Search

Data deriving from patients who underwent TAVR between 2007 and 2017 in 13 Italian centers were prospectively collected. Patients were stratified in those with normal LVEF and reduced LVEF. The latter was further classified according to ischemic or nonischemic etiology. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and rehospitalizations; the secondary end points were the isolated composers of the primary end point and cardiac death. Overall, 2,626 patients were included in the analysis: 68.1% with normal LVEF and 31.9% with reduced LVEF. At 8 years, reduced LVEF was significantly associated with the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.29). Consistent findings were evident for the composite end point. No differences in these trends were found at the 30-day landmark analyses. Compared with nonischemic etiology, ischemic reduced LVEF was associated with an increased risk of cardiac death (adjusted hazard ratio 1.43, 95% confidence interval 1.02 to 2.02). In conclusion, patients with reduced LVEF who underwent TAVR are exposed to a progressively increased risk of death and rehospitalizations, even at very long-term follow-up., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest CG, MA, and MDC received speaker fees from Medtronic; FB received consultant/proctor fees from Medtronic; MM received consultant fees from Abbott, Boston, Kardia and Medtronic; TP received lectures fees from Medtronic, Edwards and Abbott. The remaining authors have no competing interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The risks of prefrail and frail women undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have not been fully examined. The aim of the analysis was to assess the prognostic impact of prefrailty and frailty in women undergoing TAVR., Methods: Women at intermediate or high surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR from the prospective multicentre WIN-TAVI (Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry were stratified based on the number of Fried frailty criteria (weight loss, exhaustion, low physical activity, slow gait, weakness) met: nonfrail (no criteria), prefrail (1 or 2 criteria), or frail (3 or more criteria). The primary outcome at 1 year was the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC-2) efficacy end point, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalisation for valve-related symptoms or heart failure, and valve-related dysfunction; secondary outcomes included the composite of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding., Results: Out of 1019 women, 297 (29.1%) met at least 1 frailty criterion: 264 (25.9%) had prefrailty and 33 (3.2%) frailty. The 1-year risk of the primary outcome was significantly higher in prefrail and frail (20.2%) than in nonfrail (14.9%) women (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-2.12). The risk of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding was higher in prefrail or frail (19.9%) than in nonfrail (10.0%) women (aHR 2.06, 95% CI 1.42-2.97). These risks were consistently increased in the prefrail and frail groups assessed separately., Conclusions: In women undergoing TAVR, the presence of prefrailty or frailty conferred an increased risk of the VARC-2 efficacy end point and of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding., (Copyright © 2023 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Symptoms of aortic stenosis (AS) are not proportional to its severity and patients with very severe AS (VSAS) remain asymptomatic for a long time. The appropriate time for intervention in patients with VSAS and the effects of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) remain debated. Our aim was to compare the procedural and 30-day outcomes of TAVI between patients with VSAS and patients with severe AS (SAS) and the changes in LVH. We selected patients with an aortic peak velocity ≥5 m/s (VSAS) and those with aortic peak velocity 4 to 5 m/s (SAS) treated with TAVI. Patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (<45%) were excluded. The primary end point was the incidence of all-cause death at 30 days. The secondary end points included the 30-day incidence of cardiac death, cardiac rehospitalization, and stroke/transient ischemic attack and the changes in LVH from baseline to 30 days. A total of 102 patients in the VSAS group and 535 in the SAS group were included. Patients in the VSAS group had a thicker septal wall (p <0.001) and a higher Agaston score (p <0.001) and calcium volume (p = 0.007). No differences were observed regarding the primary and secondary clinical end points. However, patients with VSAS showed a significantly greater improvement in concentric LVH, although the prevalence of concentric LVH remained higher than in patients with SAS. TAVI in patients with VSAS showed similar procedural and clinical outcomes to patients with SAS and experienced a more pronounced improvement in the prevalence of concentric LVH., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Petronio, Bedogni, and Bruschi are consultants for Medtronic Inc. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains unknown., Aims: We sought to compare different PCI timing strategies in TAVI patients., Methods: The REVASC-TAVI registry is an international registry including patients undergoing TAVI with significant, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) at preprocedural workup. In this analysis, patients scheduled to undergo PCI before, after or concomitantly with TAVI were included. The main endpoints were all-cause death and a composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 2 years. Outcomes were adjusted using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method., Results: A total of 1,603 patients were included. PCI was performed before, after or concomitantly with TAVI in 65.6% (n=1,052), 9.8% (n=157) or 24.6% (n=394), respectively. At 2 years, all-cause death was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (6.8% vs 20.1% vs 20.6%; p<0.001). Likewise, the composite endpoint was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (17.4% vs 30.4% vs 30.0%; p=0.003). Results were confirmed at landmark analyses considering events from 0 to 30 days and from 31 to 720 days., Conclusions: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and stable coronary artery disease scheduled for TAVI, performance of PCI after TAVI seems to be associated with improved 2-year clinical outcomes compared with other revascularisation timing strategies. These results need to be confirmed in randomised clinical trials.

