Search

Background: An investigation into differences in the management and treatment of severe aortic stenosis (AS) between Germany, France and the UK may allow benchmarking of the different healthcare systems and identification of levers for improvement., Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of severe AS under management at centres within the IMPULSE and IMPULSE enhanced registries were eligible., Results: Data were collected from 2052 patients (795 Germany; 542 France; 715 UK). Patients in Germany were older (79.8 years), often symptomatic (89.5%) and female (49.8%) and had a lower EF (53.8%) than patients in France and UK. Comorbidities were more common and they had a higher mean Euroscore II.Aortic valve replacement (AVR) was planned within 3 months in 70.2%. This was higher (p<0.001) in Germany than France/ UK. Of those with planned AVR, 82.3% received it within 3 months with a gradual decline (Germany>France> UK; p<0.001). In 253 patients, AVR was not performed, despite planned. Germany had a strong transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) preference (83.2%) versus France/ UK (p<0.001). Waiting time for TAVI was shorter in Germany (24.9 days) and France (19.5 days) than UK (40.3 days).Symptomatic patients were scheduled for an AVR in 79.4% (Germany> France> UK; p<0.001) and performed in 83.6% with a TAVI preference (73.1%). 20.4% of the asymptomatic patients were intervened., Conclusion: Patients in Germany had more advanced disease. The rate of intervention within 3 months after diagnosis was startlingly low in the UK. Asymptomatic patients without a formal indication often underwent an intervention in Germany and France., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB has received research funding for the present project and honoraria for consultancy from Edwards Lifesciences. NF, RPS and DM-Z have received honoraria for advisory board meetings and TKR speakers’ honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centers have received funding for employing a study nurse., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Contemporary data regarding the impact of comorbidities on the clinical presentation and management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce., Methods: Prospective registry of severe patients with AS across 23 centres in nine European countries., Results: Of the 2171 patients, chronic kidney disease (CKD 27.3%), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% (22.0%), atrial fibrillation (15.9%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (11.4%) were the most prevalent comorbidities (49.3% none, 33.9% one and 16.8% ≥2 of these). The decision to perform aortic valve replacement (AVR) was taken in a comparable proportion (67%, 72% and 69%, in patients with 0, 1 and ≥2 comorbidities; p=0.186). However, the decision for TAVI was more common with more comorbidities (35.4%, 54.0% and 57.0% for no, 1 and ≥2; p<0.001), while the decision for surgical AVR (SAVR) was decreased with increasing comorbidity burden (31.9%, 17.4% and 12.3%; p<0.001). The proportion of patients with planned AVRs that were performed within 3 months was significantly higher in patients with 1 or ≥2 comorbidities than in those without (8.7%, 10.0% and 15.7%; p<0.001). Furthermore, the mean time to AVR was significantly shorter in patients with one (30.5 days) or ≥2 comorbidities (30.8 days) than in those without (35.7 days; p=0.012). Patients with reduced LVEF tended to be offered an AVR more frequently and with a shorter delay while patients with CKD were less frequently treated., Conclusions: Comorbidities in severe patients with AS affect the presentation and management of patients with severe AS. TAVI was offered more often than SAVR and performed within a shorter time period., Competing Interests: Competing interests: PB is the representative of the IPPMed, Cloppenburg, Germany. NF, RPS, DM-Z and TKR are consultants to Edwards Lifesciences. The institutions of these three and those of the remaining authors representing study centres have received funding for employing a study nurse., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: The aim of our study was to compare the impact of implantation of a balloon-expandable transcatheter valve into the inferior vena cava (CAVI) on exercise capacity with optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) and high surgical risk., Methods and Results: Twenty-eight patients were randomised to OMT (n=14) or CAVI (n=14). The primary endpoint was maximal oxygen uptake at the three-month follow-up. Secondary endpoints included six-minute walk test, NYHA class, NT-proBNP levels, right heart function, unscheduled heart failure hospitalisation, and quality of life as assessed by the Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ). Patients underwent follow-up examinations one, three, six, and twelve months after randomisation. Maximal oxygen uptake did not change significantly in either group after three months and there was no difference between the OMT and CAVI groups (-0.1±1.8 ml∙kg-1∙min-1 vs -1.0±1.6 ml∙kg-1∙min-1, p=0.4995). Compared to baseline, CAVI improved NYHA class, dyspnoea, and quality of life after three months. However, there were no statistically significant differences in the secondary endpoints between the groups. Four periprocedural complications occurred after CAVI, resulting in open heart surgery. Four patients in the OMT group and eight patients (including four after conversion to surgery) in the CAVI group died from right heart failure, sepsis or haemorrhage., Conclusions: CAVI did not result in a superior functional outcome compared to OMT. Due to an unexpectedly high rate of valve dislocations, the study was stopped for safety reasons.

Despite the prognostic significance of severe aortic valve stenosis, knowledge is limited in the general population. To document the status quo for Austria, knowledge about valvular heart disease/aortic valve stenosis was documented in 1001 participants >60 years of age. 6.7% of respondents were knowledgeable of aortic valve stenosis, with 1.6% being concerned about the condition (24.1% cancer, 18.8% Alzheimer's disease, 15.1% stroke). 29.5% were familiar with valvular heart disease (76.7% heart attack, 36.9% stroke). Only 1/3 reported auscultation by their general practitioner (GP) at least every third visit. Typical symptoms of aortic valve stenosis were likely to be reported by 50%. After exposure to further information on aortic valve stenosis, only 20% reported to be more concerned and ready to obtain more disease-related information. Awareness of surgical and catheter-based treatment options was claimed by 77% of respondents. Awareness campaigns on valvular heart disease are warranted to improve patient care in Austria.

Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis are referred late with advanced symptoms or inappropriately denied intervention. The objective was to investigate whether a structured communication to referring physicians (facilitated data relay) might improve the rate and timeliness of intervention. Methods and Results A prospective registry of consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis at 23 centers in 9 European countries with transcatheter as well as surgical aortic valve replacement being available was performed. The study included a 3-month documentation of the status quo (phase A), a 6-month intervention phase (implementing facilitated data relay), and a 3-month documentation of a legacy effect (phase-B). Two thousand one hundred seventy-one patients with severe aortic stenoses were enrolled (phase A: 759; intervention: 905; phase-B: 507). Mean age was 77.9±10.0 years, and 80% were symptomatic, including 52% with severe symptoms. During phase A, intervention was planned in 464/696 (67%), 138 (20%) were assigned to watchful waiting, 8 (1%) to balloon aortic valvuloplasty, 60 (9%) were listed as not for active treatment, and in 26 (4%), no decision was made. Three hundred sixty-three of 464 (78%) patients received the planned intervention within 3 months. Timeliness of the intervention improved as shown by the higher number of aortic valve replacements performed within 3 months (59% versus 51%, P =0.002) and a significant decrease in the time to intervention (36±38 versus 30±33 days, P =0.002). Conclusions A simple, low-cost, facilitated data relay improves timeliness of treatment for patients diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis, resulting in a shorter time to transcatheter aortic valve replacement. This effect was mainly driven by a significant improvement in timeliness of intervention in transcatheter aortic valve replacement but not surgical aortic valve replacement. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT02241447.

Transcatheter heart valve interventions have transformed the outcomes of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) who are unfavourable candidates for surgery. Technological advances have allowed extension of these interventions to younger or lower risk patients and those with other forms of VHD and may in the future permit earlier treatment of VHD in less symptomatic patients or those with moderate disease. The balance of risks and benefits is likely to differ between lower and higher risk patients, and more evidence is needed to evaluate the net benefit of transcatheter technology in these groups. As academic researchers, clinicians, industry, and patient stakeholders collaborate to research these broader indications for transcatheter valve interventions, it is essential to address (i) device durability and deliverability, (ii) specific anatomical needs (e.g. bicuspid aortic valves, aortic regurgitation, mitral and tricuspid valve disease), (iii) operator training, and (iv) the reinforced importance of the multidisciplinary Heart Team.

Aims: Multiple surgical revisions are often necessary in individuals with congenital heart defects affecting the RVOT or pulmonary valve. There are no multicentre data on the feasibility and safety of percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation (PPVI) using the SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valve. The aim of this study was to explore the short-term safety, feasibility, and haemodynamic outcomes of PPVI using the S3 transcatheter heart valve., Methods and Results: Pulmonic S3 is an observational registry of patients undergoing PPVI with the S3 valve across centres in Europe and Canada. Data for 82 patients (mean age 27.3 years) were obtained. The most common underlying diagnosis was tetralogy of Fallot (ToF) (58.5%), with 16.0% of patients having native RVOT anatomy; 90.2% received pre-stenting. Prosthesis dislodgement occurred in one patient and conduit perforation in another. Both were successfully resolved without the need for open surgery. Peak systolic gradient over the RVOT fell from 46.3 mmHg to 17.2 mmHg, moderate/severe pulmonary regurgitation from 86.3% to 0.0%, and NYHA ≥II from 86.0% to 15.2%. During follow-up, valve thrombosis was observed in two patients which resolved with adequate anticoagulation. No other procedural complications, endocarditis, stent fracture or death were reported within two years., Conclusions: PPVI with the S3 valve appears feasible and safe in a wide range of patients with congenital heart defects, with good short-term haemodynamic and functional outcomes.

Objectives: The Registry of the Utilization of the TAo-TAVR approach using the Edwards SAPIEN Valve (ROUTE) was established to assess the effectiveness and safety of the use of transaortic (TAo) access for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures (NCT01991431)., Background: TAVR represents an alternative to surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients. Whereas the transfemoral access route is used commonly as the first-line approach, transapical access is an option for patients not suitable for transfemoral treatment mainly due to anatomic conditions. TAo-TAVR has been shown to be a viable alternative surgical access route; however, only limited data on its effectiveness and safety has been published., Methods: ROUTE is a multicenter, international, prospective, observational registry; data were collected from 18 centers across Europe starting in February 2013. Patients having severe calcific aortic stenosis were documented if they were scheduled to undergo TAo-TAVR using an Edwards SAPIEN XT or a SAPIEN 3 valve. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints were intraprocedural or in hospital and 30-day complication rates., Results: A total of 301 patients with a mean age of 81.7 ± 5.9 years and an Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.6% were included. Valve success was documented in 96.7%. The 30-day mortality was 6.1% (18/293) (procedure-related mortality: 3.1%; 9 of 293). The Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 defined complications included myocardial infarction (1.0%), stroke (1.0%), transient ischemic attack (0.3%), major vascular complications (3.4%), life-threatening bleeding (3.4%), and acute kidney injury (9.5%). In 3.3% of patients, paravalvular regurgitation was classified as moderate or severe (10 of 300). Twenty-six patients (8.8%) required permanent pacemaker implantation., Conclusions: TAo access for TAVR seems to be a safe alternative to the transapical procedure., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The occurrence of new conduction abnormalities that lead to the requirement for new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) has been reported to be the most frequent complication following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, the reasons and clinical significance of TAVI-induced conduction disturbances and PPI are yet to be fully delineated. This review aims to evaluate the procedure- and patient-related factors that may contribute to the development of aberrant atrioventricular conduction following TAVI as well as its clinical consequences.