Search

Objectives Patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and severe mitral regurgitation or severe tricuspid regurgitation were excluded from the major transcatheter aortic valve replacement trials. We studied these 2 subgroups in patients at extreme risk for surgery in the prospective, nonrandomized, single-arm CoreValve US Expanded Use Study. Methods The primary end point was all-cause mortality or major stroke at 1 year. A favorable medical benefit was defined as a Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score greater than 45 at 6 months and greater than 60 at 1 year and with a less than 10-point decrease from baseline. Results There were 53 patients in each group. Baseline characteristics for the severe mitral regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation cohorts were age 84.2 ± 6.4 years and 84.9 ± 6.5 years; male, 29 (54.7%) and 22 (41.5%), and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 9.9% ± 5.0% and 9.2% ± 4.0%, respectively. Improvement in valve regurgitation from baseline to 1 year occurred in 72.7% of the patients with severe mitral regurgitation and in 61.8% of patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation. A favorable medical benefit occurred in 31 of 47 patients (66.0%) with severe mitral regurgitation and 33 of 47 patients (70.2%) with severe tricuspid regurgitation at 6 months, and in 25 of 44 patients (56.8%) with severe mitral regurgitation and 24 of 45 patients (53.3%) with severe tricuspid regurgitation at 1 year. All-cause mortality or major stroke for the severe mitral regurgitation and severe tricuspid regurgitation cohorts were 11.3% and 3.8% at 30 days and 21.0% and 19.2% at 1 year, respectively. There were no major strokes in either group at 1 year. Conclusions Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severe mitral regurgitation or severe tricuspid regurgitation is reasonable and safe and leads to improvement in atrioventricular valve regurgitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background--Multidetector computed tomography is useful for determining the appropriate transcatheter heart valve (THV) size in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are suboptimal surgical candidates. The relationship between adherence to the recommended CoreValve sizing algorithm and clinical outcomes is not known. Methods and Results--We evaluated 1023 patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed high or extreme risk for surgery treated with the CoreValve THV. All patients underwent preprocedural multidetector computed tomography, and the scans were reviewed at a central analysis center using standardized software. Compliance to a recommended sizing algorithm was used to identify patients with below-range, in-range, and above-range THV sizing. A device annular sizing ratio (DAR) was also calculated based on the native annulus perimeter and perimeter of the selected THV. Clinical end points included the presence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation evaluated by an independent echocardiographic laboratory. Adherence to the sizing algorithm was highest with a 31-mm THV (92.6%) and lowest with the 23-mm THV (38.5%). Below-range sizing was associated with a higher rate of moderate or severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation (15.3%) than in-range (6.5%) or above-range (10.0%; P<0.001) sizing. Higher DARs were associated with lower rates of moderate or severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation: DAR ≤10%, 17.6%; DAR 10% to 15%, 9.9%; DAR 15% to 20%, 6.3%; and DAR >20%, 4.9%; P<0.001. There was no increase in clinical events associated with higher DARs. Conclusions--Adherence to a sizing algorithm guided by multidetector computed tomography resulted in lower rates of paravalvular aortic regurgitation after self-expanding transcatheter valve replacement without an increase in complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Although transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an accepted alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk, less is known about comparative outcomes among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate surgical risk.Methods: We evaluated the clinical outcomes in intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis in a randomized trial comparing TAVR (performed with the use of a self-expanding prosthesis) with surgical aortic-valve replacement. The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause or disabling stroke at 24 months in patients undergoing attempted aortic-valve replacement. We used Bayesian analytical methods (with a margin of 0.07) to evaluate the noninferiority of TAVR as compared with surgical valve replacement.Results: A total of 1746 patients underwent randomization at 87 centers. Of these patients, 1660 underwent an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 79.8±6.2 years, and all were at intermediate risk for surgery (Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality, 4.5±1.6%). At 24 months, the estimated incidence of the primary end point was 12.6% in the TAVR group and 14.0% in the surgery group (95% credible interval [Bayesian analysis] for difference, -5.2 to 2.3%; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). Surgery was associated with higher rates of acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and transfusion requirements, whereas TAVR had higher rates of residual aortic regurgitation and need for pacemaker implantation. TAVR resulted in lower mean gradients and larger aortic-valve areas than surgery. Structural valve deterioration at 24 months did not occur in either group.Conclusions: TAVR was a noninferior alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, with a different pattern of adverse events associated with each procedure. (Funded by Medtronic; SURTAVI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01586910 .). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased risk for surgery, self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is associated with improved 2-year survival compared with surgery.Objectives: This study sought to determine whether this clinical benefit was sustained over time.Methods: Patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed at increased risk for surgery by a multidisciplinary heart team were randomized 1:1 to TAVR or open surgical valve replacement (SAVR). Three-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were obtained in those patients with an attempted procedure.Results: A total of 797 patients underwent randomization at 45 U.S. centers; 750 patients underwent an attempted procedure. Three-year all-cause mortality or stroke was significantly lower in TAVR patients (37.3% vs. 46.7% in SAVR; p = 0.006). Adverse clinical outcome components were also reduced in TAVR patients compared with SAVR patients, including all-cause mortality (32.9% vs. 39.1%, respectively; p = 0.068), all stroke (12.6% vs. 19.0%, respectively; p = 0.034), and major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (40.2% vs. 47.9%, respectively; p = 0.025). At 3 years aortic valve hemodynamics were better with TAVR patients (mean aortic valve gradient 7.62 ± 3.57 mm Hg vs. 11.40 ± 6.81 mm Hg in SAVR; p < 0.001), although moderate or severe residual aortic regurgitation was higher in TAVR patients (6.8% vs. 0.0% in SAVR; p < 0.001). There was no clinical evidence of valve thrombosis in either group.Conclusions: Patients with severe aortic stenosis at increased risk for surgery had improved 3-year clinical outcomes after TAVR compared with surgery. Aortic valve hemodynamics were more favorable in TAVR patients without differences in structural valve deterioration. (Safety and Efficacy Study of the Medtronic CoreValve(®) System in the Treatment of Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis in High Risk and Very High Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement; NCT01240902). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]