Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR with self-expanding valves

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the Evolut platform for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: the international, multicentre, prospective BIVOLUTX registry.

BACKGROUND: Prospective data about transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) patients are limited. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of the Evolut PRO and R (34 mm) self-expanding prostheses in BAV patients and explore the impact of different computed tomography (CT) sizing algorithms in a prospective registry. METHODS: A total of 149 bicuspid patients were treated in 14 countries. The primary endpoint was the intended valve performance at 30 days. Secondary endpoints were 30-day and 1-year mortality, severe patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) and the ellipticity index at 30 days. All study endpoints were adjudicated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 criteria. RESULTS: The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 2.6% (1.7-4.2). Type I L-R BAV was observed in 72.5% of the patients. Evolut valve sizes 29 and 34 mm were utilised in 49.0% and 36.9% of the cases, respectively. The 30-day cardiac death rate was 2.6%; the 1-year cardiac death rate was 11.0%. Valve performance at 30 days was observed in 142/149 (95.3%) patients. The mean aortic valve area post-TAVI was 2.1 (1.8-2.6) cm2, and the mean aortic gradient was 7.2 (5.4-9.5) mmHg. No patient had more than moderate aortic regurgitation at 30 days. PPM was observed in 13/143 (9.1%) surviving patients and was severe in 2 patients (1.6%). Valve function was maintained at 1 year. The mean ellipticity index remained 1.3 (interquartile range 1.2-1.4). Overall, 30-day and 1-year clinical and echocardiography outcomes were similar between the two sizing strategies. CONCLUSIONS: BIVOLUTX demonstrated a favourable bioprosthetic valve performance and good clinical outcomes after TAVI with the Evolut platform in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis. No impact from the sizing methodology could be identified.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Evolut PRO/PRO+ Self-Expanding Valves: Insights From the NEOPRO/NEOPRO-2 Registries.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) techniques and technology have continuously improved. Data regarding the impact of these advancements on outcomes in large real-world settings are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate temporal trends and assess contemporary outcomes after TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ supra-annular self-expanding valves. METHODS: This study included patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Procedural dates (August 2017 through November 2021) were stratified in quartiles (Q) and used to investigate temporal trends in TAVR outcomes. Predischarge, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 defined, and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 1616 patients from 28 centers were included. Over time, patients had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score (Q1-4, 4.1% [2.8-6.3%], 3.7% [2.6-5.3%], 3.3% [2.4-4.9%], 2.9% [2.2-4.3%]; P<0.001) and more moderate or heavy valve calcification (Q1-4, 80%, 80%, 82%, 88%; P=0.038). Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 technical success was 94.1%, with 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality of 2.4% and 10%, respectively. Throughout the study period, procedures were associated with higher rates of 30-day device success (Q1-4, 81.2%, 82.2%, 82.0%, 88.0%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and early safety (Q1-4, 66.8%, 67.5%, 74.0%, 77.6%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001), with fewer permanent pacemaker implantations (Q1-4: 15.3%, 20.0%, 12.1%, 11.6%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and residual mild or greater paravalvular leaks (Q1-4, 50.4%, 42.1%, 36.5%, 35.8%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding valve is safe and effective. Despite the treatment of heavier calcified anatomies, procedural outcomes are improving over time with less need for pacemaker implantation and less significant paravalvular leaks.

Peripartum Cardiogenic Shock and Mechanical Circulatory Support.

Despite remarkable improvements in the past two decades, the annual cardiovascular mortality rate has remained higher for women than for men. Pregnant women represent an underinvestigated population in clinical research, and the mechanisms of long-term cardiovascular complications in women with obstetric complications remain to be elucidated. Regarding advanced heart failure during pregnancy, interventional approaches are effective but still underutilised. Percutaneous mechanical circulatory support is a valuable option for peripartum cardiogenic shock, although its use during pregnancy is still limited. Survival rates have improved in recent years, but further emphasis on the importance of early recognition and initiation of heart failure treatment in this patient group is warranted. The aims of this review are to summarise the current literature on the implementation of mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock during pregnancy and delivery and to understand the role of percutaneous ventricular assist devices in the management of such conditions.

