Validation of 3D-reconstructed computed tomography images using OsiriX® software for pre-transcatheter aortic valve implantation aortic annulus sizing.

OBJECTIVES: We report validation of OsiriX® -an image processing freeware-to measure multi-slice computed tomography-derived annulus diameters for preprocedural transcatheter aortic valve implantation planning. METHODS: A total of 137 patients (82 ± 6.5 years, 42.3% male, logistic EuroSCORE 24.1 ± 14.2%) with severe aortic stenosis at high surgical risk underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation assessment: transoesophageal echocardiography, angiography and multi-slice computed tomography. Retrospectively, 3D multi-slice computed tomography reconstructions were generated using OsiriX and the reliability evaluated regarding inter- and intraobserver variability, intermodality correlation and estimation of the clinical impact on transcatheter aortic valve implantation sizing. RESULTS: Reliability of the novel OsiriX software was high with an interobserver mean difference of 0.6 ± 1.4 mm and intraclass correlation of absolute agreement of 0.84 (95% confidence interval 0.74-0.90). The intermodality accuracy between OsiriX measurements and conventional 2D computed tomography reconstructions, transoesophageal echocardiography and angiography revealed significantly larger sizing with OsiriX, with a mean difference to 2D computed tomography of 0.4 ± 2.2 mm, which would have changed valve sizing in 38% of patients. In 28%, a larger size would have been chosen, and this correlated highly with the occurrence of postoperative severe aortic regurgitation (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: While OsiriX measurements are an accurate and reproducible assessment of the aortic annulus, there are distinct and clinically relevant differences in aortic annulus dimensions between OsiriX measurements and previously standard imaging modalities. Sizing with OsiriX resulted in a larger perimeter compared with conventional 2D imaging. Careful assessment of valve size will take into account multiple imaging modalities.

Effect of B-type natriuretic peptides on long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels are elevated in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) and decrease acutely after replacement of the stenotic valve. The long-term prognostic value of BNP after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and the relative prognostic utility of single versus serial peri-interventional measurements of BNP and N-terminal prohormone BNP (NT-pro-BNP) are unknown. This study sought to determine the impact of BNP levels on long-term outcomes after TAVI and to compare the utility of BNP versus NT-pro-BNP measured before and after intervention. We analyzed 340 patients with severe AS and baseline pre-TAVI assessment of BNP. In 219 patients, BNP and NT-pro-BNP were measured serially before and after intervention. Clinical outcomes over 2 years were recorded. Patients with high baseline BNP (higher tertile ≥591 pg/ml) had increased risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 3.16, 95% confidence interval 1.84 to 5.42; p <0.001) and cardiovascular death at 2 years (adjusted hazard ratio 3.37, 95% confidence interval 1.78 to 6.39; p <0.001). Outcomes were most unfavorable in patients with persistently high BNP before and after intervention. Comparing the 2 biomarkers, NT-pro-BNP levels measured after TAVI showed the highest prognostic discrimination for 2-year mortality (area under the curve 0.75; p <0.01). Baseline-to-discharge reduction, but not baseline levels of BNP, was related to New York Heart Association functional improvement. In conclusion, high preintervention BNP independently predicts 2-year outcomes after TAVI, particularly when elevated levels persist after the intervention. BNP and NT-pro-BNP and their serial periprocedural changes provide complementary prognostic information for symptomatic improvement and survival.

Effect of Pulmonary Hypertension Hemodynamic Presentation on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Severe Symptomatic Aortic Valve Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: Insights From the New Proposed Pulmonary Hypertension Classification.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) frequently coexists with severe aortic stenosis, and PH severity has been shown to predict outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The effect of PH hemodynamic presentation on clinical outcomes after TAVI is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 606 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 433 (71.4%) patients with severe aortic stenosis and a preprocedural right heart catheterization were assessed. Patients were dichotomized according to whether PH was present (mean pulmonary artery pressure, ≥25 mm Hg; n=325) or not (n=108). Patients with PH were further dichotomized by left ventricular end-diastolic pressure into postcapillary (left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, >15 mm Hg; n=269) and precapillary groups (left ventricular end-diastolic pressure, ≤15 mm Hg; n=56). Finally, patients with postcapillary PH were divided into isolated (n=220) and combined (n=49) subgroups according to whether the diastolic pressure difference (diastolic pulmonary artery pressure-left ventricular end-diastolic pressure) was normal (<7 mm Hg) or elevated (≥7 mm Hg). Primary end point was mortality at 1 year. PH was present in 325 of 433 (75%) patients and was predominantly postcapillary (n=269/325; 82%). Compared with baseline, systolic pulmonary artery pressure immediately improved after TAVI in patients with postcapillary combined (57.8±14.1 versus 50.4±17.3 mm Hg; P=0.015) but not in those with precapillary (49.0±12.6 versus 51.6±14.3; P=0.36). When compared with no PH, a higher 1-year mortality rate was observed in both precapillary (hazard ratio, 2.30; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-5.22; P=0.046) and combined (hazard ratio, 3.15; 95% confidence interval, 1.43-6.93; P=0.004) but not isolated PH patients (P=0.11). After adjustment, combined PH remained a strong predictor of 1-year mortality after TAVI (hazard ratio, 3.28; P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Invasive stratification of PH according to hemodynamic presentation predicts acute response to treatment and 1-year mortality after TAVI.

