5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and echocardiographic outcome data of the CHOICE (Randomized Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve Versus Edwards SAPIEN XT) trial at 5 years. BACKGROUND: The CHOICE trial was designed to compare device performance of a balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valve (THV) versus a self-expanding (SE) THV. METHODS: The CHOICE trial is an investigator-initiated trial that randomized 241 high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and an anatomy suitable for treatment with both BE and SE THVs to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with either device. The primary endpoint was device success. Patients were followed up to 5 years, with assessment of clinical outcomes, and echocardiographic evaluation of valve function and THV durability. RESULTS: After 5 years, there were no statistically significant differences between BE and SE valves in the cumulative incidence of death from any cause (53.4% vs. 47.6%; p = 0.38), death from cardiovascular causes (31.6% vs. 21.5%; p = 0.12), all strokes (17.5% vs. 16.5%; p = 0.73), and repeat hospitalization for heart failure (28.9% vs. 22.5%; p = 0.75). SE patients had larger prosthetic valve area (1.6 ± 0.5 cm2 vs. 1.9 ± 0.5 cm2; p = 0.02) with a lower mean transprosthetic gradient (12.2 ± 8.7 mm Hg vs. 6.9 ± 2.7 mm Hg; p = 0.001) at 5 years. No differences were observed in the rates of paravalvular regurgitation. Clinical valve thrombosis occurred in 7 BE patients (7.3%) and 1 SE patient (0.8%; p = 0.06), and moderate or severe structural valve deterioration in 6 BE patients (6.6%) and no SE patient (0%; p = 0.018). The rate of bioprosthetic valve failure was low and not significantly different between both groups (4.1% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: Five-year follow-up of patients in the CHOICE trial revealed clinical outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early-generation BE and SE valves that were not statistically significantly different, with limited statistical power. Forward flow hemodynamics were significantly better with the SE valve. Moderate or severe structural valve deterioration was uncommon but occurred more frequently with the BE valve. (A Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CHOICE Trial [CHOICE]; NCT01645202).

Bioprosthetic Valve Performance After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Self-Expanding Versus Balloon-Expandable Valves in Large Versus Small Aortic Valve Annuli: Insights From the CHOICE Trial and the CHOICE-Extend Registry.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THVs) in large versus small aortic valve annuli. BACKGROUND: The degree of THV oversizing varies according to annular size, and this can modify the hemodynamic performance of self-expanding and balloon-expandable THVs. METHODS: Patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the randomized CHOICE (Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve vs Edwards SAPIEN XT) trial (CoreValve [CV], n = 120; SAPIEN XT [SXT], n = 121) and the nonrandomized CHOICE-Extend registry (Evolut R [ER], n = 100; SAPIEN 3 [S3], n = 334) were compared for THV performance by echocardiography (in all patients) and by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) regurgitant fraction (RF) (in a subgroup of patients). Patients were stratified according to aortic valve annular mean diameter into those with large (>23 mm) or small (≤23 mm) annuli. RESULTS: THV percentage oversizing was 19.1 ± 6.4% with the CV, 11.4 ± 7.0% with the SXT, 18.8 ± 4.8% with the ER, and 3.7 ± 5.5% with the S3. Transvalvular mean pressure gradient was lower with the CV and ER than with the SXT and S3 in both the large and small annulus groups. In the randomized CHOICE trial, moderate to severe prosthetic valve regurgitation (PVR) was more with the CV than the SXT in large annuli (15.1% vs. 0.0%; p = 0.002; MRI RF: 10.5 ± 10.2% vs. 4.4 ± 4.5%; p = 0.036) but not in small annuli (0.0% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.50; MRI RF: 4.0 ± 4.1% vs. 4.0 ± 3.4%; p = 0.98). In the CHOICE-Extend registry, moderate to severe PVR occurred in 2 patients, and any PVR was not significantly different between the ER and the S3 in large (41.7% vs. 32.5%; p = 0.24) or small (47.1% vs. 43.8%; p = 0.84) annuli. MRI RF was not different in large annuli (5.0 ± 3.8% vs. 5.0 ± 6.1%; p = 0.99) but was significantly lower with the ER than the S3 in small annuli (2.9 ± 2.3% vs. 4.8 ± 3.7%; p = 0.023). On multivariate analysis, transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the ER in small annuli was associated with a lower rate of prosthesis-patient mismatch than with the S3, with no increased risk for PVR. CONCLUSIONS: Older-generation balloon-expandable THVs were associated with less PVR than self-expanding THVs in patients with large but not small annuli. The next-generation self-expanding THV has improved sealing in patients with large annuli and may have potential advantages in patients with small annuli.

Long-term durability and haemodynamic performance of a self-expanding transcatheter heart valve beyond five years after implantation: a prospective observational study applying the standardised definitions of structural deterioration and valve failure.

AIMS: Long-term results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), in particular the incidence of bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF), are uncertain. This study presents data derived from a long-term, structured follow-up programme of the self-expanding CoreValve device utilising standardised definitions and core lab adjudication of valve performance. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study prospectively included all 152 patients who had undergone TAVI with the self-expanding CoreValve up to December 2011 at the Heart Center, Bad Segeberg, Germany. Late BVF (>30 days) was defined as either: 1) severe structural valve deterioration (transprosthetic mean pressure gradient ≥40 mmHg and/or ≥20 mmHg rise from baseline OR severe intraprosthetic aortic regurgitation), OR 2) bioprosthetic valve dysfunction leading to death or reintervention. Echocardiographic follow-up at 6.3±1.0 years (range: 5.0-8.9 years) was 88% complete (60 out of 68 survivors beyond five years) and all echocardiograms were analysed by an independent core laboratory. The all-cause mortality rate at 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 and 8 years was 14%, 20%, 50%, 60%, 65%, and 73%, respectively. Among survivors beyond five years, effective orifice area was 1.60±0.46 cm2, and transvalvular mean pressure gradient was 6.7±3.1 mmHg; no cases showed evidence of structural valve deterioration. Five patients (3.3%) had undergone redo TAVI (n=4) or surgery (n=1) 0.6 to 5.2 years after the index procedure, all due to paravalvular leakage. The estimated rate of BVF at eight years was 7.9% for the actuarial and 4.5% for the actual analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up up to 8.9 years after TAVI documents favourable performance of the self-expanding CoreValve with low rates of BVF.