Transcatheter Aortic Bioprosthesis Durability: A Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implant (TAVI) is gaining momentum in the treatment of severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis, and its indication is expanding to lower surgical risk individuals, who are generally younger and have a long life expectancy. Therefore, transcatheter bioprostheses durability appears of critical importance. Aim of the present study is to evaluate mid-term outcomes of TAVI in a high-volume single center cohort. METHODS: We analyzed all consecutive patients (n = 408) who underwent transfemoral TAVI at a single, high-volume center, between 2007 and 2014. Study objectives were all-cause death and bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) at long term follow-up. Structural valve deterioration (SVD), BVF and valve-related death were defined according to current international standards. Follow-up was performed by in person visit and transthoracic echocardiography, which was obtained only in a minority of patients, or phone call as per patient preference. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 1821 days, overall mortality was 64.5%, with cardiovascular disease accounting for roughly half of total deaths. Valve-related deaths occurred in 10 patients. Seventeen patients were diagnosed with BVF, and 15 required repeat intervention. Moderate and severe SVD were observed in 10 and 7 patients, respectively. In the subgroup of patients with echocardiographic mid-term follow-up (n = 76), no significant increase of transprosthetic gradients nor increase of significant regurgitation was detected. CONCLUSION: In the present unselected, all-comers cohort, TAVI bioprostheses appeared to have excellent durability at long-term follow-up.

ADDED Index or Percentage Diameter of Residual Coronary Stenosis to Risk-Stratify Patients Presenting With STEMI.

BACKGROUND: We compared the prognostic value of the ADDED Index with visually estimated diameter (DS) of residual coronary stenosis (RS) in STEMI patients after successful PCI of the culprit lesion. Even though associated with a positive outcome, the functional assessment of non-culprit stenosis remains largely underused, especially in STEMI patients. The Angiography-DeriveD hEmoDynamic index (ADDED index) showed high accuracy to predict FFR and it might be used to better guide the diagnostic and therapeutic work-up of such patients. METHODS: We retrospectively included 596 patients grouped on the basis of either the ADDED Index (ADDED Negative (<2.23, n = 153) vs ADDED Positive (≥2.23, n = 129)) or the DS of the RS (RS Negative (<50%, n = 177) vs RS Positive (≥50%, n = 105)). Patients without any RS served as control (n = 314). Primary endpoints were: 1) major adverse cardiac events (MACE), composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), clinically driven revascularizations (CDR); 2) non-culprit vessel oriented clinical events (VOCE), composite of all-cause death, non-culprit vessel related MI and CDR. RESULTS: At 24 months the rate of both MACE and VOCE was significantly higher in both the ADDED Positive and RS Positive groups. However, differently from patients in whom complete revascularization was deferred on the basis of the angiography (RS Negative), no additional risk was found for patients in the ADDED Negative group. CONCLUSIONS: In STEMI patients with MVD deferring treatment of RS on the basis of the ADDED index, rather than the visually estimated DS, is associated with a favorable clinical outcome.

Impact of Baseline and Newly Acquired Conduction Disorders on Need for Permanent Pacemakers With 3 Consecutive Generations of Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Heart Valves.