Early menopause is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, including aortic stenosis (AS). We sought to investigate the prevalence and impact of early menopause on clinical outcomes in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe symptomatic AS. Women's International TAVI is a multinational, prospective, observational registry of women who underwent TAVI for severe symptomatic AS (n = 1,019). Patients were divided into 2 groups based on age of menopause: early menopause (age ≤45 years) and regular menopause (age >45 years). The primary outcome of interest was Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 efficacy end point, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms, or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction at 1-year follow-up. Of 732 patients with available data on menopause age, 173 (23.6%) were classified as having early menopause. These patients presented for TAVI at a younger age (81.6 ± 6.9 vs 82.7 ± 5.9, p = 0.05) and had a significantly lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (6.6 ± 4.8 vs 8.2 ± 7.1, p = 0.03) than those with regular menopause. However, the total valve calcium volume was smaller among patients with early versus regular menopause (731.8 ± 850.9 mm 3 vs 807.6 ± 633.8 mm 3 p = 0.002). Other co-morbidities were similar between the 2 groups. At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with early versus regular menopause (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.63, p = 1.00). In conclusion, despite presenting for TAVI at a younger age, patients with early menopause had a similar risk of adverse events as patients with regular menopause at 1 year after TAVI., p = 0.002). Other co-morbidities were similar between the 2 groups. At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with early versus regular menopause (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.63, p = 1.00). In conclusion, despite presenting for TAVI at a younger age, patients with early menopause had a similar risk of adverse events as patients with regular menopause at 1 year after TAVI., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr. Chieffo received consultancy fees from Abiomed, Biosensor, Edwards and Shockwave Medical and payments for lecturs from Boston Scientific and Abbot Vascular. Dr. Dangas received a research grant to institution form Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr. Lefèvre received consultancy fees from Edwards, Boston Scientific and Abbot. Dr. Mehran received research grants to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM-Pharma, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, BAIM, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CeloNova, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, DSI, Duke University, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia, Insel Gruppe AG, Magenta, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, PhaseBio, Philips, RenalPro, Shockwave, Vivasure, Zoll, consulting fees from Cine-Med Research, WebMD. Dr. Morice is CEO and shareholder of CERC, a CRO not involved in this trial. Dr. Petronio received consultancy fees from Medtronic, Abbott, Boston Scientific, and funds from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Dr. Spirito received a research grant from the Swiss National Science Foundation. Dr. Van Mieghem received research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abiomed, PulseCath BV, Daiichi Sankyo, Pie Medical. Dr Watanabe is a clinical proctor of TAVR for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. The other authors have no relevant disclosures., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The optimal access route in patients with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains undetermined., Objectives: This study sought to compare clinical outcomes with transfemoral access (TFA), transthoracic access (TTA), and nonthoracic transalternative access (TAA) in TAVR patients with severe PAD., Methods: Patients with PAD and hostile femoral access (TFA impossible, or possible only after percutaneous treatment) undergoing TAVR at 28 international centers were included in this registry. The primary endpoint was the propensity-adjusted risk of 30-day major adverse events (MAE) defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), or main access site-related Valve Academic Research Consortium 3 major vascular complications. Outcomes were also stratified according to the severity of PAD using a novel risk score (Hostile score)., Results: Among the 1,707 patients included in the registry, 518 (30.3%) underwent TAVR with TFA after percutaneous treatment, 642 (37.6%) with TTA, and 547 (32.0%) with TAA (mostly transaxillary). Compared with TTA, both TFA (adjusted HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.75) and TAA (adjusted HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.47-0.78) were associated with lower 30-day rates of MAE, driven by fewer access site-related complications. Composite risks at 1 year were also lower with TFA and TAA compared with TTA. TFA compared with TAA was associated with lower 1-year risk of stroke/TIA (adjusted HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.24-0.98), a finding confined to patients with low Hostile scores (P interaction  = 0.049)., Conclusions: Among patients with PAD undergoing TAVR, both TFA and TAA were associated with lower 30-day and 1-year rates of MAE compared with TTA, but 1-year stroke/TIA rates were higher with TAA compared with TFA., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Palmerini has received speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Saia has received consulting and lecture fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Kim has received personal fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Merill Life Sciences, and Shockwave Medical. Dr Søndergaard has received consulting fees and/or institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Sahajanand Medical Technologies. Dr Burzotta has received speaker fees from Abiomed, Abbott, Medtronic, and Terumo. Dr Romagnoli has received speaker fees by Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, and Medtronic. Dr Van Mieghem has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Abiomed, PulseCath BV, and Daiichi Sankyo. Dr Pilgrim has received research grants to his institution from Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and Edwards Lifesciences; and honoraria from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott, and HighLife SAS. Dr Adam has received personal and proctoring fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, JenaValve, and Medtronic (during the conduct of the study). Dr Di Mario has received research grants to his institution from Abbott, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, and Volcano Philips. Dr Toggweiler has served as a proctor/consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular; has served consultant for Medira, AtHeart Medical, Veosource, Shockwave, Teleflex, and Polares Medical; has received institutional research grants from Biosensors, Boston Scientific, and Fumedica; and holds equity in Hi-D Imaging. Dr Testa has received consulting fees from and served as a proctor Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Merrill. Dr Berti has served as a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. Dr Ancona has received consultant fees from Abbott. Dr Montorfano has received proctor fees from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Castriota has received proctoring fees from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Petronio has received consultant and research funds from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Abbott. Dr Barbanti has served as a consultant for Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Tamburino has received speaker honoraria from Abbott and Medtronic. Dr Nickenig has received lecture or advisory board honoraria from Abbott, Amarin, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Biosensus, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, CardioValve, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; owns stock options with Beren, Cardiovalve; has served in clinical trials with Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Biosensus, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, CardioValve, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received research funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, the Bundeministerium für Bildung und Forschun, the European Union, Abbott, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Novartis, and Pfizer. Dr Stefanini has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Pfizer/Bristol Myers Squibb; research grants to his institution from Boston Scientific. Dr Latib has served as a consultant for Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, Neovasc, Shifamed, and Philips. Dr Porto has received consulting or speaker fees from Biotronik, Abiomed, Medtronic, Terumo, Philips, Sanofi, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and Bayer, not related to this work. Dr Grube has served on the Speakers Bureau/Scientific Advisory Board for Medtronic, Boston Scientific, JenaValve, and High Life; and owns equity interest in Millipede, Pi-Cardia, Ancora, Laminar, ReNiva Medical, and Shockwave. Dr Stone has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Pulnovo, and Infraredx; has served as a consultant for Valfix, TherOx, Robocath, HeartFlow, Ablative Solutions, Vectorious, Miracor, Neovasc, Abiomed, Ancora, Elucid Bio, Occlutech, CorFlow, Apollo Therapeutics, Impulse Dynamics, Cardiomech, Gore, Amgen, and Adona Medical; owns equity/options in Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, the Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, Valfix, and Xenter; has a daughter who is an employee at Medtronic; and his employer (Mount Sinai Hospital) has received research support from Abbott, Abiomed, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems, Philips, Biosense Webster, Shockwave, Vascular Dynamics, and V-wave. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become an accepted treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Predicting which patients are at risk for adverse clinical outcomes after TAVI remains difficult, especially in women., Aim: To identify predictors of adverse events in the WIN-TAVI cohort., Methods: The WIN-TAVI study is an observational registry of 1019 women undergoing TAVI for severe symptomatic AS. Follow-up was 1 year. The primary outcome was defined according to VARC-2: a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction or hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure. The secondary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure., Results: We included 1019 women with severe AS (mean age of 82.5 ± 6.3 years). At 1 year, 16.4% of the patients experienced the primary endpoint and 12.6% the secondary endpoint. The use of oral anticoagulants (OAC) was the strongest independent predictor of the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.079-2.106, p = 0.016). Independent predictors of the secondary endpoint were age (aHR 1.04 per year, 95% CI 1.01-1.074, p = 0.016) and use of OAC (aHR: 1.79, 95% CI 1.24-2.60, p = 0.002). OAC use was not associated with higher bleeding risk., Conclusion: Pre-procedural use of OAC was the strongest predictor of adverse outcomes during 1-year follow-up, likely reflecting a combination of high-risk factors and comorbidities, but was not related to increased bleeding risk., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Petronio received consultancy fees from Medtronic, Abbott, Boston Scientific, and funds from Boston Scientific and Abbott. Dr. Lefèvre received consultancy fees from Edwards, Boston Scientific and Abbot. Dr. Van Mieghem received research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abiomed, PulseCath BV, Daiichi Sankyo, Pie Medical. Dr. Morice is CEO and shareholder of CERC, a CRO not involved in this trial. Dr. Dangas received a research grant to institution form Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr. Chieffo received consultancy fees from Abiomed, Biosensor, Edwards and Shockwave Medical and payments for lecturs from Boston Scientific and Abbot Vascular. Dr. Mehran received research grants to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, AM-Pharma, Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, BAIM, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CeloNova, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Cytosorbents, DSI, Duke University, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia, Insel Gruppe AG, Magenta, Medtronic, Novartis, OrbusNeich, PhaseBio, Philips, RenalPro, Shockwave, Vivasure, Zoll, consulting fees from Cine-Med Research, WebMD., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The best management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still unclear due to the marked inconsistency of the available evidence., Methods: The REVASC-TAVI registry (Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Coronary Artery Disease) collected data from 30 centers worldwide on patients undergoing TAVI who had significant, stable CAD at preprocedural work-up. For the purposes of this analysis, patients with either complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were compared in a propensity score matched analysis, to take into account of baseline confounders. The primary and co-primary outcomes were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure, respectively, at 2 years., Results: Among 2407 patients enrolled, 675 pairs of patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were matched. The primary (21.6% versus 18.2%, hazard ratio' 0.88 [95% CI, 0.66-1.18]; P =0.38) and co-primary composite (29.0% versus 27.1%, hazard ratio' 0.97 [95% CI, 0.76-1.24]; P =0.83) outcome did not differ between patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization, respectively. These results were consistent across different prespecified subgroups of patients (< or >75 years of age, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > or <4%, angina at baseline, diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction > or <40%, New York Heart Association class I/II or III/IV, renal failure, proximal CAD, multivessel CAD, and left main/proximal anterior descending artery CAD; all P values for interaction >0.10)., Conclusions: The present analysis of the REVASC-TAVI registry showed that, among TAVI patients with significant stable CAD found during the TAVI work-up, completeness of myocardial revascularization achieved either staged or concomitantly with TAVI was similar to a strategy of incomplete revascularization in reducing the risk of all cause death, as well as the risk of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure at 2 years, regardless of the clinical and anatomical situations.

Aims: To investigate the impact of the right ventricle to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling on the outcome of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI), and to describe changes in right ventricular function, pulmonary hypertension, and their ratio after TAVI., Methods: Three hundred and seventy-seven patients from the Italian ClinicalService Project, who underwent TAVI between February 2011 and August 2020, were included. Tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion/pulmonary artery systolic pressure (TAPSE/PASP) ratio was retrospectively calculated as a surrogate of RV-PA coupling. The population was stratified according to TAPSE/PASP using a cut-off of 0.36 mm/mmHg derived from a receiving operating characteristic (ROC) curve. The primary end point was 6-month all-cause death., Results: Compared with patients with a TAPSE/PASP ratio ≥0.36 mm/mmHg (81%), those with TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg (19%) had more comorbidities and were more symptomatic.Moreover, they were more likely to receive general anesthesia and an old generation device. Device success was similar between the two groups. A TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg was associated with a higher risk of all-cause death at 6-months (17.3% versus 5.3%; adjusted HR 2.66; P = 0.041). The prognostic impact of the TAPSE/PASP ratio was stronger than the impact of TAPSE and PASP as separate parameters and was independent of the surgical risk score. Both TAPSE, PASP, and their ratio improved from baseline to 1 month and 6 months after TAVI., Conclusions: A TAPSE/PASP ratio <0.36 mm/mmHg is strongly associated with an increased risk of mortality after TAVI. Providing a left ventricle unloading, TAVI is associated with improvement of both TAPSE, PASP, and their ratio., (Copyright © 2022 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to minimize the procedure, and reduce the length of hospital stay (LoS) is the future objective for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI).Aims of the study are to identify procedural and electrocardiographical predictors of fast-track discharge in patients who underwent TAVI., Methods: Patients treated with TAVI included in the One Hospital ClinicalService project were categorized according to the LoS. 'Fast-Track' population, with a postprocedural LoS less than or equal to 3 days, was compared with the 'Slow-Track' population with a postprocedural LoS greater than 3 days., Results: One thousand five hundred and one patients were collected. Despite single baseline characteristics being almost similar between the two groups, Slow-Track group showed a higher surgical risk (P < 0.001). Patients in the Slow-Track group were more frequently treated with general anaesthesia (P = 0.002) and less frequently predilated (P < 0.001) and received a lower amount of contrast media. No difference between Slow-Track and Fast-Track patients was observed at 30 days in death and in cardiovascular rehospitalization.In the multivariable analysis, STS score of at least 4% [odds ratio (OR): 1.64; P = 0.01], general anaesthesia (OR: 2.80; P = 0.03), predilation (OR: 0.45; P < 001), NYHA 3-4 at baseline (OR: 1.65; P = 0.01), AVB I/LBBB/RBBB onset (OR: 2.41; P < 0.001) and in-hospital new PM (OR: 2.63; P < 0.001) were independently associated with a higher probability of Slow-Track., Conclusion: Fast-Track patients were safely discharged home showing no difference in clinical outcomes after discharge up to 30 days compared with the Slow-Track group. The STS score, general anaesthesia, NYHA 3--4 at baseline, in-hospital onset of conduction disturbances and new PM implantation after TAVI turned out to be predictors of Slow-Track., (Copyright © 2022 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Background: The differential outcomes between pure/predominant aortic stenosis (AS) and mixed aortic valve disease (MAVD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are still debated., Objective: To evaluate the comparative clinical outcomes of patients with MAVD and AS undergoing TAVI using data from the RISPEVA registry., Methods: A total of 3263 patients were included. Of the 3263 patients, 656 with concomitant moderate/severe aortic regurgitation constituted the MAVD group and 2607 constituted the AS cohort. Primary endpoints were 30-day mortality and 1-year survival. Postprocedural paravalvular regurgitation (PPVR), cerebrovascular events, bleeding, and vascular complications were assessed at 30 days., Results: In the overall population, 30-day mortality in the MAVD group was higher than in AS patients (4.3% vs 2.6%;P=.02); however, no differences were detected after propensity-score matching (4.1% vs 3.5%; P=.62). One-year survival was comparable between MAVD and AS patients in both unmatched and matched cohorts. Left ventricular ejection fraction, pulmonary artery systolic pressure, and PPVR, but not baseline MAVD, were predictors of 30-day mortality. The incidence of PPVR was higher in the MAVD group vs the AS group; this difference was not confirmed in patients implanted with a balloon-expandable device., Conclusion: MAVD per se did not negatively affect patients' prognoses, but appears to identify a more complex cohort of patients with a worse clinical and functional status, probably referred to TAVI in a later stage of the disease. Patients with MAVD had a greater propensity to develop PPVR, which is a known predictor of worse outcome; this tendency seems to be mitigated by the implantation of balloon-expandable valves.

