Minimally Invasive Surgical Versus Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Retrospective Observational Single-Center Study in Japan.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (MICS-AVR) versus transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR) in Asian patients. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational, single-center study in Japan, including cases of MICS-AVR (n = 202) and TF-TAVR (n = 248) between 2014 and 2021. In a total of 450 cases, propensity score matching was performed at a ratio of 1:1, resulting in 96 pairs. Furthermore, we performed competing-risk regression and mediation analyses to determine the treatment effect on outcomes of interests, considering death as a competing risk, and to evaluate the mediation effect of paravalvular leak (PVL) severity. RESULTS: There were similar incidences of all-cause death, cardiac death, stroke and cerebral hemorrhage, and aortic valve reintervention between the 2 groups. However, the TF-TAVR cohort had a longer hospital length of stay and higher rates of significant PVL compared with the MICS-AVR cohort. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression analyses revealed that heart failure hospitalization (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.129, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.038 to 0.445, p = 0.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation (HR = 0.050, 95% CI: 0.006 to 0.409, p = 0.005) favored MICS-AVR. Competing-risk regression analyses confirmed similar findings. All outcomes were unrelated to PVL severity. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge, this is the first comparative study of clinical outcomes in Asian patients undergoing MICS-AVR versus TF-TAVR, revealing that MICS-AVR could be a feasible and efficient alternative to TF-TAVR. Future larger-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the present results.

Comparison of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement under local versus general anesthesia in patients with aortic stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis / 中国胸心血管外科临床杂志

@#Objective    To systematically review the efficacy and safety of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TFTAVR) under local anesthesia (LA) and general anesthesia (GA). Methods    Electronic databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang and CBM were searched to collect randomized controlled trial and cohort studies on clinical outcomes of TFTAVR under LA and GA from inception to September 2020. Two authors independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of studies, and a meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 16.0 software. Results    A total of 30 studies involving 52 087 patients were included in this study. There were 18 719 patients in the LA group and 33 368 patients in the GA group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the in-hospital all-cause mortality rate [RR=0.65, 95%CI (0.45, 0.94), P=0.021], 30-day all-cause mortality rate [RR=0.73, 95%CI (0.62, 0.86), P<0.001], 30-day stroke [RR=0.82, 95%CI (0.68, 0.98), P=0.025], cardiac arrest [RR=0.50, 95%CI (0.34, 0.73), P<0.001], ICU stay time [RR=−6.86, 95%CI (−12.31, −1.42), P=0.013], and total hospital stay  time [RR=−2.02, 95%CI (−2.59, −1.45), P<0.001] in the LA group were all better than those in the GA group. There was no significant difference in the in-hospital stroke [RR=0.83, 95%CI (0.69, 1.00), P=0.053], in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI) [RR=1.74, 95%CI (0.43, 7.00), P=0.434], or 30-day MI [RR=0.77, 95%CI (0.42, 1.42), P=0.404] between the two groups. Conclusion    LA provides a safe and effective way to induce sedation without intubation, and may be a good alternative to GA for TFTAVR.

Impact of Major Vascular Complication Access Site Status on Mortality After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement　- Results From the FinnValve Registry.

Background: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of anatomical site status and major vascular complication (MVC) severity on the outcome of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). Methods and Results: The FinnValve registry enrolled consecutive TAVR patients from 2008 to 2017. MVC was divided into 2 groups: non-access site-related MVC (i.e., MVC in aorta, aortic valve annulus or left ventricle); and access site-related MVC (i.e., MVC in iliac or femoral arteries). Severity of access site-related MVC was measured as units of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. Of 1,842 patients who underwent TF-TAVR, 174 had MVC (9.4%; non-access site related, n=29; access site related, n=145). Patients with MVC had a significantly higher 3-year mortality than those without MVC (40.8% vs. 24.3%; HR, 2.01; 95% CI: 1.16-3.62). Adjusted 3-year mortality risk was significantly increased in the non-access site-related MVC group (mortality, 77.8%; HR, 4.30; 95% CI: 2.63-7.02), but not in the access site-related MVC group (mortality, 32.6%; HR, 1.38; 95% CI: 0.86-2.15). In the access site-related MVC group, only those with RBC transfusion ≥4 units had a significantly increased 3-year mortality risk (mortality, 51.8%; HR, 2.18; 95% CI: 1.19-3.89). Conclusions: In patients undergoing TF-TAVR, MVC was associated with an increased 3-year mortality risk, incrementally correlating with anatomical site and bleeding severity.

Prophylactic Retrograde Distal Common Femoral Access as a Bail-out Strategy in Patients with Increased Risk for Femoral Access Complication During Transfemoral Aortic Valve Replacement.

