as well as long-term outcomes, including long-term death, rehospitalization, and their composite (all P greater than .05). CONCLUSIONS: New-generation MitraClip devices are associated with favorable procedural and clinical outcomes, despite being used in patients with more adverse features, when compared with patients treated with previous devices.

Chimney Stenting vs BASILICA for Prevention of Acute Coronary Obstruction During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Coronary obstruction (CO) is a potentially life-threatening complication of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Chimney stenting or leaflet laceration with transcatheter electrosurgery (Bioprosthetic or Native Aortic Scallop Intentional Laceration to Prevent Iatrogenic Coronary Artery Obstruction [BASILICA]) are 2 techniques developed to prevent CO. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to compare periprocedural and 1-year outcomes of chimney and BASILICA in TAVR patients at high risk of CO. METHODS: This multicenter observational registry enrolled consecutive TAVR patients at high risk of CO, undergoing either preventive chimney stenting or BASILICA. Clinical success was defined as successful performance of the chimney or BASILICA technique without clinically relevant ostial CO. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned target lesion coronary revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included: 71 (42.3%) received chimney stenting, and 97 (57.7%) underwent BASILICA. Patients undergoing BASILICA had higher preprocedural risk of CO, as indicated by lower sinotubular junction height (18.2 ± 4.8 mm vs 14.8 ± 3.4 mm; P < 0.001) and diameter (28.2 ± 4.5 vs 26.8 ± 3.4; P = 0.029). Rates of periprocedural complications were similar between the 2 groups. Clinical success was 97.2% and 96.9% in chimney and BASILICA, respectively (P = 0.92). At 1-year follow-up, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was 18.7% (95% CI: 11%-30.6%) in the chimney group and 19.9% (95% CI: 12.1%-31.5%) in the BASILICA group (log-rank P = 0.848), whereas chimney was associated with a numerically higher cardiovascular mortality than BASILICA (6.7% vs 1.3%; log-rank P = 0.168). CONCLUSIONS: Chimney stenting and BASILICA effectively prevent TAVR-induced acute CO. Both techniques seem to have comparable acceptable periprocedural and 1-year outcomes.

