Comparing two-year outcomes of balloon-expandable Myval and self-expanding Evolut R in severe aortic valve stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The new balloon-expandable (BE) Myval transcatheter heart valves (THV) has shown promising early results with low paravalvular leak (PVL) and permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rates. Limited data are available regarding its long-term performance. We aimed to compare the 2-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the self-expanding (SE) Evolut R and the BE Myval THVs. METHODS: The EVAL study included 166 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis who underwent TAVR either with SE Evolut R (n = 108) or BE Myval (n = 58) THV. Primary objectives include comparison on clinical efficacy (freedom from all-cause mortality, stroke, and cardiovascular hospitalization), echocardiographic performance and PPI rates between the two THVs. RESULTS: At 2-year the BE Myval group showed higher clinical efficacy (86% vs. 66%,HR:2.62, 95%CI 2.2-5.1;p = 0.006), with fewer cardiac hospitalizations (3.4% vs. 13.9%,p = 0.03). No significant differences in all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, or stroke rates were observed. The proportion of patients with ≥moderate PVL was significantly lower in the BE Myval compared to the SE Evolut R group (4%vs. 22%,p = 0.008). The mean transvalvular gradient was significantly higher in the SE group compared to the BE group (9.5 ± 4.3 vs. 6.9 ± 2.2 mmHg,p < 0.001), however there was no difference in the percentage of patients with a mean gradient ≥20 mmHg between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both THVs offer similar 2-year clinical outcomes. The BE Myval THV demonstrated advantages with higher clinical efficacy and lower PVL incidence. Longer follow-up and randomized trials are needed to validate these results and assess Myval's sustained performance and durability.

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.

Annular size and interaction with trans-catheter aortic valves for treatment of severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: Insights from the BEAT registry.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is safe and feasible in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), but whether annular size may influence TAVR results in BAV patients remains unclear. We aimed at evaluating the impact of aortic annular size on procedural and clinical outcomes of BAV patients undergoing TAVR, as well as potential interactions between annular dimension and trans-catheter heart valve (THV) type (balloon-expandable (BEV) vs. self-expanding (SEV). METHODS: BEAT is a multicenter registry of consecutive BAV stenosis undergoing TAVR. For this sub-study patients were classified according to annular dimension in small-annulus (area < 400 mm2 or perimeter <72 mm), medium-annulus (area ≥ 400 and < 575 mm2, perimeter ≥72 mm and< 85 mm), large-annulus (area ≥ 575 mm2 or perimeter ≥85 mm). Primary endpoint was Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) device success. RESULTS: 45(15.5%) patients had small, 132(45.3%) medium, and 114(39.2%) large annuli. Compared with other groups, patients with large annuli were more frequently male, younger, with higher body mass index, larger aortic valve area, higher rate of moderate-severe calcification, lower mean trans-aortic valve gradient and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. In large-annuli SEVs were associated with a lower VARC-2 device success (75.9% vs. 90.6%, p = 0.049) driven by a higher rate of paravalvular valvular leak (PVL) compared to BEVs (20.7% vs. 1.2%, p < 0.001). However, no differences in clinical outcomes were observed according to annular size nor THV type. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR in BAV patients is feasible irrespective of annular size. However in patients with large aortic annulus SEVs were associated with a significantly higher rate of PVLs compared to BEVs.

Impact of High Body Mass Index on Vascular and Bleeding Complications After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Increased body mass index (BMI) is an established cardiovascular risk factor. The impact of high BMI on vascular and bleeding complications in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is not clarified. RISPEVA, a multicenter prospective database of patients undergoing TAVI stratified by BMI was used for this analysis. Patients were classified as normal or high BMI (obese and overweight) according to the World Health Organization criteria. A comparison of 30-day vascular and bleeding outcomes between groups was performed using propensity scores methods. A total of 3776 matched subjects for their baseline characteristics were included. Compared with normal BMI, high BMI patients had significantly 30-day greater risk of the composite of vascular or bleeding complications (11.1% vs 8.8%, OR: 1.28, 95% CI [1.02 to 1.61]; p = 0.03). Complications rates were higher in both obese (11.3%) and overweight (10.5%), as compared with normal weight patients (8.8%). By a landmark event analysis, the effect of high versus normal BMI on these complications appeared more pronounced within 7 days after the TAVI procedure. A significant linear association between increased BMI and vascular complications was observed at this time frame (p = 0.03). In conclusion, compared with normal BMI, both obese and overweight patients undergoing TAVI, experience increased rates of 30-day vascular and bleeding complications. These findings indicate that high BMI is an independent risk predictor of vascular and bleeding complications after TAVI.

Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support from the collaborative multicenter Mechanical Unusual Support in TAVI (MUST) Registry.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the use and outcomes of percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) utilized during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) from high-volume centers. METHODS AND RESULTS: Our international multicenter registry including 13 high-volume TAVI centers with 87 patients (76.5 ± 11.8 years, 63.2% men) who underwent TAVI for severe aortic stenosis and required pMCS (75.9% VA-ECMO, 19.5% Impella CP, 4.6% TandemHeart) during the procedure (prior to TAVI 39.1%, emergent rescue 50.6%, following TAVI 10.3%). The procedures were considered high-risk, with 50.6% having severe left ventricular dysfunction, 24.1% biventricular dysfunction, and 32.2% severe pulmonary hypertension. In-hospital and 1-year mortality were 27.5% and 49.4%, respectively. Patients with prophylactic hemodynamic support had lower periprocedural mortality compared to patients with rescue insertion of pMCS (log rank = 0.013) and patients who did not undergo cardiopulmonary resuscitation during the TAVI procedure had better short and long term survival (log rank <0.001 and 0.015, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Given the overall survival rate and low frequency of pMCS-related complications, our study results support the use of pMCS prophylactically or during the course of TAVI (bailout) in order to improve clinical outcomes in high-risk procedures or in case of acute life-threatening hemodynamic collapse.

