Search

Background—The prognosis and treatment of patients with low-flow (LF) severe aortic stenosis are controversial. Methods and Results—The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial randomized patients with severe aortic stenosis to medical management versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR; inoperable cohort) and surgical aortic valve replacement versus TAVR (high-risk cohort). Among 971 patients with evaluable echocardiograms (92%), LF (stroke volume index =35 mL/m2) was observed in 530 (55%); LF and low ejection fraction (<50%) in 225 (23%); and LF, low ejection fraction, and low mean gradient (<40 mm Hg) in 147 (15%). Two-year mortality was significantly higher in patients with LF compared with those with normal stroke volume index (47% versus 34%; hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.25–1.89; P=0.006). In the inoperable cohort, patients with LF had higher mortality than those with normal flow, but both groups improved with TAVR (46% versus 76% with LF and 38% versus 53% with normal flow; P<0.001). In the high-risk cohort, there was no difference between TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement. In patients with paradoxical LF and low gradient (preserved ejection fraction), TAVR reduced 1-year mortality from 66% to 35% (hazard ratio, 0.38; P=0.02). LF was an independent predictor of mortality in all patient cohorts (hazard ratio, ˜1.5), whereas ejection fraction and gradient were not. Conclusions—LF is common in severe aortic stenosis and independently predicts mortality. Survival is improved with TAVR compared with medical management and similar with TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement. A measure of flow (stroke volume index) should be included in the evaluation and therapeutic decision making of patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Background— We aimed to determine the incidence, predictors, clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods and Results— This multicenter registry included 53 patients (mean age, 79±8 years; men, 57%) who suffered IE after TAVI of 7944 patients after a mean follow-up of 1.1±1.2 years (incidence, 0.67%, 0.50% within the first year after TAVI). Mean time from TAVI was 6 months (interquartile range, 1–14 months). Orotracheal intubation (hazard ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.55–9.64; P=0.004) and the self-expandable CoreValve system (hazard ratio, 3.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.37–7.14; P=0.007) were associated with IE (multivariate analysis including 3067 patients with individual data). The most frequent causal microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (24%), followed by Staphylococcus aureus (21%) and enterococci (21%). Vegetations were present in 77% of patients (transcatheter valve leaflets, 39%; stent frame, 17%; mitral valve, 21%). At least 1 complication of IE occurred in 87% of patients (heart failure in 68%). However, only 11% of patients underwent valve intervention (valve explantation and valve-in-valve procedure in 4 and 2 patients, respectively). The mortality rate in hospital was 47.2% and increased to 66% at the 1-year follow-up. IE complications such as heart failure (P=0.037) and septic shock (P=0.002) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Conclusions— The incidence of IE at 1 year after TAVI was 0.50%, and the risk increased with the use of orotracheal intubation and a self-expandable valve system. Staphylococci and enterococci were the most common agents. Although most patients presented at least 1 complication of IE, valve intervention was performed in a minority of patients, and nearly half of the patients died during the hospitalization period.

Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine whether a less-invasive approach to aortic valve replacement (AVR) improves clinical outcomes in diabetic patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Background: Diabetes is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after surgical AVR for AS. Methods: Among treated patients with severe symptomatic AS at high risk for surgery in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial, we examined outcomes stratified according to diabetes status of patients randomly assigned to receive transcatheter or surgical AVR. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Results: Among 657 patients enrolled in PARTNER who underwent treatment, there were 275 patients with diabetes (145 transcatheter, 130 surgical). There was a significant interaction between diabetes and treatment group for 1-year all-cause mortality (p = 0.048). Among diabetic patients, all-cause mortality at 1 year was 18.0% in the transcatheter group and 27.4% in the surgical group (hazard ratio: 0.60 [95% confidence interval: 0.36 to 0.99]; p = 0.04). Results were consistent among patients treated via transfemoral or transapical routes. In contrast, among nondiabetic patients, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 1 year (p = 0.48). Among diabetic patients, the 1-year rates of stroke were similar between treatment groups (3.5% transcatheter vs. 3.5% surgery; p = 0.88), but the rate of renal failure requiring dialysis >30 days was lower in the transcatheter group (0% vs. 6.1%; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Among patients with diabetes and severe symptomatic AS at high risk for surgery, this post-hoc stratified analysis of the PARTNER trial suggests there is a survival benefit, no increase in stroke, and less renal failure from treatment with transcatheter AVR compared with surgical AVR. (The PARTNER Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894)