Risk Score for Prediction of Dialysis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Dialysis is a rare but serious complication after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We analyzed the large multicenter TRITAVI (transfusion requirements in transcatheter aortic valve implantation) registry in order to develop and validate a clinical score assessing this risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 10 071 consecutive patients were enrolled in 19 European centers. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to a derivation and validation cohort. Two scores were developed, 1 including only preprocedural variables (TRITAVIpre) and 1 also including procedural variables (TRITAVIpost). In the 6714 patients of the derivation cohort (age 82±6 years, 48% men), preprocedural factors independently associated with dialysis and included in the TRITAVIpre score were male sex, diabetes, prior coronary artery bypass graft, anemia, nonfemoral access, and creatinine clearance <30 mL/min per m2. Additional independent predictors among procedural features were volume of contrast, need for transfusion, and major vascular complications. Both scores showed a good discrimination power for identifying risk for dialysis with C-statistic 0.78 for TRITAVIpre and C-statistic 0.88 for TRITAVIpost score. Need for dialysis increased from the lowest to the highest of 3 risk score groups (from 0.3% to 3.9% for TRITAVIpre score and from 0.1% to 6.2% for TRITAVIpost score). Analysis of the 3357 patients of the validation cohort (age 82±7 years, 48% men) confirmed the good discrimination power of both scores (C-statistic 0.80 for TRITAVIpre and 0.81 for TRITAVIpost score). Need for dialysis was associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality (from 6.9% to 54.4%; P=0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: A simple preprocedural clinical score can help predict the risk of dialysis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Evolut PRO and SAPIEN ULTRA Performance in Small Aortic Annuli: The OPERA-TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: The performance of latest iteration transcatheter aortic valve replacement platforms in patients with small aortic anatomy remains underexplored. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate effectiveness and performance between the self-expanding (SE) Evolut PRO and PRO+ and the balloon-expandable (BE) SAPIEN ULTRA in patients with small aortic annuli. METHODS: Data from the OPERA-TAVI (Comparative Analysis of Evolut PRO vs. SAPIEN 3 ULTRA Valves for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry were used, with 1:1 propensity score matching. Primary endpoints included 1-year effectiveness composite (all-cause mortality, disabling stroke, or heart failure hospitalization) and 30-day device-related (hemodynamic structural valve dysfunction and nonstructural valve dysfunction) outcomes. RESULTS: Among 3,516 patients, 251 matched pairs with aortic annular area <430 mm2 were assessed. The 1-year primary effectiveness outcome did not differ significantly between cohorts (SE 10.8% vs BE 11.2%; P = 0.91). The 30-day device-oriented composite outcome was more favorable in the Evolut PRO group (SE 4.8% vs BE 10.4%; P = 0.027). Notably, SE valve recipients showed higher rates of disabling stroke (SE 4.0% vs BE 0.0%; P < 0.01) and paravalvular leaks (mild or greater: SE 48.5% vs BE 18.6% [P < 0.001]; moderate: SE 4.5% vs BE 1.2% [P = 0.070]). The BE group had higher rates of prosthesis-patient mismatch (moderate or greater: SE 16.0% vs BE 47.1% [P < 0.001]; severe: SE 1.3% vs BE 5.7% [P = 0.197]) and more patients with residual mean gradients >20 mm Hg (SE 1.0% vs BE 13.5%; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with small aortic annuli, transcatheter aortic valve replacement with latest iteration devices is safe. SE platforms are associated with more favorable device performance in terms of hemodynamic structural and nonstructural dysfunction. Randomized data are needed to validate these findings and guide informed device selection.

Sex-Related Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Self-Expanding or Balloon-Expandable Valves: Insights from the OPERA-TAVI Registry.

Evidence regarding gender-related differences in response to transcatheter aortic valve implantation according to the valve type is lacking. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of gender on the treatment effect of Evolut PRO/PRO+ (PRO) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) devices on clinical outcomes. The Comparative Analysis of Evolut PRO vs SAPIEN 3 Ultra Valves for Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (OPERA-TAVI) is a multicenter, multinational registry including patients who underwent the latest-iteration PRO or ULTRA implantation. Overall, 1,174 of 1,897 patients were matched based on valve type and compared according to gender, whereas 470 men and 630 women were matched and compared according to valve type. The 30-day and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. In the PRO and ULTRA groups, men had a higher co-morbidity burden, whereas women had smaller aortic root. The 30-day (device success [DS], early safety outcome, permanent pacemaker implantation, patient-prosthesis mismatch, paravalvular regurgitation, bleedings, vascular complications, and all-cause death) and 1-year outcomes (all-cause death, stroke, and heart failure hospitalization) did not differ according to gender in both valve groups. However, the male gender decreased the likelihood of 30-day DS with ULTRA versus PRO (p for interaction = 0.047). A higher risk of 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation and 1-year stroke and a lower risk of patient-prosthesis mismatch was observed in PRO versus ULTRA, regardless of gender. In conclusion, gender did not modify the treatment effect of PRO versus ULTRA on clinical outcomes, except for 30-day DS, which was decreased in men (vs women) who received ULTRA (vs PRO).

Valve Hemodynamics by Valve Size and 1-Year Survival Following Implantation of the Portico Valve in the Multicenter CONFIDENCE Registry.