Although most patients with small aortic annulus are women, there is paucity of data on the prognostic impact of small aortic prosthesis in women who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the impact of small valve size on 1-year clinical outcomes after TAVI in women. The Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation is an all-women registry evaluating patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI. Based on the size of the aortic bioprosthesis implanted, women were stratified into small (≤23 mm) and nonsmall (>23 mm) valve. The primary efficacy endpoint was the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction at 1-year follow-up. Of 934 women who underwent TAVI, 388 (41.5%) received a small valve. Women with a small valve size had a lower body mass index, lower surgical risk scores, were less likely to suffer from atrial fibrillation, less often required postdilation and had a lower rate of residual aortic regurgitation grade ≥2. The occurrence of the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 efficacy endpoint was similar between women treated with small and nonsmall valve (16.0% vs 16.3%, p = 0.881; adjusted hazard ratio 1.34, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 2.00). Likewise, there were no significant differences in the occurrence of other secondary endpoints after multivariable adjustment. In conclusion, women with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI with the implantation of a small valve bioprosthesis had similar 1-year outcomes as those receiving a nonsmall bioprosthesis., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG AS) with reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) is still a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge. The aim of this paper is to review the latest evidences about the assessment of the valvular disease, usually difficult because of the low-flow status, and the therapeutic options. Special emphasis is given to the available diagnostic tools for the characterization of LFLG AS without functional reserve at stress echocardiography and to the factors that clinicians should evaluate to choose between surgical aortic valve repair, transcatheter aortic valve implantation, or medical therapy., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Objectives: We evaluated the acute and two-year safety and efficacy of using the Corevalve, Evolut R, and Evolut PRO valves for treating failed surgical bioprosthesis from the Italian CoreValve Clinical Service Project., Background: Valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR is an emerging treatment option for failed surgical bioprosthesis. Choice of transcatheter valve is an important determinant of procedural and clinical outcomes, however, longer-term data are lacking., Methods: The Clinical Service Project is a national clinical data repository evaluating the use of implantable devices across Italy. The present multi-center analysis includes consecutive patients who underwent ViV-TAVR with the Medtronic CoreValve series between October 2008 to June 2019. Evaluated endpoints included rates of overall mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular accidents at 2-year follow-up. Procedural success, complications, and echocardiographic outcomes were reported according to VARC-2 criteria., Results: A total of 139 patients (mean age, 80 ± 7 years; 47.5% male; mean STS score, 10.0 ± 9.7%) underwent ViV-TAVR with CoreValve (28.5%), Evolut R (68.6%), and Evolut Pro (2.9%) valves. Device success was achieved in 68% and acute coronary obstruction requiring PCI was observed in 4 patients (2.9%). Moderate PVL was observed in 3.7% and 2.8% of patients at 30-day and 2-year follow-up and moderate structural valve degeneration seen only 5 patients (3.6%). All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were 3.6% and 2.9% at 30 days, respectively, and 20.6% and 10.2% at 2-year follow-up., Conclusions: This real-world nationwide analysis demonstrates the acute and longer-term safety and efficacy of using the self-expanding Medtronic THV for ViV-TAVR.

Concomitant severe aortic and mitral stenosis in patients who are not candidates for traditional surgery is a complex scenario that becomes increasingly more common with population aging. While transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has emerged as a new lifeline for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at intermediate or high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement, transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is still in the early clinical phase. TMVR can be an alternative to surgical valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with bioprosthetic mitral valves, annuloplasty rings, or severe mitral annular calcification (MAC). Despite the growing use of TMVR, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction remains a major challenge and a life-threatening complication of this procedure mostly among patients undergoing valve-in-MAC procedures. Preprocedural planning with imaging is essential in understanding and reducing the risk for these complications.We describe a case of simultaneous transcatheter double valve replacement into native valves from transapical access in a 77-year-old female patient with severe symptomatic aortic and mitral stenosis associated with MAC.

Objectives: To describe the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of permanent pacemaker insertion (PPI) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in women., Background: Data on pacemaker insertion complicating TAVR in women are scarce., Methods: The Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve implantation (WIN-TAVI) is a prospective registry evaluating the safety and efficacy of TAVR in women. We included patients without preprocedural pacemakers and divided them into two groups: (1) PPI and (2) no-PPI. We identified PPI predictors using logistic regression and studied its clinical impact on the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 efficacy and safety endpoints., Results: Out of 1019 patients, 922 were included in the analysis. Post-TAVR PPI occurred in 132 (14.3%) patients. Clinical and procedural characteristics were similar in both groups. Pre-existing right bundle branch block (RBBB) was associated with a high risk of post-TAVR PPI (OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.85-7.06, p < 0.001), while implantation of balloon-expandable prosthesis was associated with a lower risk (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.30-0.74, p < 0.001). Post-TAVR PPI prolonged in-hospital stay by a median of 2 days (11 [9-16] days in PPI vs. 9 [7-14] days in no-PPI, p = 0.005), yet risks of VARC-2 efficacy and safety endpoints at 1 year were similar in both groups ( adj HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.60-1.52, p = 0.84 and adj HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.83-1.79, p = 0.31, respectively)., Conclusion: Pacemaker implantation following TAVR is frequent among women and is associated with pre-existing RBBB and valve type. PPI prolongs hospital stay, albeit without any significant impact on 1-year outcomes., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Increased body mass index (BMI) is an established cardiovascular risk factor. The impact of high BMI on vascular and bleeding complications in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is not clarified. RISPEVA, a multicenter prospective database of patients undergoing TAVI stratified by BMI was used for this analysis. Patients were classified as normal or high BMI (obese and overweight) according to the World Health Organization criteria. A comparison of 30-day vascular and bleeding outcomes between groups was performed using propensity scores methods. A total of 3776 matched subjects for their baseline characteristics were included. Compared with normal BMI, high BMI patients had significantly 30-day greater risk of the composite of vascular or bleeding complications (11.1% vs 8.8%, OR: 1.28, 95% CI [1.02 to 1.61]; p = 0.03). Complications rates were higher in both obese (11.3%) and overweight (10.5%), as compared with normal weight patients (8.8%). By a landmark event analysis, the effect of high versus normal BMI on these complications appeared more pronounced within 7 days after the TAVI procedure. A significant linear association between increased BMI and vascular complications was observed at this time frame (p = 0.03). In conclusion, compared with normal BMI, both obese and overweight patients undergoing TAVI, experience increased rates of 30-day vascular and bleeding complications. These findings indicate that high BMI is an independent risk predictor of vascular and bleeding complications after TAVI., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has become first-line treatment for severe aortic valve stenosis in patients with moderate, high or prohibitive surgical risk. However, access site complications may occur more frequently in extreme body mass index (BMI) categories. The aim of this study was to describe the features and outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI in a comprehensive Italian prospective clinical registry, focusing on BMI classes., Methods: A national prospective database was queried for baseline, procedural, and outcome details of patients undergoing TAVI according to established BMI categories: underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m 2 ), normal weight (BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (BMI 25.0-29.9 kg/m 2 ), and obese (BMI≥30 kg/m 2 ). Short- and long-term outcomes, including major adverse events (MAE), i.e. the composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complication, major bleeding, or renal failure, were appraised with bivariate and multivariable analyses., Results: A total of 3075 subjects were included, 64 (2.1%) were underweight, 1319 (42.9%) were normal weight, 1152 (37.4%) were overweight, and 540 (17.6%) were obese. Several baseline differences were evident, including gender, diabetes mellitus, renal function, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, surgical scores, and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (all P<0.05). Several procedural differences were also evident, including percutaneous approach, predilation, prosthesis type and size (all P<0.05), with postprocedural aortic regurgitation >2+ significantly more common in underweight patients (P<0.05). Nonetheless, unadjusted analysis for one-month outcomes showed similar rates for fatal and non-fatal outcomes, including MAE (all P>0.05), with the notable exception of permanent pacemaker implantation, which was more common in higher BMI classes (P=0.010) Unadjusted analysis for long-term events showed an increased rate of death in underweight patients (P=0.024). Multivariable adjusted analysis confirmed the increased risk of permanent pacemaker implantation in obese patients (P=0.015 when comparing obese vs. normal weight subjects), but disproved differences in long-term mortality and other outcomes (P>0.05 for all comparisons)., Conclusions: Irrespective of BMI class, TAVI is associated with favorable outcomes in surgical high-risk risk patients, with the notable exclusion of permanent pacemaker implantation, which is significantly more common in obese subjects.