Clinical outcomes and revascularization strategies in patients with low-flow, low-gradient severe aortic valve stenosis according to the assigned treatment modality.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared clinical outcomes and revascularization strategies among patients presenting with low ejection fraction, low-gradient (LEF-LG) severe aortic stenosis (AS) according to the assigned treatment modality. BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment modality for patients with LEF-LG severe AS and concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD) requiring revascularization is unknown. METHODS: Of 1,551 patients, 204 with LEF-LG severe AS (aortic valve area <1.0 cm(2), ejection fraction <50%, and mean gradient <40 mm Hg) were allocated to medical therapy (MT) (n = 44), surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (n = 52), or transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) (n = 108). CAD complexity was assessed using the SYNTAX score (SS) in 187 of 204 patients (92%). The primary endpoint was mortality at 1 year. RESULTS: LEF-LG severe AS patients undergoing SAVR were more likely to undergo complete revascularization (17 of 52, 35%) compared with TAVR (8 of 108, 8%) and MT (0 of 44, 0%) patients (p < 0.001). Compared with MT, both SAVR (adjusted hazard ratio [adj HR]: 0.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07 to 0.38; p < 0.001) and TAVR (adj HR: 0.30; 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.52; p < 0.001) improved survival at 1 year. In TAVR and SAVR patients, CAD severity was associated with higher rates of cardiovascular death (no CAD: 12.2% vs. low SS [0 to 22], 15.3% vs. high SS [>22], 31.5%; p = 0.037) at 1 year. Compared with no CAD/complete revascularization, TAVR and SAVR patients undergoing incomplete revascularization had significantly higher 1-year cardiovascular death rates (adj HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.07 to 7.36; p = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Among LEF-LG severe AS patients, SAVR and TAVR improved survival compared with MT. CAD severity was associated with worse outcomes and incomplete revascularization predicted 1-year cardiovascular mortality among TAVR and SAVR patients.

Early results of first versus second generation Amplatzer occluders for left atrial appendage closure in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion has been proven to be an effective treatment for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation. For this purpose, the Amplatzer cardiac plug (ACP) was introduced. Its second generation, the Amulet, was developed for easier delivery, better coverage, and reduction of complications. AIM: To investigate the safety and efficacy of first generation versus second generation Amplatzer occluders for LAA occlusion. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the LAA occlusion registries of the Bern and Zurich university hospitals. Comparison of the last consecutive 50 ACP cases versus the first consecutive 50 Amulet cases in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. For safety, a periprocedural combined endpoint, which is composed of death, stroke, cardiac tamponade, and bailout by surgery was predefined. For efficacy, the endpoint was procedural success. RESULTS: There were no differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics. The percentage of associated interventions during LAA occlusion was high in (78% with ACP vs. 70% with Amulet p = ns). Procedural success was similar in both groups (98 vs. 94%, p = 0.61). The combined safety endpoint for severe adverse events was reached by a similar rate of patients in both groups (6 vs. 8%, p = 0.7). Overall complication rate was insignificantly higher in the ACP group, which was mainly driven by clinically irrelevant pericardial effusions (24 vs. 14%, p = 0.31). Death, stroke, or tamponade were similar between the groups (0 vs. 2%, 0 vs. 0%, or 6 vs. 6%, p = ns). CONCLUSION: Transcatheter LAA occlusion for stroke prophylaxis in patients with atrial fibrillation can be performed with similarly high success rates with first and second generations of Amplatzer occluders. According to this early experience, the Amulet has failed to improve results of LAA occlusion. The risk for major procedural adverse events is acceptable but has to be taken into account when selecting patients for LAA occlusion, a preventive procedure.