Background: The CONtrolled delivery For ImproveD outcomEs with cliNiCal Evidence registry was initiated to characterize the clinical safety and device performance from experienced transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) centers in Europe and Australia that use the Portico valve to treat patients with severe aortic stenosis. We herein report for the first time the valve performance at 30-day across all implanted valve sizes and the 1-year survival from this registry. Methods: This was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm observational clinical investigation of patients clinically indicated for implantation of a Portico valve in experienced TAVI centers. Patients were treated with a commercially available valve (size 23, 25, 27, or 29 mm) using either the first-generation delivery system (DS) (n = 501) or the second-generation (FlexNav) DS (n = 500). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria. Echocardiographic outcomes were assessed at 30 days by an independent core laboratory, and a survival check was performed at 1 year. Results: We enrolled 1001 patients (82.0 years, 62.5% female, 63.7% New York Heart Association functional class III/IV at baseline) from 27 clinical sites in 8 countries across Europe and one site in Australia. Implantation of a single valve was successful in 97.5% of subjects. Valve hemodynamics at 30 days were substantially improved relative to baseline, with large aortic valve areas and low mean gradients across all implanted valve sizes (aortic valve areas were 1.7 ± 0.4, 1.7 ± 0.5, 1.8 ± 0.5, and 2.0 ± 0.5 cm2, and mean gradients were 7.0 ± 2.7, 7.5 ± 4.7, 7.3 ± 3.3, and 6.4 ± 3.3 mmHg for 23, 25, 27, and 29 mm valve sizes, respectively). Across all implanted valve sizes, most patients (77.1%) had no patient-prosthesis mismatch. Death from any cause within 1 year occurred in 13.7% of the patients in the first-generation DS group as compared with 11.0% in the second-generation DS group (p = 0.2). Conclusions: The Portico valve demonstrated excellent hemodynamic performance across all valve sizes in a large cohort of subjects implanted in experienced TAVI centers. One-year survival rates were favorable when using both the first-generation and second-generation (FlexNav) DSs in this high-risk cohort. ClinicalTrialsgov Identifier: NCT03752866.

Artificial intelligence-derived risk score for mortality in secondary mitral regurgitation treated by transcatheter edge-to-edge repair: the EuroSMR risk score.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Risk stratification for mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (M-TEER) is paramount in the decision-making process to appropriately select patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR). This study sought to develop and validate an artificial intelligence-derived risk score (EuroSMR score) to predict 1-year outcomes (survival or survival + clinical improvement) in patients with SMR undergoing M-TEER. METHODS: An artificial intelligence-derived risk score was developed from the EuroSMR cohort (4172 and 428 patients treated with M-TEER in the derivation and validation cohorts, respectively). The EuroSMR score was validated and compared with established risk models. RESULTS: The EuroSMR risk score, which is based on 18 clinical, echocardiographic, laboratory, and medication parameters, allowed for an improved discrimination of surviving and non-surviving patients (hazard ratio 4.3, 95% confidence interval 3.7-5.0; P < .001), and outperformed established risk scores in the validation cohort. Prediction for 1-year mortality (area under the curve: 0.789, 95% confidence interval 0.737-0.842) ranged from <5% to >70%, including the identification of an extreme-risk population (2.6% of the entire cohort), which had a very high probability for not surviving beyond 1 year (hazard ratio 6.5, 95% confidence interval 3.0-14; P < .001). The top 5% of patients with the highest EuroSMR risk scores showed event rates of 72.7% for mortality and 83.2% for mortality or lack of clinical improvement at 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The EuroSMR risk score may allow for improved prognostication in heart failure patients with severe SMR, who are considered for a M-TEER procedure. The score is expected to facilitate the shared decision-making process with heart team members and patients.

Impact of Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Mitral Valve Repair on Atrial Functional Mitral Regurgitation from the GIOTTO Registry.