Background: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains one of the main drawbacks of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but scarce data exist on PPI after valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR, particularly with the use of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs)., Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, factors associated with, and clinical impact of PPI in a large series of ViV-TAVR procedures., Methods: Data were obtained from the multicenter VIVID Registry and included the main baseline and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and late (median follow-up: 13 months [interquartile range: 3 to 41 months]) outcomes analyzed according to the need of periprocedural PPI. All THVs except CoreValve, Cribier-Edwards, Sapien, and Sapien XT were considered to be new-generation THVs., Results: A total of 1,987 patients without prior PPI undergoing ViV-TAVR from 2007 to 2020 were included. Of these, 128 patients (6.4%) had PPI after TAVR, with a significant decrease in the incidence of PPI with the use of new-generation THVs (4.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.017), mainly related to a reduced PPI rate with the Evolut R/Pro versus CoreValve (3.7% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in PPI rates between newer-generation balloon- and self-expanding THVs (6.1% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.18). In the multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 for each increase of 1 year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.07; p = 0.001), larger THV size (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.20; p = 0.02), and previous right bundle branch block (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.17; p = 0.05) were associated with an increased risk of PPI. There were no differences in 30-day mortality between the PPI (4.7%) and no-PPI (2.7%) groups (p = 0.19), but PPI patients exhibited a trend toward higher mortality risk at follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.91; p = 0.04; p = 0.08 after adjusting for age differences between groups)., Conclusions: In a contemporary large series of ViV-TAVR patients, the rate of periprocedural PPI was relatively low, and its incidence decreased with the use of new-generation THV systems. PPI following ViV-TAVR was associated with a trend toward increased mortality at follow-up., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr. Alperi was supported by a grant from the Fundación Alfonso Martin Escudero (Madrid, Spain). Dr. Rodés-Cabau holds the Research Chair “Fondation Famille Jacques Larivière” for the Development of Structural Heart Disease Interventions, and has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr. Montorfano is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Adam has received personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Boston Scientific; and has received grants and personal fees from Medtronic during the conduct of the study. Dr. Noble has received institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; and is a proctor for Medtronic. Dr. Erlebach has received fees from Medtronic. Dr. Kempfert has received fees from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Abbott. Dr. Pilgrim has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences; has received speaker fees from Biotronik and Boston Scientific; has received consultancy fees from HighLife SAS (CEC); and has performed proctoring for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kim has received personal fees from, performed proctoring for, and has served on advisory boards for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Meril, Medtronic, and Shockwave Med. Dr. Hildick-Smith has served as a proctor and advisor for Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr. Dvir has provided consulting for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Abbott. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The management of severe aortic stenosis has been revolutionized by the introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), especially in patients at intermediate, high, or prohibitive surgical risk. There is uncertainty, however, regarding the comparative effectiveness and safety of contemporary TAVI devices., Methods: We queried detailed data from the ongoing national Italian TAVI registry and compared baseline features, procedural details, and 12-month outcomes of Acurate Neo (Boston Scientific), Evolut Pro/R (Medtronic), Lotus (Boston Scientific), Portico (Abbott Vascular), and Sapien/ Sapien S3 Ultra (Edward Lifesciences) transcatheter aortic valves. Several endpoints were collected and appraised, including the composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), major bleeding, major vascular complication, surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve reimplantation, which were deemed major adverse events (MAEs)., Results: A total of 1976 patients were included, with 234 treated with Acurate, 703 with Evolut, 151 with Lotus, 347 with Portico, and 541 with Sapien. Twelve-month events were not significantly different among the 5 devices, including death (P=.29) and MAE (P=.21), with the notable exception of major vascular complications, which were more common with Acurate and Sapien (P<.001) and permanent pacemaker implantation, which was more frequent with Lotus and Evolut (P<.001). Differences in MAE were more pronounced in women and subjects with prior cardiac surgery, with the lowest event rates in the Evolut group. Propensity-score adjusted analysis suggested that Acurate, Evolut, Portico, and Sapien were all associated with similarly favorable results, whereas adverse events were more evident with Lotus (P<.05)., Conclusion: Leading current-generation TAVI devices offer similarly favorable results at mid-term follow-up.

The ACC/TVT score is a specific predictive model of in-hospital mortality for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The aim of this study was to test its predictive accuracy in comparison with standard surgical risk models (Logistic Euroscore, Euroscore II, and STS-PROM) in the population of TAVI patients included in the multicenter RISPEVA (Registro Italiano GISE sull'impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea) registry. The study cohort included 3293 patients who underwent TAVI between 2008 and 2019. The 4 risk scores were calculated for all patients. For all scores, the capability to predict 30-day mortality was assessed by means of several analyses testing calibration and discrimination. The ACC/TVT score showed moderate discrimination, with a C-statistics for 30-day mortality of 0.63, not significantly different from the standard surgical risk models. The ACC/TVT score demonstrated, in contrast, better calibration compared with the other scores, as proved by a greater correspondence between estimated probabilities and the actual observations. However, when the ACC/TVT score was tested in the subgroup of patients treated in a more contemporary period (from 2016 on), it revealed a slight tendency to lose discrimination and to overestimate mortality risk. In conclusion, in comparison with the standard surgical risk models, the ACC/TVT score demonstrated better prediction accuracy for estimation of 30-day mortality in terms of calibration. Nevertheless, its predictive reliability remained suboptimal and tended to worsen in patients treated more recently., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: To assess the impact of anemia on clinical outcomes in female patients enrolled in the Women's InterNational transcatheter aortic valve implantation (WIN-TAVI) registry., Background: Anemia is highly prevalent among females who constitute half of TAVI candidates, yet, its clinical significance remains poorly investigated., Methods: Patients were divided into three groups according to preprocedural hemoglobin (Hb) level: (1) no anemia (Hb ≥12 g/dl), (2) mild-to-moderate anemia (10 ≤ Hb <12 g/dl), and (3) severe anemia (Hb <10 g/dl). The primary outcome was the occurrence of Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 efficacy endpoint, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction at 1-year follow-up., Results: Hemoglobin level was available in 877 (86.1%) patients: 412 (47.0%) had no anemia, 363 (41.4%) had mild-to-moderate anemia, and 102 (11.6%) had severe anemia. The latter group had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Compared with patients without anemia, severe anemia was associated with a greater risk of VARC-2 efficacy endpoint ( adj HR 1.71, 95% CI: 1.02-2.87, p = .04), all-cause death ( adj HR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.31-4.26, p = .004) and a composite of death, MI or stroke ( adj HR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.10-3.22, p = .02) at 1 year. Moreover, an increased risk of late mortality ( adj HR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.02-1.30, p = .03) was observed with every 1 g/dl decrease in hemoglobin level., Conclusion: Severe anemia in females undergoing TAVI was independently associated with increased rates of VARC-2 efficacy endpoint and mortality at 1 year., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Aim: To assess the outcome of nonagenarians patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Methods: We aimed to stratify the overall population from an Italian, multicenter, observational project including a total of 3792 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with CoreValve and Evolut R/PRO devices between April 2009 and October 2018, into four groups according to their age class (≥90 vs. 80-89 years vs. 70-79 vs. <70 years) and to compare outcomes up to 4 years after TAVR., Results: At 4 years, survival estimates showed no difference in terms of overall survival [Kaplan-Meier estimates (KM est.) 49.9 vs. 58.1% vs. 57.0 vs. 69.3%; Plogrank = 0.28] among the four groups. After 2 years from the procedure, landmark analysis showed an age-based difference in overall survival (KM est. 63.8 vs. 75.0% vs. 75.1 vs. 88.7%; Plogrank = 0.025) but no difference in terms of survival from cardiovascular death (KM est. 87.8 vs. 87.4% vs. 86.1 vs. 96.1%; Plogrank = 0.43). Finally, age itself was not correlated with overall mortality at 4 years (hazard ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.30, P = 0.591)., Conclusion: TAVR with self-expanding CoreValve and Evolut prostheses was demonstrated to have good long-term outcomes, regardless of the patient's age. At 4 years, no difference in overall mortality was reported among age-based groups, while a higher overall mortality was reported in nonagenarians after 2 years from the procedure. TAVR showed good long-term outcomes even in nonagenarian patients, and it could be the therapy of choice for selected elderly patients., (Copyright © 2020 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the incidence, predictors and outcomes of female patients with patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) following transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) for severe aortic stenosis (AS)., Background: Female AS TAVI recipients have a significantly lower mortality than surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) recipients, which could be attributed to the potentially lower PPM rates. TAVI has been associated with lower rates of PPM compared to SAVR. PPM in females post TAVI has not been investigated to date., Methods: The WIN-TAVI (Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry is a multicenter registry of women undergoing TAVR for severe symptomatic AS. Two hundred and fifty patients with detailed periprocedural and follow-up echocardiographic investigations were included in the WIN-TAVI echocardiographic sub-study. PPM was defined as per European guidelines stratified by the presence of obesity., Results: The incidence of PPM in our population was 32.8%. Patients with PPM had significantly higher BMI (27.4 ± 6.1 vs. 25.2 ± 5.0, p = .002), smaller sized valves implanted (percentage of TAVI ≤23 mm 61% vs. 29.2%, PPM vs. no PPM, p < .001) and were more often treated with balloon expandable valves (48.3 vs. 32.5%, p < .001) rather than self expanding ones (26.3 vs. 52.8%, <.001). BMI (OR = 1.08; 95%CI 1.02-1.14, p = .011) and valve size ≤23 mm (OR = 3.00 95%CI 1.14-7.94, p = .027) were the only independent predictors of PPM. There was no significant interaction between valve size and valve type (p = .203). No significant differences were observed in 1-year mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events., Conclusions: PPM in females undergoing TAVI occurs in one third of patients. BMI and valve size ≤23 mm are independent predictors. Larger registries are required to determine the impact of PPM on future clinical outcomes., (© 2020 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR., Methods: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate., Results: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76-996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510-1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR ( P <0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients ( P =0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; P <0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; P =0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; P =0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74-12.56; P =0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88-21.53; P <0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement., Conclusions: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.