Impact of mitral regurgitation on clinical outcomes of patients with low-ejection fraction, low-gradient severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Up to 1 in 6 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) present with low-ejection fraction, low-gradient (LEF-LG) severe aortic stenosis and concomitant relevant mitral regurgitation (MR) is present in 30% to 55% of these patients. The effect of MR on clinical outcomes of LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 606 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, 113 (18.7%) patients with LEF-LG severe aortic stenosis (mean gradient ≤40 mm Hg, aortic valve area <1.0 cm(2), left ventricular ejection fraction <50%) were analyzed. LEF-LG patients were dichotomized into ≤mild MR (n=52) and ≥moderate MR (n=61). Primary end point was all-cause mortality at 1 year. No differences in mortality were observed at 30 days (P=0.76). At 1 year, LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR had an adjusted 3-fold higher rate of all-cause mortality (11.5% versus 38.1%; adjusted hazard ratio, 3.27 [95% confidence interval, 1.31-8.15]; P=0.011), as compared with LEF-LG patients with ≤mild MR. Mortality was mainly driven by cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.62; P=0.005). As compared with LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR assigned to medical therapy, LEF-LG patients with ≥moderate MR undergoing TAVI had significantly lower all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.38; 95% confidence interval, 0.019-0.75) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate or severe MR is a strong independent predictor of late mortality in LEF-LG patients undergoing TAVI. However, LEF-LG patients assigned to medical therapy have a dismal prognosis independent of MR severity suggesting that TAVI should not be withheld from symptomatic patients with LEF-LG severe aortic stenosis even in the presence of moderate or severe MR.

Long-term outcome of elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis as a function of treatment modality.

OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term clinical outcomes of consecutive high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis according to treatment allocation to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or medical treatment (MT). METHODS: Patients with severe aortic stenosis were consecutively enrolled into a prospective single centre registry. RESULTS: Among 442 patients (median age 83 years, median STS-score 4.7) allocated to MT (n=78), SAVR (n=107), or TAVI (n=257) all-cause mortality amounted to 81%, 37% and 43% after a median duration of follow-up of 3.9 years (p<0.001). Rates of major adverse cerebro-cardiovascular events were lower in patients undergoing SAVR or TAVI as compared with MT (SAVR vs MT: HR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.46) (TAVI vs MT: HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.46), with no significant difference between SAVR and TAVI (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.25). Whereas SAVR (HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.61), TAVI (HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.52), and female gender (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.99) were associated with improved survival, body mass index ≤20 kg/m(2) (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.47), diabetes (HR 1.48, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.12), peripheral vascular disease (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.81), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.37) and pulmonary hypertension (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 2.00) were identified as independent predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, long-term clinical outcome through 5 years was comparable between patients allocated to SAVR or TAVI. In contrast, patients with MT had a dismal prognosis.

Extent and distribution of calcification of both the aortic annulus and the left ventricular outflow tract predict aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

AIMS: We sought to analyse local distribution of aortic annulus and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and its impact on aortic regurgitation (AR) immediately after device placement. A group of 177 patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing multislice computed tomography of the aortic root followed by TAVR were enrolled in this single-centre study. Annular and LVOT calcifications were assessed per cusp using a semi-quantitative grading system (0: none; 1 [mild]: small, non-protruding calcifications; 2 [moderate]: protruding [>1 mm] or extensive [>50% of cusp sector] calcifications; 3 [severe]: protruding and extensive calcifications). Any calcification of the annulus or LVOT was present in 107 (61%) and 63 (36%) patients, respectively. Prevalence of annulus/LVOT calcifications in the left coronary cusp was 42% and 25%, respectively, in the non-coronary cusp 28% and 13%, in the right coronary cusp 13% and 5%. AR grade 2 to 4 assessed by the method of Sellers immediately after TAVR device implantation was observed in 55 patients (31%). Multivariate regression analysis revealed that the overall annulus calcification (OR [95% CI] 1.48 [1.10-2.00]; p=0.0106), the overall LVOT calcification (1.93 [1.26-2.96]; p=0.0026), any moderate or severe LVOT calcification (5.37 [1.52-18.99]; p=0.0092), and asymmetric LVOT calcification were independent predictors of AR. Calcifications of the aortic annulus and LVOT are frequent in patients undergoing TAVR, and both the distribution and the severity of calcifications appear to be independent predictors of aortic regurgitation after device implantation.