INTRODUCTION: We aimed to compare conduction dynamics and need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after CoreValve, Evolut R and PRO (transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)). METHODS: Patients were stratified based on conduction at baseline; Cohort A had normal conduction, Cohort B had conduction abnormalities including atrioventricular (AV)-block, fascicular block or complete bundle branch block. Three different dynamic QRS-patterns were defined: stable QRS-duration, transient QRS-prolongation and persistent QRS-prolongation. We performed multivariable regression analysis to estimate the effect of the three separate transcatheter heart valves (THV's) on need for PPI at 30 days. RESULTS: TAVR was performed with CoreValve (N = 113), Evolut R (N = 157) or Evolut PRO (N = 92). Conduction dynamics were similar between the different THVs. Overall, Evolut R and PRO showed a tendency towards less PPI compared to CoreValve (17% vs. 19% vs. 27%, P = 0.08), which was driven by a lower PPI rate in Cohort A (6% vs. 11% vs. 25%, P = 0.002). Need for PPI was restricted to patients with persistent QRS-prolongation in Cohort A (26/106) but did not correlate with conduction dynamics in Cohort B. In multivariable logistic regression analysis the use of Evolut R (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19-0.78, P = 0.008) and PRO (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.19-0.91, P-value = 0.028) were independently associated with less need for PPI. CONCLUSION: The newer generations Evolut R and PRO were associated with less PPI compared to CoreValve. Acquired persistent conduction abnormalities predicted PPI after TAVR only in patients with normal conduction at baseline. Our findings may help identify eligible patients for early discharge after Evolut R/PRO TAVR.

Suture- or Plug-Based Large-Bore Arteriotomy Closure: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to test the superiority in terms of efficacy and safety of a dedicated plug-based vascular closure device (VCD) during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) over a suture-based VCD. BACKGROUND: Vascular complications after TAVR are relevant and often associated with VCD failure. METHODS: The MASH (MANTA vs. Suture-based vascular closure after transcatHeter aortic valve replacement) trial is an international, 2-center pilot randomized controlled trial comparing the MANTA VCD (Teleflex, Wayne, Pennsylvania) versus 2 ProGlides (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois). The primary composite endpoint consisted of access site-related major or minor vascular complications at 30-days' follow-up. Secondary endpoints included clinically relevant access site bleeding, time to hemostasis, and modified VCD failure (defined as failure to achieve hemostasis within 5 min or requiring additional endovascular maneuvers such as endovascular stenting, surgical techniques, or additional closure devices). Adverse events were adjudicated by an independent clinical events committee according to the VARC-2 definitions. RESULTS: A total of 210 TAVR patients were included between October 2018 and January 2020. Median age was 81 years, 54% were male, and the median STS score was 2.7%. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of access site-related vascular complications between MANTA and ProGlide (10% vs. 4%; p = 0.16). Clinically significant access site bleedings were similar with both closure techniques (9% vs. 6%; p = 0.57). Modified VCD failure occurred less frequently in MANTA versus ProGlide (20% vs. 40%; p < 0.01). Suture-based closure required more often additional closure devices, whereas MANTA numerically needed more covered stents and surgical bailouts. CONCLUSIONS: Plug-based large-bore arteriotomy closure was not superior to suture-based closure. Plug-based closure required fewer, but a different kind of bailout maneuvers.

Impact of drug-eluting stents on left ventricular wall motion after successful reperfusion of first anterior ST elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Timely myocardial reperfusion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) prevents the development of left ventricular (LV) dysfunction after myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to investigate whether bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug eluting stents (DES) differently affect the recovery of LV function in patients with ST-elevation MI (STEMI). METHODS: Overall 103anterior STEMI patients were retrospectively analyzed. All patients had single vessel disease with culprit lesion at the left anterior descending coronary artery. Patients were categorized in DES group (N.=67) and BMS group (N.=36). Changes in LV contractility were assessed by trans-thoracic echocardiogram as Left Ventricular Wall Motion Score Index (LVWMSI). Follow-up visits were performed between 6 and 12 months after hospital discharge. RESULTS: Compared to baseline, LV ejection fraction (EF) remained unchanged between the two groups at the follow-up; LVWMSI significantly improved in patients treated with DES (1.95±0.25 vs. 1.78±0.38, P<0.05), whereas did not change in those treated with BMS (2.09±0.21 vs. 1.98±0.33, P: not significant). At follow-up the LVWMSI was significantly higher in patients with DES than with BMS (P=0.048). LV end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes (LVESV, LVEDV) significantly increased in patients receiving a BMS, whereas it did not change in those receiving a DES (P<0.05). Multivariate analysis adjusted for age, gender, type of stent (DES or BMS), and type of revascularization (primary PCI or rescue PCI or thrombolysis + PCI) showed that DES implantation was an independent predictor of LVWMSI improvement (OR: 3.8 [1.143-12.969] P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: DES implantation is associated with a favorable impact on LV remodeling and regional contractility.