Background: Female subjects constitute half of all transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) candidates, but the association between important comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus (DM) and clinical outcomes after TAVI remains unclear in this group., Method: WIN-TAVI is a real-world international registry of exclusively female subjects undergoing TAVI. The study population was stratified into those with (DM) and those without DM (NDM). Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 efficacy (composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or worsening congestive heart failure, or valve-related dysfunction) was the primary endpoint for this analysis., Results: Of the 1012 subjects included in this study, 264 (26.1%) had DM at baseline. DM patients were younger but had a higher burden of comorbidities. There were no differences in VARC-2 efficacy events between DM and NDM patients at 30 days or 1 year. Conversely, patients with DM had a lower risk of VARC-2 life threatening bleeding at 30 days and 1 year after TAVI compared to NDM patients, which remained significant even after multivariable adjustment (HR, 0.34, 95% CI, 0.12-0.99; p = .047). In the subgroup analysis, insulin-dependent DM was not associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes., Conclusions: Among female patients undergoing TAVI, more than one-fourth of the subjects presented with DM. At 1-year follow-up, DM was associated with lower bleeding complications and no increase in the risk of other adverse events, including mortality, after TAVI., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) requires large-bore access, which is associated with bleeding and vascular complications. ProGlide and Prostar XL are vascular closure devices widely used in clinical practice, but their comparative efficacy and safety in TAVR is a subject of debate, owing to conflicting results among published studies. We aimed to compare outcomes with Proglide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices after TAVR. Methods and Results This large-scale analysis was conducted using RISPEVA, a multicenter national prospective database of patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR treated with ProGlide versus Prostar XL vascular closure devices. Both multivariate and propensity score adjustments were performed. A total of 2583 patients were selected. Among them, 1361 received ProGlide and 1222 Prostar XL. The predefined primary end point was a composite of cardiovascular mortality, bleeding, and vascular complications assessed at 30 days and 1-year follow-up. At 30 days, there was a significantly greater reduction of the primary end point with ProGlide versus Prostar XL (13.8% versus 20.5%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.99]; P =0.043), driven by a reduction of bleeding complications (9.1% versus 11.7%, respectively; multivariate adjusted odds ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.58-0.98]; P =0.046). Propensity score analysis confirmed the significant reduction of major adverse cardiovascular events and bleeding risk with ProGlide. No significant differences in the primary end point were found between the 2 vascular closure devices at 1 year of follow-up (multivariate adjusted hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.72-1.10]; P =0.902). Comparable results were obtained by propensity score analysis. During the procedure, compared with Prostar XL, ProGlide yielded significant higher device success (99.2% versus 97.5%, respectively; P =0.001). Conclusions ProGlide has superior efficacy as compared with Prostar XL in TAVR procedures and is associated with a greater reduction of composite adverse events at short-term, driven by lower bleeding complications. Registration Information URL: clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02713932.

We report a case of cardiogenic shock due to severe aortic stenosis in a 55-year-old patient with a congenital unicuspid aortic valve (UAV). An emergent aortic valvuloplasty was performed in the spoke catheterization laboratory which allowed to achieve transient stabilization of the hemodynamic parameters and to move the patient to the nearest hub hospital with on-site cardiac surgery. Since the surgical risk of an aortic valve replacement was deemed too high, a transcatheter procedure was performed with implantation of a self-expandable prosthesis. The final result was suboptimal due to a moderate residual paravalvular leak, but the patient experienced rapid recovery and was discharged 10 days after the procedure. Just a few cases of transcatheter aortic valve replacement due to severe aortic stenosis in UAV have been described but, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first one in a clinical setting of cardiogenic shock. Although the gold standard treatment for UAV is surgical intervention, this case demonstrates that the transcatheter procedure is feasible and may play a role as a bridge to definitive surgical replacement.

The differential outcomes across the age spectrum of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) recipients are still debated. Aim of the study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of oldest-old patients undergoing TAVI in the large "Registro Italiano GISE sull'impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea (RISPEVA)" registry. A total of 3,507 patients were stratified according to age: 1,381 were ≥85 years, 2,126 were <85 years. Primary endpoints were death at 30-days and complete follow-up (FU) (medium 368 days). Cerebrovascular events, myocardial infarction, bleedings, vascular complications at 30-days and complete FU were considered. In the unadjusted analysis, 30-days mortality in the oldest-old group was higher than in younger patients (4.2% vs 2.4%; p = 0.007); this difference kept true also at complete FU (19.6% vs 15.9%; p = 0.014). After propensity score (PS) matching, the oldest-old population showed a higher mortality solely at 30-days (4.7% vs 2.4%; p = 0.016), while the survival at complete FU was similar to that of younger patients (20.1% vs 18.0%; p = 0.286). The incidence of non-fatal outcomes resulted comparable between the 2 groups, also after propensity score matching. At the multivariate logistic regression analysis procedural major or disabling bleedings, cerebrovascular events, cardiogenic shock resulted predictors of 30-days death in the oldest-old cohort. In conclusion, patients ≥85 years can safely undergo TAVI being not more exposed to procedural complications than those <85 years; nevertheless they showed worse 30-days mortality, probably driven by reduced tolerance to complications. Passed the critical periprocedural phase, patients ≥85 years had a similar survival to those <85 years with comparable risk profile., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Due to bioprosthetic valve degeneration, aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures are increasingly performed. There are no data on long-term outcomes after aortic ViV. Our aim was to perform a large-scale assessment of long-term survival and reintervention after aortic ViV., Methods and Results: A total of 1006 aortic ViV procedures performed more than 5 years ago [mean age 77.7 ± 9.7 years; 58.8% male; median STS-PROM score 7.3% (4.2-12.0)] were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with Medtronic self-expandable valves (CoreValve/Evolut, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) (n = 523, 52.0%), Edwards balloon-expandable valves (EBEV, SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) (n = 435, 43.2%), and other devices (n = 48, 4.8%). Survival was lower at 8 years in patients with small-failed bioprostheses [internal diameter (ID) ≤ 20 mm] compared with those with large-failed bioprostheses (ID > 20 mm) (33.2% vs. 40.5%, P = 0.01). Independent correlates for mortality included smaller-failed bioprosthetic valves [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13)], age [HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01-1.45)], and non-transfemoral access [HR 1.43 (95% CI 1.11-1.84)]. There were 40 reinterventions after ViV. Independent correlates for all-cause reintervention included pre-existing severe prosthesis-patient mismatch [subhazard ratio (SHR) 4.34 (95% CI 1.31-14.39)], device malposition [SHR 3.75 (95% CI 1.36-10.35)], EBEV [SHR 3.34 (95% CI 1.26-8.85)], and age [SHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.44-0.78)]., Conclusions: The size of the original failed valve may influence long-term mortality, and the type of the transcatheter valve may influence the need for reintervention after aortic ViV., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2020. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of coronary protection by preventive coronary wiring and stenting across the coronary ostia in patients at high risk for coronary obstruction after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: Coronary obstruction following TAVR is a life-threatening complication with high procedural and short-term mortality., Methods: Data were collected retrospectively from a multicenter international registry between April 2011 and February 2019., Results: Among 236 patients undergoing coronary protection with preventive coronary wiring, 143 had eventually stents implanted across the coronary ostia after valve deployment. At 3-year follow-up, rates of cardiac death were 7.8% in patients receiving stents and 15.7% in those not receiving stents (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.42; 95% confidence interval: 0.14 to 1.28; p = 0.13). There were 2 definite stent thromboses (0.9%) in patients receiving stents, both occurring after TAVR in "valve-in-valve" procedures. In patients not receiving stents, there were 4 delayed coronary occlusions (DCOs) (4.3%), occurring from 5 min to 6 h after wire removal. Three cases occurred in valve-in-valve procedures and 1 in a native aortic valve procedure. Distance between the virtual transcatheter valve and the protected coronary ostia <4 mm was present in 75.0% of patients with DCO compared with 30.4% of patients without DCO (p = 0.19)., Conclusions: In patients undergoing TAVR at high risk for coronary obstruction, preventive stent implantation across the coronary ostia is associated with good mid-term survival rates and low rates of stent thrombosis. Patients undergoing coronary protection with wire only have a considerable risk for DCO., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We sought to analyze outcomes of women receiving balloon-expandable valves (BEV) or self-expanding valves (SEV) in contemporary transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). WIN TAVI (Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) is the first all-female TAVI registry to study the safety and performance of TAVI in women. We compared women treated with BEV (n = 408, 46.9%) versus those treated with SEV (n = 461, 53.1%). The primary efficacy end point was the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 (VARC-2) composite of 1-year all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction. Women receiving SEV had higher surgical risk scores, higher rate of previous stroke and pulmonary hypertension whereas women receiving BEV were more frequently denied surgical valve replacement due to frailty. BEV patients were less likely to require post-dilation and had significantly lower rates of residual aortic regurgitation grade ≥2 (9.8% vs 4.7%, p = 0.007). At 1 year, the crude incidence and adjusted risk of the primary VARC-2 efficacy end point was similar between groups (17.1% with SEV and 14.3% with BEV, p = 0.25; hazards ratio 1.09, 95% confidence interval 0.68 to 1.75). Conversely the crude rate and adjusted risk of new pacemaker implantation was higher with SEV than BEV (15% vs 8.6%, p = 0.001; hazards ratio 1.97, 95% confidence interval 1.13 to 3.43). A subanalysis on new generation valves showed no difference in the need for pacemaker implantation between the 2 devices (10.1% vs 8.0%, p = 0.56). In conclusion, in contemporary TAVI, SEV are used more frequently in women with greater co-morbidities. While there were no differences in unadjusted and adjusted risk of 1-year primary efficacy end point between the valve types, there was a greater need for permanent pacemakers after SEV implantation., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Expanding indications to transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) warrant meticolous vascular management and minimization of access site complications. Two leading vascular closure devices (VCD) are currently used for TAVI, ProGlide vs. Prostar, but their comparative effectiveness and safety are debated. We aimed at comparing acute and 1-month outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI using as VCD either ProGlide (Perclose) or Prostar (XL)., Methods: The prospective RISPEVA database was queried for baseline, procedural, and outcome details of patients undergoing TAVI and in whom either ProGlide or Prostar had been used as VCD. Outcomes of interest were death, vascular complication, and bleeding, distinguishing specific subtypes. Outcomes were adjudicated according to current Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions., Results: A total of 1987 subjects were included, 913 (46.0%) receiving ProGlide, and 1074 receiving Prostar (54.0%). Several baseline and procedural differences were evident, including surgical risk, concomitant coronary artery disease, sheath size, use of predilation, and chosen TAVI device (all P<0.05). Periprocedurally, despite similar rates of device success (P=0.262), Prostar was associated with a lower risk of vascular stenosis (P=0.005), but a higher rate of device malfunction (P=0.028). Unadjusted analysis for 1-month outcomes suggested higher rates of major adverse events, any bleeding, major bleeding, and renal failure in patients receiving Prostar (all P<0.05). However, propensity score-adjusted analysis did not confirm any significant differences, suggesting that confounding factors mostly drove unadjusted differences., Conclusions: Use of ProGlide and Prostar as VCD of choice for TAVI appears similarly safe and effective, despite some potential benefits associated with ProGlide. Further randomized trials are warranted to confirm or disprove these findings.