Atrial functional mitral regurgitation (aFMR) has a peculiar pathophysiology that may have distinctive outcomes. We investigated the impact of transcatheter edge-to-edge repair in aFMR compared with other FMR etiologies. The GIOTTO (GIse registry Of Transcatheter treatment of MR) is a multicenter, prospective study enrolling patients with symptomatic MR treated with MitraClip up to 2020. We categorized patients with FMR as aFMR, ischemic FMR (iFMR), and nonischemic ventricular FMR (niFMR). The clinical end points were defined according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium. Of 1,153 patients, 6% had aFMR, 47% iFMR, and 47% niFMR. Patients with aFMR were older, mostly women, and had a higher atrial fibrillation rate. They had better left ventricular ejection fraction and smaller left ventricular volumes, with no difference in mitral effective regurgitant orifice area. The acute device and procedural success rates were similar among the groups. At the longest available follow-up (median 478 days, interquartile range 91 to 741 days), the rate of MR ≥2+ was similar among the groups. Patients with aFMR had a lower rate of cardiovascular death and heart failure than patients with iFMR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.43, p = 0.02) and niFMR (HR 0.45, p = 0.03). The aFMR etiology remained independently associated with the composite outcome, together with postprocedural MR ≤1+ (HR 0.63, p <0.01) and peripheral arteriopathy (HR 1.82, p = 0.003). The results of this GIOTTO subanalysis suggested that aFMR is less prevalent and associated with better outcomes compared with other causes of FMR treated by transcatheter edge-to-edge repair. Postprocedural MR >1+, peripheral vasculopathy, non-aFMR were independent predictors of worse outcomes.

Features and outcomes of bailout repeat transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): the Bailout Acute TAVI-in-TAVI to Lessen Events (BATTLE) international registry.

AIM: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a mainstay in the management of severe aortic stenosis in patients with intermediate to prohibitive surgical risk. When a single TAVI device fails and cannot be retrieved, TAVI-in-TAVI must be performed acutely, but outcomes of bailout TAVI-in-TAVI have been incompletely appraised. We aimed at analyzing patient, procedural and outcome features of patients undergoing bailout TAVI-in-TAVI in a multicenter registry. METHODS: Details of patients undergoing bailout TAVI-in-TAVI, performed acutely or within 24 h of index TAVI, in 6 international high-volume institutions, were collected. For every case provided, 2 same-week consecutive controls (prior TAVI, and subsequent TAVI) were provided. Outcomes of interest were procedural and long-term events, including death, myocardial infarction, stroke, access site complication, major bleeding, and reintervention, and their composite (i.e. major adverse events [MAE]). RESULTS: A total of 106 patients undergoing bailout TAVI-in-TAVI were included, as well as 212 controls, for a total of 318 individuals. Bailout TAVI-in-TAVI was less common in younger patients, those with higher body mass index, or treated with Portico/Navitor or Sapien devices (all p < 0.05). Bailout TAVI-in-TAVI was associated with higher in-hospital rates of death, emergency surgery, MAE, and permanent pacemaker implantation (all p < 0.05). Long-term follow-up showed that bailout TAVI-in-TAVI was associated with higher rates of death and MAE (both < 0.05). Similar findings were obtained at adjusted analyses (all p < 0.05). However, censoring early events, outlook was not significantly different when comparing the two groups (p = 0.897 for death, and p = 0.645 for MAE). CONCLUSIONS: Bail-out TAVI-in-TAVI is associated with significant early and long-term mortality and morbidity. Thus, meticulous preprocedural planning and sophisticated intraprocedural techniques are of paramount importance to avoid these emergency procedures.

One-year clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the latest iteration of self-expanding or balloonexpandable devices: insights from the OPERA-TAVI registry.