OBJECTIVE: Several patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have complex peripheral arterial disease (PAD) that increases risk of vascular complications and failure of vascular closure device (VCD). Endovascular bailout of failed VCD is performed through contralateral femoral access. Further due to multiple different anatomic reasons the contralateral femoral access and "up and over" approach is unavailable for endovascular bailout of the VCD failure. We evaluated a novel bailout technique of obtaining an additional access in ipsilateral common femoral artery (CFA) or superficial femoral artery (SFA) distal to the main CFA access used for TAVR device. METHODS: We prospectively identified patients who were at high risk for VCD failure and had unavailable contralateral CFA approach from the pre-TAVR evaluation with multislice CT angiography. The data was collected prospectively for the TVT registry and retrospectively reviewed. All patients had an additional distal access obtained in the CFA or proximal SFA under direct fluoroscopy guidance after achieving main CFA access for TAVR. Using an inner 0.021″ micro-dilator from the 4-Fr micropuncture mini stick max access kit (AngioDynamics, Marlborough, MA) and a 200 cm long 0.018″ wire, the distal access was secured in place through the TAVR procedure. After completing the TAVR if the VCD gained successful hemostasis, the 0.021″ dilator was removed with manual pressure. If the VCD failed to achieve hemostasis, the distal access was upsized to a 7 Fr sheath for carrying out endovascular repair of the TAVR access. If the distal access was upsized to 7 Fr, that access was treated with VCD. The patients were monitored for acute in-hospital complication and followed for 6 months. RESULTS: During 2017 & 2018, 97.4% of 186 TAVRs were performed via femoral approach at our center. Six patients met the criteria for high-risk access and non-availability of the contralateral "up and over" approach. Of the 6 patients enrolled in this prospective study, 3 required endovascular management of TAVR access because of failed VCDs and were treated with covered stents using the distal ipsilateral access. The remaining 3 patients had successful use of VCDs for the TAVR access and the prophylactic access with 0.021″ dilator was managed with manual pressure. None of the six patients suffered any further vascular complication or bleeding. At the 6-month follow up no vascular complications or clinically driven events were identified from the TAVR access or additional distal ipsilateral access. CONCLUSION: This novel technique of prophylactic ipsilateral distal femoral access can provide an alternative bailout strategy for patients at high risk of closure device failure and unavailable contralateral femoral approach during transfemoral TAVR.

The utilization of single versus double Perclose devices for transfemoral aortic valve replacement access site closure: Insights from Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center.

INTRODUCTION: Percutaneous femoral access is the preferred access route for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The majority of experienced TAVR centers use two 6F Perclose ProGlide™ devices to close the primary vascular access site, deployed prior to upsizing sheath size with closure completed at the end of the case (the "preclose" approach). A strategy of utilizing a single Perclose device to preclose may have advantages including fewer complications, complexity, and cost, but the safety of this is unknown. This study examines in the safety and efficacy of using a single Perclose versus double Perclose for perclosure of large bore access during TAVR. METHODS: Patients undergoing Transfemoral (TF) TAVR from January 2014 to December 2017 within the Cleveland Clinic Aortic Valve Center were identified. A retrospective review of medical charts was conducted. Vascular complications were defined according to the VARC-2 criteria. RESULTS: A total of 740 patients were included; 487 (65.8%) received a single Perclose device while 253 (34.2%) received double Perclose devices. Baseline characteristics were similar with no differences between the single versus double Perclose groups, respectively. The access sheath size was similar in both groups with (14, 16, and 18 F) being the most common sizes utilized. Of the total 487 patients with single Perclose, 75.6% needed additional closure device (AngioSeal). With double Perclose strategy, additional closure device (AngioSeal) was used in 40.3% patients with 470 (63.5%) patients being successfully perclosed. Vascular complication rates including hematoma, stenosis requiring stenting, pseudoaneurysm, and other major vascular complications were similar between both groups. CONCLUSION: Single 6F ProGlide use for preclosure is a safe strategy for TF TAVR using the S3 valve. Additional closure device was not needed in almost one-quarter of the patients. When necessary, residual bleeding can be controlled with the AngioSeal Device at the end of the procedure. This single device preclose strategy can help to reduce the cost of TAVR procedure without increasing risk.