Background: Significant aortic stenosis can be effectively treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients at high or intermediate surgical risk. Predilation is often performed to facilitate TAVI implantation, but its risk-benefit balance with new-generation devices is detabed. We aimed to appraise whether predilation is still needed with new-generation devices for TAVI., Methods/materials: We queried the prospective multicenter RISPEVA (Registro Italiano GISE sull'impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea) Study, comparing patients with vs without predilation receiving Acurate, Evolut, Lotus, Portico, or Sapien3. Baseline, procedural features and early clinical and echocardiographic results were compared with unadjusted and adjusted analyses., Results: A total of 1409 subjects were included, 1055 (74.9%) receiving predilation, and 354 (25.1%) undergoing direct TAVI. Several baseline and procedural differences were evident at unadjusted analysis between the two groups, including device success, procedural success, contrast volume, procedural time, mean post-procedural gradient, and prevalence of aortic regurgitation 2+ (all p < 0.05). Adjusted analysis showed that only procedural time remained significantly impacted by predilation (average reduction in procedural time with predilation of -12.9 [95% confidence interval -21.0; -4.8] minutes, p = 0.002). Subgroup unadjusted and adjusted analysis showed that predilation was associated with shorter procedural times only when Evolut or Portico devices were used (all p < 0.05). Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up up to 1 month showed similar results irrespective of predilation at both unadjusted and adjusted analysis., Conclusion: TAVI without predilation is not associated with adverse procedural, clinical or echocardiographic results when new-generation devices are used. Predilation may however reduce procedural time with Evolut and Portico devices., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for aortic stenosis is becoming an appealing alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients and to medical therapy for inoperable ones. Several new-generation TAVI devices have been recently introduced, but comparative analyses are lacking. We aimed to compare 1-month outcomes associated with such five leading new-generation TAVI devices exploiting data collected in the prospective observational RISPEVA (Registro Italiano GISE sull'impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea) Study. We queried the dataset of the ongoing RISPEVA study to retrieve baseline, procedural and 1-month outcome details of patients undergoing TAVI with Acurate, Evolut, Portico, Lotus, and Sapien3. Analysis was based on unadjusted and propensity score-adjusted methods. We included 1976 patients, 234 (11.8%) treated with Acurate, 703 (35.6%) with Evolut, 151 (7.6%) with Lotus, 347 (17.6%) with Portico, and 541 (27.4%) with Sapien3. Unadjusted analysis for baseline features highlighted several significant differences, and other discrepancies were found for procedural features. Despite these differences, device and procedural success were similarly high (ranging from 98.0% to 99.4%, p > 0.05). However, procedural valve migration appeared more common with Acurate (p = 0.007), and major bleeding with Sapien3 (p = 0.002). Unadjusted analysis for 1-month outcomes also highlighted significant differences in the composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complication, major bleeding, or renal failure (favoring Portico, p < 0.001), major vascular complications (favoring Lotus, p < 0.001), renal failure (favoring Portico, p = 0.035), and permanent pacemaker implantation (favoring Acurate, p < 0.001). Propensity score-adjusted analyses showed lower rates of major adverse events with Evolut and Portico (p < 0.05), major vascular complications with Lotus and Portico (p < 0.05), renal failure with Sapien3 (p < 0.05) and permanent pacemaker implantation with Acurate (p < 0.05). In conclusion, new-generation TAVI devices have different profiles of early comparative safety and efficacy. These findings should be taken into account for individualized decision making and patient management.

Objectives: A large comprehensive analysis of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was performed for failed stentless bioprostheses., Background: Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to redo surgery for patients with a failing aortic bioprosthesis., Methods: Unadjusted outcome data were collected from the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data) registry between 2007 and 2016 from a total of 1,598 aortic ViV procedures (291 stentless, 1,307 stented bioprostheses)., Results: Bioprosthetic failure was secondary to aortic regurgitation in 56% of stentless and 20% stented devices (p < 0.001). ViV-TAVR access was transfemoral in 71.1% stentless and 74.2% stented ViV-TAVR. Self-expanding devices were more frequently used in stentless ViV-TAVR (56.0% vs. 39.9%; p = 0.05), but there was no difference between balloon-expanding and self-expanding TAVR devices for stented ViV-TAVR (48.6% vs. 45.1%). The degree of oversizing for all mechanisms of bioprosthesis failure was 9 ± 10% for stentless ViV-TAVR vs. 6 ± 9% for stented ViV-TAVR (and 8 ± 10% for stentless ViV-TAVR vs. 3 ± 9% for stented ViV-TAVR in patients with predominant aortic regurgitation; both p < 0.001). Initial device malposition (10.3% vs. 6.2%; p = 0.014), second transcatheter device (7.9% vs. 3.4%), coronary obstruction (6.0% vs. 1.5%), and paravalvular leak occurred more frequently in stentless ViV-TAVR (all p < 0.001). Hospital stay duration (median 7 days) was no different, and 30-day (6.6% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.12) and 1-year mortality year (15.8% vs. 12.6%; p = 0.15) were numerically higher, but not statistically different, after stentless ViV-TAVR., Conclusions: Stentless ViV-TAVR is associated with greater periprocedural complications (initial device malposition, second transcatheter device, coronary obstruction, paravalvular leak), but no difference in 30-day and 1-year outcome., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate the impact of coronary artery disease (CAD) with or without recent (≤ 30 days) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in women undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Background: Although women display a specific risk-profile for both PCI and TAVR, the impact of CAD and PCI in the setting of TAVR in women is unclear., Methods: The multinational Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve implantation registry enrolled consecutive female patients undergoing contemporary TAVR in 19 centers between 2013 and 2015. Patients with available coronary angiography or CT scan in the pre-operative assessment of TAVR were categorized as without CAD, with CAD but no recent PCI and CAD and recent PCI (≤30 days). All events were adjudicated according to the VARC-2 criteria., Results: A total of 787 patients were included in this analysis, among whom 459 (58.3%) had no CAD, 247 (31.4%) had CAD without recent PCI and 81 (10.3%) underwent recent PCI (≤ 30 days before TAVR). After multivariable adjustment, both groups of CAD patients, without and with recent PCI, presented with higher risk of death, myocardial infarction or stroke, compared with patients without CAD ( adj HR 1.56, 95%CI 1.03-2.39, P = 0.038 and adj HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.1-3.5, P = .021, respectively). Patients with recent PCI had increased risk of all-cause death ( adj HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.0-3.5, P = 0.04) and stroke ( adj HR 3.7, 95% CI 1.0-13.5, P = 0.046) compared with patients without CAD., Conclusion: The presence of CAD in women undergoing TAVR, with or without recent PCI, was associated with long-term poorer outcomes., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Several clinical and procedural factors determine outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but data are scarce on the impact of post-TAVR discharge disposition on long-term outcomes. We sought to analyse whether discharge location after TAVR is associated with 1-year outcomes in women undergoing contemporary TAVR., Methods: The Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (WIN-TAVI) registry is the first all-female TAVR registry to study the safety and performance of contemporary TAVR in women (n = 1019). Information on discharge location was available in 817 patients (80.2%). We compared women discharged home vs those discharged to another location (nursing home, rehabilitation, or other hospital). One-year outcomes were adjusted using multivariable Cox regression methods with discharge home as the reference group., Results: Of the study subjects, 75.2% (n = 614) were discharged home and 24.8% (n = 203) to another location. Women discharged to other locations were older with a greater prevalence of severe lung disease requiring home oxygen and renal failure on dialysis but were less frequently considered frail or at high surgical risk compared with women discharged home. After multivariable adjustment, non-home discharge was associated with greater hazard for 1-year Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 efficacy (21.3% vs 10.8%, hazards ratio [HR] 1.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-2.9) and safety endpoints (31.5% vs 15.2%, HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.5-3.0), cardiovascular death (12.7% vs 5.5%, HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1-3.6), and stroke (6.5% vs 0.8%, HR 8.5, 95% CI 2.9-25.6)., Conclusions: In women undergoing contemporary TAVR, discharge disposition significantly affects 1-year risk of outcomes even after adjustment for recorded baseline differences. This might suggest the necessity of considering additional factors beyond comorbidities in the TAVR decision-making process., (Copyright © 2018 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Pre-existing atrial fibrillation (AF) is common among patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and has been associated with adverse outcomes. The specific impact of AF at baseline in women who underwent TAVI, however, remains unknown. The Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation is a prospective, multinational registry evaluating the safety and performance of contemporary TAVI in women in 19 centers between January 2013 and December 2015. Patients with available electrocardiogram at baseline were compared according to the presence of AF. All events were adjudicated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. Associations between AF and outcomes were tested using multivariate Cox regression model. Of the 993 women with available baseline electrocardiogram included in the study, 200 (20.1%) presented with AF. Patients with AF at baseline had higher Euroscore I score values and more frequently had chronic kidney disease or prior stroke. Patients without AF more frequently had coronary artery disease. There was no difference regarding in-hospital events between the two groups aside from longer length of stay for patients with AF (13.3 ± 11 vs 11.5 ± 7.1 days, p = 0.01). In multivariate analysis, AF at baseline was associated with an increase of all-cause and cardiovascular death at 12 months ( adj HR 1.67 95%CI 1.11 to 2.50, p = 0.013 and adj HR 1.85 95%CI 1.19 to 2.86, p = 0.006 respectively). In conclusion, in this prospective registry of women who underwent contemporary TAVI, the presence of AF at baseline was associated with significantly increased 12-month mortality., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an effective treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Yet, balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) is still occasionally offered to apparently inoperable patients as bridge or destination therapy, with some eventually receiving TAVI. We aimed to determine whether prior BAV would unfavorably impact TAVI., Methods: The RISPEVA dataset was analyzed to compare the outcomes of non-BAV subjects undergoing TAVI vs those with prior BAV. Outcomes of interest were procedural results, hospital stay, and in-hospital outcomes, including major adverse events. Unadjusted and propensity-matched analyses were performed., Results: A total of 1683 patients were included (1541 [91.6%] non-BAV and 142 [8.4%] prior BAV). Device success, procedural success, major adverse events and their individual components were all similar in the two groups, in both unadjusted and propensity-matched analyses. However, non-BAV patients had significantly shorter intensive/coronary care unit stay (8.1 ± 23.0 days vs 13.4 ± 35.2 days; P=.03) and total hospital stay (12.4 ± 22.1 days vs 17.2 ± 32.7 days; P=.02). Similar findings were obtained even in the propensity-matched groups (6.3 ± 11.9 days vs 13.6 ± 35.5 days [P=.05] and 10.5 ± 13.8 days vs 17.4 ± 33.1 days [P=.03], respectively). No significant interaction was found between device type and prior BAV status., Conclusion: BAV continues to offer a palliative solution to patients with unclear or poor prognosis and deemed at too high risk for emergent TAVI or surgery. Subjects undergoing BAV and surviving the post-BAV period can undergo TAVI without a significantly increased risk of in-hospital adverse events in comparison with non-BAV patients.