BACKGROUND: Midterm comparative analyses of the latest iterations of the most used Evolut and SAPIEN platforms for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are lacking. AIMS: We aimed to compare 1-year clinical outcomes of TAVI patients receiving Evolut PRO/PRO+ (PRO) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra (ULTRA) devices in current real-world practice. METHODS: Among patients enrolled in the OPERA-TAVI registry, patients with complete 1-year follow-up were considered for the purpose of this analysis. One-to-one propensity score matching was used to compare TAVI patients receiving PRO or ULTRA devices. The primary endpoint was a composite of 1-year all-cause death, disabling stroke and rehospitalisation for heart failure. Five prespecified subgroups of patients were considered according to leaflet and left ventricular outflow tract calcifications, annulus dimensions and angulation, and leaflet morphology. RESULTS: Among a total of 1,897 patients, 587 matched pairs of patients with similar clinical and anatomical characteristics were compared. The primary composite endpoint did not differ between patients receiving PRO or ULTRA devices (Kaplan-Meier [KM] estimates 14.0% vs 11.9%; log-rank p=0.27). Patients receiving PRO devices had higher rates of 1-year disabling stroke (KM estimates 2.6% vs 0.4%; log-rank p=0.001), predominantly occurring within 30 days after TAVI (1.4% vs 0.0%; p=0.004). Outcomes were consistent across all the prespecified subsets of anatomical scenarios (all pinteraction>0.10). CONCLUSIONS: One-year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI and receiving PRO or ULTRA devices in the current clinical practice were similar, but PRO patients had higher rates of disabling stroke. Outcomes did not differ across the different anatomical subsets of the aortic root.

Impact of extra-mitral valve cardiac involvement in patients with primary mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair.

BACKGROUND: In the context of primary mitral regurgitation (PMR), the selection of patients for transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) does not include a systematic assessment of PMR-associated cardiac remodelling. AIMS: We aimed to investigate the epidemiology and prognostic significance of different phenotypes of extra-mitral valve (MV) cardiac involvement in a large series of patients with PMR referred for TEER. METHODS: The study included 654 patients from the multicentre Italian GIOTTO registry, stratified into groups according to extra-mitral valve (MV) cardiac involvement. The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Patients with no cardiac involvement (NI; n=58), left heart involvement (LHI; n=343) and right heart involvement (RHI; n=253) were analysed. Acute technical success was achieved in 98% of patients. Kaplan-Meier curve analysis revealed significantly worse survival in patients with LHI and RHI (p=0.041). On multivariate Cox regression analysis, extra-MV cardiac involvement, haemoglobin level and technical success were independent predictors of the primary endpoint occurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Grading cardiac involvement may help refine risk stratification, since at least 1 group of extra-MV cardiac involvement represents in itself a negative predictor of midterm outcome.

Incidence and predictors of 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR: Insights from the multicenter OBSERVANT II study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence and predictors of 30-day stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) were derived from early studies investigating first-generation devices. The incidence of 6-month stroke and its related predictors are unknown. AIMS: To investigate the incidence and to identify procedural and patient-related predictors of 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR. METHODS: Data from 2753 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR were obtained from the OBSERVANT-II study, an observational, prospective, multicenter cohort study. The study endpoints were symptomatic 30-day and 6-month stroke after TAVR. RESULTS: The occurrence of a 30-day and 6-month stroke was low (1.3% and 2.4%, respectively) but with significant impact on survival. Aortic valve predilatation (odds ratio [OR]: 2.28, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.12-4.65, p = 0.023), diabetes (OR: 3.10, 95% CI: 1.56-6.18, p = 0.001), and left ventricle ejection fraction < 50% (OR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.04-4.47, p = 0.04) were independent predictors of 30-day stroke, whereas diabetes (sub-distribution hazard ratio [SHR]: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.25-3.42, p = 0.004), pre-existing neurological dysfunction (SHR: 3.92, 95% CI: 1.54-10, p = 0.004), bicuspid valve (SHR: 4.75, 95% CI: 1.44-15.7, p = 0.011), and critical status (SHR: 3.05, 95% CI: 1.21-7.72, p = 0.018) were predictive of 6-month stroke. Conversely, antiplatelet therapy and anticoagulation were protective factors at both 30 days and 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke after TAVR was rare. Predilatation was the only procedural factor predictive of 30-day stroke, whereas the remaining were patient-related risk factors, suggesting appropriate risk stratification preoperatively.