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.

Procedural and clinical outcomes of type 0 versus type 1 bicuspid aortic valve stenosis undergoing trans-catheter valve replacement with new generation devices: Insight from the BEAT international collaborative registry.

BACKGROUND: Although bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) is not considered a "sweet spot" to trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), a certain number of BAV underwent TAVR. Whether BAV phenotype affects outcomes following TAVR remains debated. We aimed at evaluating the impact of BAV phenotype on procedural and clinical outcomes after TAVR using new generation trans-catheter heart valves (THVs). METHODS: patients included in the BEAT registry were classified according to the BAV phenotype revealed at multi-slice computed tomography (MSCT) in type 0 (no raphe) vs. type 1 (1 raphe). Primary end-point was Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) device success. Secondary end-points included procedural complications, rate of permanent pacemaker implantation, clinical outcomes at 30-day and 1-year. RESULTS: Type 0 BAV was present in 25(7.1%) cases, type 1 in 218(61.8%). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between groups. Moderate-severe aortic valve calcifications at MSCT were less frequently present in type 0 vs. type 1 (52%vs.71.1%,p = 0.05). No differences were reported for THV type, size, pre and post-dilation between groups. VARC-2 success tended to be lower in type 0 vs. type 1 BAV (72%vs86.7%;p = 0.07). Higher rate of mean transprosthetic gradient ≥20 mmHg was observed in type 0 vs. type 1 group (24%vs6%,p = 0.007). No differences were reported in the rate of post-TAVR moderate-severe aortic regurgitation and clinical outcomes between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms TAVR feasibility in both BAV types, however a trend toward a lower VARC-2 device success and a higher rate of mean transprosthetic gradient ≥20 mmHg was observed in type 0 vs. type 1 BAV.

Efficacy and Safety of ProGlide Versus Prostar XL Vascular Closure Devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: The RISPEVA Registry.

Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) requires large-bore access, which is associated with bleeding and vascular complications. ProGlide and Prostar XL are vascular closure devices widely used in clinical practice, but their comparative efficacy and safety in TAVR is a subject of debate, owing to conflicting results among published studies. We aimed to compare outcomes with Proglide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices after TAVR. Methods and Results This large-scale analysis was conducted using RISPEVA, a multicenter national prospective database of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR treated with ProGlide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices. Both multivariate and propensity score adjustments were performed. A total of 2583 patients were selected. Among them, 1361 received ProGlide and 1222 Prostar XL. The predefined primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications assessed at 30 days and 1-year follow-up. At 30 days, there was a significantly greater reduction of the primary end point with ProGlide versus Prostar XL (13.8% versus 20.5%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.99]; P=0.043), driven by a reduction of bleeding complications (9.1% versus 11.7%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.58-0.98]; P=0.046). Propensity score analysis confirmed the significant reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding risk with ProGlide. No significant differences in the primary end point were found between the 2 vascular closure devices at 1 year of follow-up (multivariate adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72-1.10]; P=0.902). Comparable results were obtained by propensity score analysis. During the procedure, compared with Prostar XL, ProGlide yielded significant higher device success (99.2% versus 97.5%, respectively; P=0.001). Conclusions ProGlide has superior efficacy as compared with Prostar XL in TAVR procedures and is associated with a greater reduction of composite adverse events at short-term, driven by lower bleeding complications. Registration Information URL: clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02713932.

Coronary artery aneurysms, insights from the international coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR).

BACKGROUND: Coronary Aneurysms are a focal dilatation of an artery segment >1.5-fold the normal size of adjacent segments. Although some series have suggested a prevalence of 0.3-12%, data are lacking. In addition, they are not mentioned in practice guidelines. Our aim was investigate its prevalence, management and long-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: The coronary artery aneurysm registry (CAAR) involved 32 hospitals across 9 countries in America and Europe. We reviewed 436,467 consecutive angiograms performed over the period 2004-2016. Finally, 1565 patients were recruited. Aneurysm global prevalence was 0.35%. Most patients were male (78.5%) with a mean age of 65 years and frequent cardiovascular risk factors. The main indication for angiogram was an acute coronary syndrome, 966 cases. The number of aneurisms was ≤2 per patient in 95.8% of the cases, mostly saccular, most frequently found in the left anterior descending and with numbers proportional with coronary stenosis. Aortopathies were related with more aneurysms too. Most patients received any revascularization procedure (69%), commonly percutaneous (53%). After a median follow-up of 37.2 months, 485 suffered a combined event (MACE) and 240 died. Without major differences comparing CABG vs PCI, MACE and death were more frequent in patients who received bare metal stents. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary artery aneurysms are not uncommon. Usually, they are associated with coronary stenosis and high cardiovascular risk. Antiplatelet therapy seems reasonable and a percutaneous approach is safe and effective.