Feasibility and outcomes of combined transcatheter aortic valve replacement with other structural heart interventions in a single session: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Concurrent cardiac diseases are frequent among elderly patients and invite simultaneous treatment to ensure an overall favourable patient outcome. AIM: To investigate the feasibility of combined single-session percutaneous cardiac interventions in the era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: This prospective, case-control study included 10 consecutive patients treated with TAVI, left atrial appendage occlusion and percutaneous coronary interventions. Some in addition had patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect closure in the same session. The patients were matched in a 1:10 manner with TAVI-only cases treated within the same time period at the same institution regarding their baseline factors. The outcome was validated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria. RESULTS: Procedural time (126±42 vs 83±40 min, p=0.0016), radiation time (34±8 vs 22±12 min, p=0.0001) and contrast dye (397±89 vs 250±105 mL, p<0.0001) were higher in the combined intervention group than in the TAVI-only group. Despite these drawbacks, no difference in the VARC endpoints was evident during the in-hospital period and after 30 days (VARC combined safety endpoint 32% for TAVI only and 20% for combined intervention, p=1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter treatment of combined cardiac diseases is feasible even in a single session in a high-volume centre with experienced operators.

Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) using the Edwards FORTIS device.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has demonstrated the feasibility of treating valvular heart disease with transcatheter therapy. On the back of this success, various transcatheter concepts are being evaluated to treat other valvular disease, especially mitral regurgitation (MR). The concepts currently approved to treat MR replicate surgical mitral valve repair. However, most of them cannot eliminate MR completely. Similar to TAVI, a transcatheter mitral valve implantation may provide a valuable alternative. The FORTIS transcatheter mitral valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) is a self-expanding device implanted via a transapical approach. We describe our experience and early results in the first five patients treated on compassionate grounds. We also describe the details of the device, selection criteria and technical details of implantation.

Coronary artery disease severity and aortic stenosis: clinical outcomes according to SYNTAX score in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate whether coronary artery disease (CAD) severity exerts a gradient of risk in patients with aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 445 patients with severe AS undergoing TAVI were included into a prospective registry between 2007 and 2012. The preoperative SYNTAX score (SS) was determined from baseline coronary angiograms. In case of revascularization prior to TAVI, residual SS (rSS) was also determined. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients without CAD (n = 158), patients with low SS (0-22, n = 207), and patients with high SS (SS > 22, n = 80). The pre-specified primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, CAD severity was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint (no CAD: 12.5%, low SS: 16.1%, high SS: 29.6%; P = 0.016). This was driven by differences in cardiovascular mortality (no CAD: 8.6%, low SS: 13.6%, high SS: 20.4%; P = 0.029), whereas the risk of stroke (no CAD: 5.1%, low SS: 3.3%, high SS: 6.7%; P = 0.79) and MI (no CAD: 1.5%, low SS: 1.1%, high SS: 4.0%; P = 0.54) was similar across the three groups. Patients with high SS received less complete revascularization as indicated by a higher rSS (21.2 ± 12.0 vs. 4.0 ± 4.4, P < 0.001) compared with patients with low SS. High rSS tertile (> 14) was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint at 1 year (no CAD:12.5%, low rSS: 16.5%, high rSS: 26.3%, P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Severity of CAD appears to be associated with impaired clinical outcomes at 1 year after TAVI. Patients with SS > 22 receive less complete revascularization and have a higher risk of cardiovascular death, stroke, or MI than patients without CAD or low SS.