Comparison of the Sapien 3 versus the ACURATE neo valve system: A propensity score analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcomes of transfemoral ACURATE neo (NEO) and Sapien 3 (S3) patients in terms of device success and clinical safety outcomes using a propensity score analysis. BACKGROUND: Differences in clinical outcomes between the latest-generation balloon-expandable S3 and self-expanding NEO in a "real-world transfemoral TAVI population" are still unclear. METHODS: We compared up to 6 months clinical outcomes using a propensity score analysis (inverse probability of treatment weighting [IPTW]) to account for differences in baseline characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 345 patients underwent transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with either NEO or S3 at two centers in the Netherlands. Composite device success and early safety endpoints were comparable between NEO and S3 (Device success: IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.35 [95% CI: 0.12-1.18], and early safety: IPTW-adjusted OR: 0.51 [95% CI: 0.19-1.38]). Six-months mortality was 5.3 versus 3.6%, stroke was 2.8 versus 3.3%, and pacemaker rate was 6.1 versus 8.6%, respectively with p = NS. Mean aortic gradient was lower in the NEO group (5.72 ± 2.47 vs. 9.05 ± 3.48; p = <.001), with a comparable rate of moderate or severe paravalvular leak (0 versus 2.1%; p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Device success and clinical safety outcomes were comparable for both valves. Up to 6-months follow-up clinical outcomes and mortality rate remained excellent. Mean aortic gradient was lower after ACURATE neo implantation.

Heterogeneity of debris captured by cerebral embolic protection filters during TAVI.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the total amount, size and heterogeneity of debris captured among different transcatheter valve types and while repositioning. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 328 patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the SENTINEL cerebral embolic protection (CEP) at our centre were eligible. Histopathological and semiquantitative analysis of captured debris was performed and data were entered into our prospective database. TAVI was performed with either the Evolut R/PRO (N=123), SAPIEN 3 (N=113) or Lotus valve (N=92). Capture of debris occurred in 98% of patients. Lotus TAVI resulted in more frequent foreign body material (62% vs 40% vs 47%, p=0.006), endothelium (49% vs 30% vs 16%, p<0.0005), calcified material (33% vs 12% vs 24%, p=0.001) and myocardial tissue (19% vs 11% vs 2%, p<0.0005) compared to SAPIEN 3 or Evolut R/PRO. Native (functional) bicuspid valves (OR 2.91, 95% CI: 1.20-7.03, p=0.02) and Lotus (OR 2.44, 95% CI: 1.14-5.24, p=0.02) were associated with the highest risk for dislodging particles ≥1,000 um. Valve repositioning was independently associated with larger amounts of debris (OR 2.96, 95% CI: 1.42-6.16, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: All THV platforms had similar amounts of captured debris. THV repositioning seemed to be associated with a higher risk for dislodging greater amounts of debris to the brain.

Contemporary management of severe symptomatic bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: the BiTri Registry.

AIMS: A greater number of patients with bicuspid aortic valves (BAV) may be identified and treated as indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are expected to expand to younger patients. We evaluated the contemporary frequency and management of symptomatic patients with stenotic BAV in a multicenter European registry. METHODS: Between November 2017 and February 2018, all consecutive patients admitted for symptomatic aortic stenosis across six high-volume European hospitals were prospectively enrolled in the BiTri registry. RESULTS: Of the 832 patients, 17% (n = 138) had a BAV. The most frequent BAV phenotypes were type 1 (left--right coronary cusps fusion 64%) and type 1 (right-noncoronary cusps fusion 17%). Type 0 and type 2 accounted for 12 and 2%, respectively. When compared with tricuspid patients (n = 694), BAV patients were younger, with lower surgical risk. The transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) identified BAV in 64% of patients. Multisliced computed tomography (MSCT) additionally completed the diagnosis in 20% of patients. Surgical inspection finally identified the remaining undiagnosed 16% of BAV. A combination of TTE and MSCT was the most common diagnosis method for BAV. Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) was the predominant therapeutic option for BAV (70%) whilst TAVI was performed in 26%. CONCLUSION: BAV is frequently observed in symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis. These patients are younger, have a lower risk profile and are predominantly treated with SAVR as compared with tricuspid patients. However, TAVI is performed in almost one-third of BAV patients in contemporary European practice. TTE combined with MSCT identified 84% of BAV.