One-year clinical outcome with a novel self-expanding transcatheter heart valve.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate 1-year outcome using the ACURATE neo (Symetis S.A., a Boston Scientific Company, Ecublens, Switzerland) according to the updated Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) with emphasis on the composite endpoints "clinical efficacy after 30 days" and "time-related valve safety". BACKGROUND: Initial reports on the clinical performance of patients treated with the ACURATE neo are promising; however, information regarding one-year outcome is scarce, especially with regard to the composite endpoints proposed by the VARC-2. METHODS: One hundred and fifty one consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the ACURATE neo for severe aortic valve stenosis were enrolled. Data were prospectively collected and event rates during follow-up were calculated as the Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: Mean age was 81.1 ± 5.9 years and 49.7% (75/151) were female with a median logistic EuroScore of 13.8% [8.2-20.5]. Device success was achieved in 88.1% (133/151) and procedure related mortality was 0.7% (1/151). At one-year, all-cause mortality was 3.3% (5/151), while permanent pacemaker implantation occurred in 12.7% (19/151) of patients. The "clinical efficacy after 30 days" was observed in 24.8% (37/151), where the main contributor was symptom worsening in 14.8% (22/151) of cases. "Time-related valve safety" occurred in 22.0% (33/151) with structural valve deterioration as main contributor in 10.7% (16/151) of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Using the ACURATE neo, we found a favorable safety profile with low all-cause mortality at 1 year. The reported VARC-2 defined composite endpoints at 1 year reveal low rates of "clinical efficacy after 30 days" and "time-related valve safety".

Acute Femoral Occlusion After Adjunctive Angio-Seal Usage in Vascular Closure Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

We report 3 patients with acute femoral occlusion after adjunctive Angio-Seal use during transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement. All occlusions were recanalized by applying elaborative strategies for chronic total occlusion recanalization. Our experience reminds operators to cautiously use the Angio-Seal as a bailout treatment, especially in patients with high-risk clinical features. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).

Prospective Multicenter Evaluation of the Direct Flow Medical Transcatheter Aortic Valve System: 12-Month Outcomes of the Evaluation of the Direct Flow Medical Percutaneous Aortic Valve 18F System for the Treatment of Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis (DISCOVER) Study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the 1-year outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) of the Direct Flow Medical (DFM) valve in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis who were contraindicated or high risk for surgery. BACKGROUND: The DFM transcatheter heart valve is a new-generation, nonmetallic aortic valve with a pressurized support structure and conformable double-ring annular sealing delivered through an 18-F sheath. The device allows repositioning, retrieval, and assessment of valve performance before permanent implantation. METHODS: A prospective multicenter European registry was set up to determine the safety and performance of the valve in 100 consecutive patients (10 centers). Echocardiographic and angiographic data were evaluated by an independent core laboratory, and adverse events were adjudicated by a clinical events committee using Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria. RESULTS: Patients were 83.1 ± 5.9 years of age and had a logistic EuroSCORE of 22.5 ± 11.3% and a Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.7 ± 8.7%. Correct valve positioning was obtained in 99% of cases with a combined 30-day safety endpoint at 10%, including major stroke in 5.0%, major vascular complications in 2.0%, and death in 1%. At 12 months, 95% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class I or II. Freedom from any death was 90%, and freedom from any death or major stroke was 85%. Echocardiography demonstrated none/trace to mild aortic regurgitation in 100% of patients and an unchanged mean aortic gradient of 12.2 ± 6.6 mm Hg and effective orifice area of 1.6 ± 0.4 cm(2). CONCLUSIONS: At 1 year, the DFM transcatheter heart valve had durable hemodynamics. This study demonstrates that the low rate of early complications and the low risk of significant aortic regurgitation translated into midterm clinical benefit.

Learning curves for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the PARTNER-I trial: Technical performance.

OBJECTIVES: To assess technical performance learning curves of teams performing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TF-TAVR). BACKGROUND: TF-TAVR is a new procedure for treating severe aortic stenosis. The number of cases required for procedural efficiency is unknown. METHODS: In the PARTNER-I trial, 1,521 patients underwent TF-TAVR from 4/2007-2/2012. Learning curve analysis of technical performance metrics was performed using institution-specific patient sequence number, interval between procedures, and institutional trial entry date. Learning curve characteristics were assessed using semi-parametric and parametric mixed-effects models. RESULTS: As patient sequence number increased, average procedure time decreased from 154 to 85 minutes (P < 0.0001), and fluoroscopy time from 28 to 20 minutes (P < 0.0001). Procedure time plateaued at an average of 83 minutes (range 52-140). Procedure time plateau was dynamic during the course of the trial, averaging 25 cases (range 21-52) by its end. The later institutions enrolled in the trial, the shorter the initial procedure time. During the trial, percutaneous rather than surgical access increased from 7.9% to 69%. CONCLUSIONS: Technical performance learning curves exist for TF-TAVR; procedural efficiency increased with experience, with concomitant decreases in radiation and contrast media exposure. The number of cases needed to achieve efficiency decreased progressively, with optimal procedural performance reached after approximately 25 cases for late-entering institutions. Knowledge and experience accumulated by early TF-TAVR institutions were disseminated, shortening the learning curve of late-entering institutions. Technological advances resulting from learning during the trial moved the field from initial conservative surgical cut-down to percutaneous access for most patients. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.