Preinterventional screening of the TAVI patient: how to choose the suitable patient and the best procedure.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a novel therapy, which has transformed the management of inoperable patients presenting with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). It is also a proven and less invasive alternative therapeutic option for high-risk symptomatic patients presenting with severe AS who are otherwise eligible for surgical aortic valve replacement. Patient age is not strictly a limitation for TAVI but since this procedure is currently restricted to high-risk and inoperable patients, it follows that most patients selected for TAVI are at an advanced age. Patient frailty and co-morbidities need to be assessed and a clinical judgment made on whether the patient will gain a measureable improvement in their quality of life. Risk stratification has assumed a central role in selecting suitable patients and surgical risk algorithms have proven helpful in this regard. However, limitations exist with these risk models, which must be understood in the context of TAVI. When making final treatment decisions, it is essential that a collaborative multidisciplinary "heart team" be involved and this is stressed in the most recent guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology. Choosing the best procedure is contingent upon anatomical feasibility, and multimodality imaging has emerged as an integral component of the pre-interventional screening process in this regard. The transfemoral route is now considered the default approach although vascular complications remain a concern. A minimal vessel diameter of 6 mm is required for currently commercial available vascular introducer sheaths. Several alternative access routes are available to choose from when confronted with difficult iliofemoral anatomy such as severe peripheral vascular disease or diffuse circumferential vessel calcification. The degree of aortic valve leaflet and annular calcification also needs to be assessed as the latter is a risk factor for post-procedural paravalvular aortic regurgitation. The ultimate goal of patient selection is to achieve the highest procedural success rate while minimizing complications and to choose patients most likely to derive tangible benefit from this procedure.

Accuracy and reproducibility of aortic annulus sizing using a dedicated three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction tool in patients evaluated for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

AIMS: To evaluate the accuracy and reproducibility of aortic annulus sizing using a multislice computed tomography (MSCT) based aortic root reconstruction tool compared with conventional imaging among patients evaluated for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients referred for TAVR underwent standard preprocedural assessment of aortic annulus parameters using MSCT, angiography and transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE). Three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of MSCT images of the aortic root was performed using 3mensio (3mensio Medical Imaging BV, Bilthoven, The Netherlands), allowing for semi-automated delineation of the annular plane and assessment of annulus perimeter, area, maximum, minimum and virtual diameters derived from area and perimeter (aVD and pVD). A total of 177 patients were enrolled. We observed a good inter-observer variability of 3D reconstruction assessments with concordance coefficients for agreement of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.87-0.93) and 0.91 (0.88-0.94) for annulus perimeter and area assessments, respectively. 3D derived pVD and aVD correlated very closely with a concordance coefficient of 0.97 (0.96-0.98) with a mean difference of 0.5±0.3 mm (pVD-aVD). 3D derived pVD showed the best, but moderate concordance with diameters obtained from coronal MSCT (0.67, 0.56-0.75; 0.3±1.8 mm), and the lowest concordance with diameters obtained from TEE (0.42, 0.31-0.52; 1.9±1.9 mm). CONCLUSIONS: MSCT-based 3D reconstruction of the aortic annulus using the 3mensio software enables accurate and reproducible assessment of aortic annulus dimensions.

Initial clinical experience with the Coherex FlatStent™ and FlatStent™ EF PFO closure system for in-tunnel PFO closure: results of the Coherex-EU study.

OBJECTIVE: The Coherex-EU Study evaluated the safety and efficacy of PFO closure utilizing novel in-tunnel PFO closure devices. BACKGROUND: Transcatheter closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) followed the development of transcatheter closure devices designed to patch atrial septal defects (ASDs). The Coherex FlatStent™ and FlatStent™ EF devices were designed specifically to treat PFO anatomy. METHODS: A total of 95 patients with a clinical indication for PFO closure were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter first in man study at six clinical sites. Thirty-six patients received the first-generation FlatStent study device, and 57 patients received the second-generation FlatStent EF study device, which was modified based on clinical experience during the first 38 cases. Two patients enrolled to receive the first generation did not receive a device. RESULTS: At 6 months post-procedure, 45% (17/38) of the intention-to-treat (ITT) cohort receiving the first-generation FlatStent device had complete closure, 26% (10/38) had a trivial residual shunt, and 29% (11/38) had a moderate to large residual shunt. In the ITT cohort receiving the second-generation FlatStent EF device, 76% (43/57) had complete closure, 12% (7/57) had a trivial shunt, and 12% had a moderate to large shunt. Five major adverse events occurred, all without sequelae. CONCLUSION: This initial study of the Coherex FlatStent/FlatStent EF PFO Closure System demonstrated the potential for in-tunnel PFO closure. The in-tunnel Coherex FlatStent EF may offer an alternative to septal repair devices for PFO closure in appropriately selected patients; however, further investigation will be necessary to establish the best use of this device.