HAS-BLED score and actual bleeding in elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antithrombotic therapy after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unsettled. Short and longer-term thromboembolic and bleeding risk post TAVI remain high. Non-vitamin K oral anticoagulant drugs (NOAC) may be attractive after TAVI but the implications of prolonged NOAC in this setting require further research. The aim of this study was to assess the HAS-BLED bleeding risk in a contemporary TAVI population and explore its correlation with the effective bleeding complications with or without (N)OAC. METHODS: This study included 986 consecutive successful TAVI patients from 2 tertiary care facilities. Statistical analysis consisted of Cox regression. Bleedings were classified according to VARC-2 criteria. RESULTS: Mean age was 80.5 years, mean STS was 4.7 and 54% were males. A total of 483 patients (49.2%) had AF and 42.1% were on (N)OAC. The median HAS-BLED score was 2, 42.6% had a HAS-BLED≥3. Overall 216 patients (21.9%) experienced at least 1 bleeding, 166 (16.9%) occurred early after TAVI. HAS-BLED≥3 was an independent predictor of overall and pre-discharge bleeding (respectively HR 1.347 CI 1.029-1.763, P=0.03: HR 1.403 CI 1.032-1.905, P=0.05). The incidence of bleeding was similar in patient on (N)OAC vs. patients not on (N)OAC, both in the low and high HAS-BLED cohorts (P=0.93, P=0.42 respectively). Cardiovascular mortality was significantly higher in the high HAS-BLED cohort (37.5% vs. 24%, P=0.04) and HAS-BLED≥3 was an independent predictor of late mortality (HR 1.452 CI 1.028-2.053, P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In our series, contemporary TAVI patients had an elevated HAS-BLED score. The HAS-BLED score correlated with early bleedings and mortality after TAVI. Use of (N)OAC was not associated with more bleedings after TAVI.

Impact of predilatation prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding acurate neo device (From the Multicenter NEOPRO Registry)

Safety and feasibility of transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without systematic predilatation are not fully investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of pre-implantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with Acurate neo. The NEOPRO Registry retrospectively included 1,263 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with Acurate neo at 18 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. Information on preBAV was available for 1,262 patients (99.9%). Primary endpoints were pre-discharge moderate-tosevere paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR II+), 30-day new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), and 30-day all-cause mortality or stroke. A total of 1,262 patients who underwent TAVI with (n=1,051) or without predilatation (n=211) were included. A reduction in the pre-BAV rate was observed during the study period (from 95.7% in the first date quintile to 78.4% in the last date quintile). Patients who underwent pre-BAV had higher degrees of aortic valve (AV) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Primary endpoints were similar between pre-BAV and no pre-BAV groups (PAR II+ 5.5% vs. 3.4%, p=0.214; 30-day PPI 9.0% vs. 8.0%, p=0.660; 30-day death or stroke 4.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.743). The need for postdilatation and other procedural outcomes were comparable between groups. Predilatation did not have a significant impact on primary endpoints across AV and LVOT calcification subgroups (subgroup analyses) and was not independently associated with primary endpoints (multivariate analyses). In conclusion, transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without predilatation appears to be feasible and safe, especially in patients with milder degrees of AV and LVOT calcification. (AU)

Impact of Predilatation Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With the Self-Expanding Acurate neo Device (from the Multicenter NEOPRO Registry).