Background: Aortic valve calcification patterns were associated with short- and long-term outcomes in previous small observational datasets of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The specific impact of multi detector-row computed tomography (MDCT) findings on outcomes in women has not been reported. We sought to describe the associations between MDCT characteristics and clinical outcomes in a registry of 547 women undergoing TAVI., Methods: WIN-TAVI is the first all-female registry to study the safety and effectiveness of TAVI in women (n = 1019). Thirteen sites participated in the MDCT sub-study and contributed pre-TAVI MDCT studies in 547 consecutive subjects. All MDCT data were analyzed in an independent core lab blinded to clinical outcomes. Key measurements included number of valve leaflets, aortic annulus area and perimeter, left and right coronary artery height, aortic cusp calcium volume, commissural calcification and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Calcium volume of the aortic valvular complex was quantified using a threshold relative to patient-specific contrast attenuation in the arterial blood pool. We examined univariate and multivariate associations between ECG-gated contrast MDCT characteristics and 1-year mortality or stroke, new pacemaker implantation and new onset atrial fibrillation (AF)., Results: The CT sub-study sample had a mean age of 82.8 ± 6.3 years, mean logistic EuroSCORE of 17.8 ± 11.3%, and mean STS score of 8.2 ± 7.4%. Transfemoral access was used in 89.6% of patients. After multivariate adjustment, moderate or severe LVOT calcification was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality or stroke (HR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.11-3.30; p = 0.02). Calcium volume in the right coronary cusp was an independent predictor of new pacemaker (HR = 1.18 per 100 m 3 increment; p = 0.04), whereas calcium volume of the non-coronary cusp had a protective effect (HR = 0.78 per 100 mm 3 increment; p = 0.004). Severe calcification of the non-coronary/right-coronary commissure was an independent predictor of new AF (HR = 5.1; p = 0.008)., Conclusion: Computed tomography provides important prognostic information in women undergoing TAVI. Moderate or severe LVOT calcification is associated to an almost two-fold increased risk of mortality or stroke at one year. Different calcification patterns of the aortic valve may predict diverse rhythm abnormalities., (Copyright © 2018 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine whether the association of small label size of the surgical valve with increased mortality after transcatheter valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation is, at least in part, related to pre-existing prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (i.e., a bioprosthesis that is too small in relation to body size)., Background: Transcatheter ViV implantation is an alternative for the treatment of patients with degenerated bioprostheses. Small label size of the surgical valve has been associated with increased mortality after ViV implantation., Methods: Data from 1,168 patients included in the VIVID (Valve-in-Valve International Data) registry were analyzed. Pre-existing PPM of the surgical valve was determined using a reference value of effective orifice area for each given model and size of implanted prosthetic valve indexed for body surface area. Severe PPM was defined according to the criteria proposed by the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2: indexed effective orifice area <0.65 cm 2 /m 2 if body mass index is <30 kg/m 2 and <0.6 cm 2 /m 2 if BMI is ≥30 kg/m 2 . The primary study endpoint was 1-year mortality., Results: Among the 1,168 patients included in the registry, 89 (7.6%) had pre-existing severe PPM. Patients with severe PPM had higher 30-day (10.3%, p = 0.01) and 1-year (unadjusted: 28.6%, p < 0.001; adjusted: 19.3%, p = 0.03) mortality rates compared with patients with no severe PPM (4.3%, 11.9%, and 10.9%, respectively). After adjusting for surgical valve label size, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, renal failure, diabetes, and stentless surgical valves, presence of pre-existing severe PPM was associated with increased risk for 1-year mortality (odds ratio: 1.88; 95% confidence interval: 1.07 to 3.28; p = 0.03). Patients with severe PPM also more frequently harbored high post-procedural gradients (mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg)., Conclusions: Pre-existing PPM of the failed surgical valve is strongly and independently associated with increased risk for mortality following ViV implantation., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to examine the safety and performance of contemporary transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in an exclusive all-women TAVR population, and to further investigate the potential impact of female sex-specific characteristics on composite 1-year clinical outcomes., Background: Women comprise ≥50% patients undergoing TAVR. Several data have shown the noninferiority of TAVR compared with surgical aortic valve replacement for symptomatic significant aortic stenosis, but no study so far has been specifically powered to detect differences by sex., Methods: The WIN-TAVI (Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry is a multinational, prospective, observational registry of women undergoing TAVR for significant aortic stenosis, across 18 sites in Europe and 1 site in the United States, between January 2013 and December 2015. The primary Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 efficacy endpoint was a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction beyond 30 days. Secondary endpoints included composite 1-year death or stroke. Predictors of 1-year outcomes were determined using Cox regression methods., Results: A total of 1,019 intermediate to high-risk women, with mean age 82.5 ± 6.3 years, mean European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) I 17.8 ± 11.7% and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score 8.3 ± 7.4% were enrolled. TAVR was performed via transfemoral access in 90.6% and new-generation devices were used in 42.1%. The primary VARC-2 efficacy composite endpoint occurred in 111 (10.9%) patients beyond 30 days and in 167 (16.5%) patients at 1 year. The incidence of 1-year death or stroke was 13.9% (n = 141). Death occurred in 127 (12.5%) patients and stroke in 22 (2.2%) patients. Prior coronary revascularization (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 2.52; p = 0.006) and EuroSCORE I (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.04; p = 0.027) were independent predictors of the VARC-2 efficacy endpoint. Similarly, EuroSCORE I (HR: 1.02; 95% CI: 1.00 to 1.04; p = 0.013), baseline atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.33; p = 0.022), and prior percutaneous coronary intervention (HR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.03 to 2.19; p = 0.035) were independent predictors of 1-year death or stroke. After adjustment, no significant association was observed between history of pregnancy or any sex-specific factors and 1-year TAVR outcomes., Conclusions: Intermediate to high-risk women enrolled in this first ever all-women contemporary TAVR registry experienced a 1-year VARC-2 composite efficacy endpoint of 16.5%, with a low incidence of 1-year mortality and stroke. Prior revascularization and EuroSCORE I were independent predictors of the VARC-2 efficacy endpoint, whereas EuroSCORE I, baseline atrial fibrillation, and prior percutaneous coronary intervention were independent predictors of the 1-year death or stroke., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Despite the technical advancements in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), this procedure in patients with peripheral artery disease remains challenging and requires a patient-tailored management by the Heart Team. In-depth assessment of the patient's vascular anatomy is of utmost importance for the management of TAVI procedures with the aim to use the less invasive approach according to the specific patient characteristics. The trans-subclavian approach should be the preferred option in patients with femoral arterial disease undergoing TAVI; however, self-expandable valves have potential limitations, as in case of ascending aorta dilation and high implantation. We present an elegant solution to overcome this challenging situation with good short- and mid-term outcome. A balloon-expandable Edwards Sapien 3 prosthesis was implanted by right subclavian surgical access using a multistep approach. The imaging controls showed good positioning with trivial paravalvular leak. The right subclavian approach for balloon-expandable TAVI implantation is feasible and safe when performed by skilled operators and can be a valid treatment strategy when no other options are available.

Advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poor outcomes in patients who underwent surgical aortic valve replacement, whereas its prognostic role in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate outcomes in patients with advanced CKD who underwent TAVI. A total of 1,904 consecutive patients who underwent balloon-expandable TAVI in 33 centers between 2007 and 2012 were enrolled in the Italian Transcatheter Balloon-Expandable Valve Implantation Registry. Advanced CKD was defined according to the estimated glomerular filtration rate: 15 to 29 ml/min/1.73 m 2 stage 4 (S4), <15 ml/min/1.73 m 2 stage 5 (S5). Edwards Sapien or Sapien-XT prosthesis were used. The primary end point was all-cause mortality during follow-up. Secondary end points were major adverse cardiac events at 30 days and at follow-up, defined with Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. A total of 421 patients were staged S5 (n = 74) or S4 (n = 347). S5 patients were younger and had more frequently porcelain aorta and a lower incidence of previous stroke. Periprocedural and 30-day outcomes were similar in S5 and S4 patients. During 670 (±466) days of follow-up, S5 patients had higher mortality rates (69% vs 39%, p <0.01) and cardiac death (19% vs 9%, p = 0.02) compared with S4 patients. Male gender (hazard ratio [HR] 1.6, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2 to 2.2), left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (HR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3 to 4), atrial fibrillation (HR 1.4, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.9), and S5 CKD (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0 to 2.1) were independent predictors of death. In conclusion, TAVI in predialytic or dialytic patients (i.e., S5) is independently associated with poor outcomes with more than double risk of death compared with patients with S4 renal function. Conversely, in severe CKD (i.e., S4) a rigorous risk stratification is required to avoid the risk of futility risk., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate interactions among pre-procedural aortic regurgitation (AR), post-procedural paravalvular leak (PVL) and long-term clinical outcomes., Methods and Results: We analyzed data prospectively collected in the Italian Transcatheter balloon-Expandable Registry (ITER) on aortic stenosis (AS) patients. The degree of pre-procedural AR and post-procedural PVL was stratified as: absent/trivial, mild, and moderate/severe. VARC definitions were applied to outcomes. Of 1708 patients, preoperatively, AR was absent/trivial in 40% of the patients, mild in 42%, and moderate in 18%. Postoperatively, PVL was moderate-severe in 5%, mild in 32% of patients, and absent/trivial in 63%. Clinical follow-up, median 821days (IQR 585.75), was performed in 99.7% of patients. PVL, but not preoperative AR, was a major predictor of adverse outcome (HR 1.33, CI 95% 0.9-2.05, p=0.012 for mild PVL, HR 1.36, CI 95% 0.9-2.05, p<0.001 for PVL≥moderate and OR 1.04, p=0.97 respectively). Patients with moderate-severe PVL and preoperative left ventricle (LV) dilatation (LVEDVi>75ml/m 2 ) showed better survival than those without dilatation (HR 8.63, p=0.001)., Conclusions: In patients with severe AS treated with balloon-expandable TAVI, the presence of PVL, but not pre-procedural AR, was a major predictor of adverse outcome. Preoperative LV dilatation seemed to offer some clinical advantages., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this multicentre study is to report the clinical experiences of all patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with a balloon-expandable device in Italy., Methods: The Italian Transcatheter balloon-Expandable valve Registry (ITER) is a real-world registry that includes patients who have undergone TAVI with the Sapien (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) bioprosthesis in Italy since it became available in clinical practice. From 2007 to 2012, 1904 patients were enrolled to undergo TAVI in 33 Italian centres. Outcomes were classified according to the updated Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) definitions. A multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of all-cause mortality., Results: Mean age was 81.7 (SD:6.2) years, and 1147 (60.2%) patients were female. Mean Logistic EuroSCORE was 21.1% (SD:13.7). Transfemoral, transapical, transaortic and transaxillary TAVI was performed in 1252 (65.8%), 630 (33.1%), 18 (0.9%) and 4 (0.2%) patients, respectively. Operative mortality was 7.2% (137 patients). The VARC-2 outcomes were as follows: device success, 88.1%; disabling stroke, 1.0%; life-threatening and major bleeding 9.8 and 10.5%, respectively; major vascular complication, 9.7%; acute kidney injury, 8.2%; acute myocardial infarction ≤72 h, 1.5%. Perioperative pacemaker implantation was necessary in 116 (6.1%) patients. At discharge, the mean transprosthetic gradient was 10.7 (SD:4.5) mmHg. Incidence of postoperative mild, moderate or severe paravalvular leak was, respectively, 32.1, 5.0 and 0.4%. A total of 444/1767 (25.1%) deaths after hospital discharge were reported: of these, 168 (37.8%) were classified as cardiac death. Preoperative independent predictors of all-cause mortality were male gender (HR: 1.395; 95% CI:1.052-1.849); overweight, BMI 25-30 kg/m 2 (HR: 0.775; 95% CI: 0.616-0.974); serum creatinine level (every 1 mg/dl increase; HR: 1.314; 95% CI:1.167-1.480); haemoglobin level (every 1 g/dl increase; HR: 0.905; 95% CI:0.833-0.984); critical preoperative state (HR: 2.282; 95% CI: 1.384-3.761); neurological dysfunction (HR: 1.552; 95% CI:1.060-2.272); atrial fibrillation (HR: 1.556; 95% CI:1.213-1.995); pacemaker rhythm (HR: 1.948; 95% CI:1.310-2.896); NYHA Class III or IV (HR: 1.800; 95% CI:1.205-2.689 or HR: 2.331; 95% CI:1.392-3.903, respectively)., Conclusions: TAVI with a balloon-expandable device in the 'real world' shows good mid-term outcomes in terms of survival, technical success, valve-related adverse events and haemodynamic performance., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Stroke incidence after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) still represents a concern. This multicentre study aimed at investigating the hypothesis that CHADS2 and CHA2DS2-VASc scores may be used to predict perioperative stroke after TAVI., Methods: The Italian Transcatheter Balloon-Expandable Valve Implantation Registry (ITER) is a multicentre, prospective registry of patients undergoing balloon-expandable TAVI using Edwards Sapien and Sapien XT prosthesis between 2007 and 2012. The primary end-point of this study was the 30-day stroke rate. Secondary safety end-points were all the major adverse events based on Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC-2) criteria., Results: One thousand nine hundred and four patients were enrolled in the registry. Mean age was 81.6 ± 6.2 years and 1147 (60.2%) patients were female; mean CHADS 2 and CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc scores were 2.2 ± 0.8 and 4.4 ± 1.1, respectively. Fifty-four (2.8%) patients had a stroke within 30 days. At multivariable logistic regression analysis, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc (OR: 1.35, 95% CI: 1.03-1.78; P = 0.031) and previous cardiac surgery (OR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.06-3.6; P = 0.033) but not CHADS 2 (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.76-1.44; P = 0.77) were found to be independent predictors of in-hospital stroke. A CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score ≥5 was strongly related to the occurrence of in-hospital stroke (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.38-4.57; P= 0.001). However, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score showed only poor accuracy for in-hospital stroke with a trend for better accuracy when compared with CHADS 2 score (area under the curve: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.59-0.63 vs 0.51; 95% CI: 0.49-0.54, respectively, P = 0.092)., Conclusions: In TAVI patients, CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc provided a strong correlation for in-hospital stroke but with low accuracy. Dedicated scores to properly tailor procedures and preventive strategies are needed., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The study sought to examine the safety and performance of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using an all-female registry and to further explore the potential impact of female sex-specific characteristics on clinical outcomes after TAVR., Background: Although women comprise 50% of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR, the optimal treatment strategy remains undetermined., Methods: The WIN-TAVI (Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry is a multinational, prospective, observational registry of women undergoing TAVR for aortic stenosis, conducted without any external funding. The primary endpoint was the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 early safety endpoint at 30 days (composite of mortality, stroke, major vascular complication, life-threatening bleeding, stage 2 or 3 acute kidney injury, coronary artery obstruction, or repeat procedure for valve-related dysfunction)., Results: Between January 2013 and December 2015, 1,019 women were enrolled across 19 European and North American centers. The mean patient age was 82.5 ± 6.3 years, mean EuroSCORE I was 17.8 ± 11.7% and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 8.3 ± 7.4%. TAVR was performed via transfemoral access in 90.6% and new-generation devices were used in 42.1%. In more than two-thirds of cases, an Edwards SAPIEN 23 mm (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) or Medtronic CoreValve ≤26 mm (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) device was implanted. The 30-day VARC-2 composite endpoint occurred in 14.0% with 3.4% all-cause mortality, 1.3% stroke, 7.7% major vascular complications, and 4.4% VARC life-threatening bleeding. The independent predictors of the primary endpoint were age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00 to 1.08), prior stroke (OR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.07 to 3.80), left ventricular ejection fraction <30% (OR: 2.62; 95% CI: 1.07 to 6.40), new device generation (OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.38 to 0.91), and history of pregnancy (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.85)., Conclusions: Women enrolled in this first ever all-female TAVR registry with collection of female sex-specific baseline parameters, were at intermediate-high risk and experienced a 30-day VARC-2 composite safety endpoint of 14.0% with a low incidence of early mortality and stroke. Randomized assessment of TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement in intermediate risk women is warranted to determine the optimal strategy., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transcatheter valve implantation inside failed bioprosthetic surgical valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) may offer an advantage over reoperation. Supra-annular transcatheter valve position may be advantageous in achieving better hemodynamics after ViV. Our objective was to define targets for implantation that would improve hemodynamics after ViV., Methods and Results: Cases from the Valve-in-Valve International Data (VIVID) registry were analyzed using centralized core laboratory assessment blinded to clinical events. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of elevated postprocedural gradients (mean ≥20 mm Hg). Optimal implantation depths were defined by receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 292 consecutive patients (age, 78.9±8.7 years; 60.3% male; 157 CoreValve Evolut and 135 Sapien XT) were evaluated. High implantation was associated with significantly lower rates of elevated gradients in comparison with low implantation (CoreValve Evolut, 15% versus 34.2%; P=0.03 and Sapien XT, 18.5% versus 43.5%; P=0.03, respectively). Optimal implantation depths were defined: CoreValve Evolut, 0 to 5 mm; Sapien XT, 0 to 2 mm (0-10% frame height); sensitivities, 91.3% and 88.5%, respectively. The strongest independent correlate for elevated gradients after ViV was device position (high: odds ratio, 0.22; confidence interval, 0.1-0.52; P=0.001), in addition to type of device used (CoreValve Evolut: odds ratio, 0.5; confidence interval, 0.28-0.88; P=0.02) and surgical valve mechanism of failure (stenosis/mixed baseline failure: odds ratio, 3.12; confidence interval, 1.51-6.45; P=0.002)., Conclusions: High implantation inside failed bioprosthetic valves is a strong independent correlate of lower postprocedural gradients in both self- and balloon-expandable transcatheter valves. These clinical evaluations support specific implantation targets to optimize hemodynamics after ViV., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)