Clinical outcomes of patients with low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis and either preserved or reduced ejection fraction undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIMS: Our aim was to evaluate the invasive haemodynamic indices of high-risk symptomatic patients presenting with 'paradoxical' low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis (AS) (PLF-LG) and low-flow, low-gradient severe AS (LEF-LG) and to compare clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) among these challenging AS subgroups. METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 534 symptomatic patients undergoing TAVI, 385 had a full pre-procedural right and left heart catheterization. A total of 208 patients had high-gradient severe AS [HGAS; mean gradient (MG) ≥40 mmHg], 85 had PLF-LG [MG ≤ 40 mmHg, indexed aortic valve area [iAVA] ≤0.6 cm(2) m(-2), stroke volume index ≤35 mL/m(2), ejection fraction (EF) ≥50%], and 61 had LEF-LG (MG ≤ 40 mmHg, iAVA ≤0.6 cm(2) m(-2), EF ≤40%). Compared with HGAS, PLF-LG and LEF-LG had higher systemic vascular resistances (HGAS: 1912 ± 654 vs. PLF-LG: 2006 ± 586 vs. LEF-LG: 2216 ± 765 dyne s m(-5), P = 0.007) but lower valvulo-arterial impedances (HGAS: 7.8 ± 2.7 vs. PLF-LG: 6.9 ± 1.9 vs. LEF-LG: 7.7 ± 2.5 mmHg mL(-1) m(-2), P = 0.027). At 30 days, no differences in cardiac death (6.5 vs. 4.9 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.90) or death (8.4 vs. 6.1 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.88) were observed among HGAS, PLF-LG, and LEF-LG groups, respectively. At 1 year, New York Heart Association functional improvement occurred in most surviving patients (HGAS: 69.2% vs. PLF-LG: 71.7% vs. LEF-LG: 89.3%, P = 0.09) and no significant differences in overall mortality were observed (17.6 vs. 20.5 vs. 24.5%, P = 0.67). Compared with HGAS, LEF-LG had a higher 1 year cardiac mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.45, 95% confidence interval 1.04-5.75, P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: TAVI in PLF-LG or LEF-LG patients is associated with overall mortality rates comparable with HGAS patients and all groups profit symptomatically to a similar extent.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the transfemoral access route is the default access.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a widely accepted alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) among non-operable patients or selected high-risk patients with degenerative, severe aortic stenosis. TAVI is considered less invasive when compared with SAVR; however, there remain significant differences between different TAVI access routes. The transfemoral approach is considered the least invasive access route, and can be performed as a fully percutaneous procedure in a spontaneously breathing patient under local anaesthesia and mild sedation only. Moreover, transfemoral TAVI patients are typically transferred to coronary care rather than to an intensive care unit after the procedure, and benefit from early ambulation and a reduction in overall length of hospital stay. Considering these patient-specific and health-economic advantages, several TAVI centres follow the least invasive strategy for their patients and have implemented the transfemoral access route as the default access in their institutions. This article provides an overview on the prerequisites for a successful transfemoral TAVI procedure, describes the procedural advantages compared to alternative access routes, and highlights differences in clinical outcomes.

Atrial fibrillation and aortic stenosis: impact on clinical outcomes among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is an important risk factor for stroke and is common among elderly patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of AF on clinical outcomes among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between August 2007 and October 2011, a total of 389 high-risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation were included into a prospective registry. AF was recorded in 131 patients (33.7%) with a mean CHA(2)DS(2)-VASC score of 4.5±1.2 and was paroxysmal in 26 (25.0%), persistent in 8 (7.7%), and permanent in 70 patients (67.3%). Patients with and without AF had similar baseline characteristics except for fewer revascularization procedures (coronary artery bypass grafting: 12% versus 22%; P=0.03) among AF patients. At 1 year, all-cause mortality was higher among patients with AF (30.9%) compared with those without AF (13.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 2.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-3.90; P=0.0008). This was observed irrespective of the type of AF (permanent, HR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.40-4.38; persistent, HR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.10-11.78; paroxysmal, HR, 2.88; 95% CI, 1.37-6.05). Mortality gradually increased with higher CHA(2)DS(2)-VASC scores (score 1-3: HR, 2.20; 95% CI, 0.92-5.27; score 6-8: HR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.07-8.20). The risks of stroke (3.9% versus 5.1%; HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.23-1.96; P=0.47) and life-threatening bleeding (19.8% versus 14.7%; HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.86-2.19; P=0.19) were similar among patients with and without AF. CONCLUSIONS: AF is common among high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation and is associated with a >2-fold increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, irrespective of the type of AF. The gradient of risk directly correlates with the CHA(2)DS(2)-VASC score.