Safety and feasibility of transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without systematic predilatation are not fully investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of pre-implantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with Acurate neo. The NEOPRO Registry retrospectively included 1,263 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with Acurate neo at 18 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. Information on pre-BAV was available for 1,262 patients (99.9%). Primary end points were pre-discharge moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR II+), 30-day new permanent pacemaker implantation, and 30-day all-cause mortality or stroke. A total of 1,262 patients who underwent TAVI with (n = 1,051) or without predilatation (n = 211) were included. A reduction in the pre-BAV rate was observed during the study period (from 95.7% in the first date quintile to 78.4% in the last date quintile). Patients who underwent pre-BAV had higher degrees of aortic valve (AV) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Primary endpoints were similar between pre-BAV and no pre-BAV groups (PAR II+ 5.5% vs 3.4%, p = 0.214; 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation 9.0% vs 8.0%, p = 0.660; 30-day death or stroke 4.9% vs 4.4%, p = 0.743). The need for postdilatation and other procedural outcomes were comparable between groups. Predilatation did not have a significant impact on primary endpoints across AV and LVOT calcification subgroups (subgroup analyses) and was not independently associated with primary endpoints (multivariate analyses). In conclusion, transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without predilatation appears to be feasible and safe, especially in patients with milder degrees of AV and LVOT calcification.

Transcatheter Self-Expandable Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Small Aortic Annuli: The TAVI-SMALL Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of transcatheter self-expandable prostheses in patients with small annuli. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic heart valves appear to have better performance than surgical valves in terms of prosthesis-patient mismatch, especially in patients with aortic stenosis with small aortic annuli. METHODS: TAVI-SMALL (International Multicenter Registry to Evaluate the Performance of Self-Expandable Valves in Small Aortic Annuli) is a retrospective registry of patients with severe aortic stenosis and small annuli (annular perimeter <72 mm or area <400 mm2 on computed tomography) treated with transcatheter self-expandable valves (n = 859; Evolut R, n = 397; Evolut PRO, n = 84; ACURATE, n = 201; Portico, n = 177). Primary endpoints were post-procedural mean aortic gradient, indexed effective orifice area, and rate of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch. RESULTS: Pre-discharge gradients were consistently low in every group, with a slight benefit with the Evolut R (8.1 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.7 to 8.5 mm Hg) and Evolut PRO (6.9 mm Hg; 95% CI: 6.3 to 7.6 mm Hg) compared with the ACURATE (9.6 mm Hg; 95% CI: 8.9 to 10.2 mm Hg) and Portico (8.9 mm Hg; 95% CI: 8.2 to 9.6 mm Hg) groups (p < 0.001). Mean indexed effective orifice area was 1.04 cm2/m2 (95% CI: 1.01 to 1.08 cm2/m2) with a trend toward lower values with the Portico. No significant differences were reported in terms of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (overall rate 9.4%; p = 0.134), permanent pacemaker implantation (15.6%), and periprocedural and 1-year adverse events. Pre-discharge more than mild paravalvular leaks were significantly more common with the Portico (19.2%) and less common with the Evolut PRO (3.6%) compared with the Evolut R (11.8%) and ACURATE (9%) groups. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter self-expandable valves showed optimal clinical and echocardiographic results in patients with small aortic annuli, although supra-annular functioning transcatheter heart valves seemed to slightly outperform intra-annular functioning ones. The role of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expandable valves for the treatment of aortic stenosis in patients with small annuli needs to be confirmed in larger trials.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Next-Generation Self-Expanding Devices: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Comparison of Evolut PRO Versus Acurate neo Transcatheter Heart Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter registry, transfemoral TAVR with the NEO and PRO bioprostheses was associated with high device success, acceptable rates of paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and good 30-day clinical outcomes. After adjusting for potential confounders, short-term outcomes were similar between the devices.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with next-generation self-expanding devices: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched comparison of evolut pro versus acurate neo transcatheter heart valves

Abstract OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: (AU)