BACKGROUND: Inoperable aortic stenosis may be treated with either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or medical management (MM) with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV). The aim of this study was to compare the long-term echocardiographic findings among TAVR, MM, and BAV in patients with severe, inoperable aortic stenosis. METHODS: A total of 358 inoperable patients in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves trial were randomized to MM or TAVR. Echocardiograms obtained at baseline, 30 days, and 1, 2, and 3 years were analyzed by a central core laboratory. RESULTS: At baseline, TAVR and MM were similar, with more frequent Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > 10 (51.7% vs 65.0%, P = .03) and larger end-systolic volumes (54.5 ± 29.3 vs 69.1 ± 48.0 mL, P = .03) in MM. By 30 days after TAVR, mean aortic valve gradient had decreased (from 43.8 ± 14.7 to 10.0 ± 4.3 mm Hg, P < .001), ejection fraction had increased (from 53.2 ± 12.4% to 56.7 ± 10.0%, P < .001), and left ventricular (LV) mass index had decreased (from 144.7 ± 36.1 to 140.0 ± 37.9 gm/m(2), P < .05). After 1 year, aortic valve gradients and area were unchanged, while LV mass index had decreased by another 16 gm/m(2) (to 124 gm/m(2)). By 30 days after BAV, mean aortic valve gradient had decreased from 43.4 ± 15.0 to 31.9 ± 11.1 mm Hg, while ejection fraction and LV mass index were unchanged; gradient reverted to baseline at 1 year. No changes in gradients or mass were seen in MM patients. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR results in immediate and sustained relief in pressure overload and improved LV systolic function, with continued regression of hypertrophy over 3 years. Poor clinical results with BAV are explained by the modest and transient reductions in pressure overload with BAV, which were not accompanied by improved LV function or remodeling. TAVR is the preferred treatment in eligible inoperable patients

Aim: The impact of paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains uncertain. In this analysis, we sought to evaluate the impact of varying degrees of PVR on both mortality and changes in ventricular geometry and function. Methods and results: Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients who underwent TAVR from the randomized cohorts and continued access registries in the PARTNER trial were analysed after stratifying by severity of post-implant PVR, which was graded as none/trace in 52.9% (n = 1288), mild in 38.0% (n = 925), and moderate/severe in 9.1% (n = 221). There were significant differences in baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics. After TAVR, all the patients demonstrated increase in left ventricular (LV) function and reduction in the LV mass index, although the magnitude of mass regression was lower in the moderate/severe PVR group. The 30-day mortality (3.1 vs. 3.4 vs. 4.5%, P = 0.56) and stroke (3.4 vs. 3.7 vs. 2.3%, P = 0.59) were similar in all groups (none/trace, mild, and moderate/severe). At 1 year, there was increased all-cause mortality (15.9 vs. 22.2 vs. 35.1%, P < 0.0001), cardiac mortality (6.1 vs. 7.4% vs. 16.3%, P < 0.0001) and re-hospitalization (14.4 vs. 23.0 vs. 31.3%, P < 0.0001) with worsening PVR. A multivariable analysis indicated that the presence of moderate/severe PVR (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.57–3.02, P < 0.0001) or mild PVR (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.14–1.90, P = 0.012) was associated with higher late mortality. Conclusion: Differences in baseline characteristics in patients with increasing severities of PVR may increase the risk of this complication. Despite these differences, multivariable analysis demonstrated that both mild and moderate/severe PVR predicted higher 1-year mortality.

Objectives: This study sought to characterize the patients receiving post-implantation balloon dilation (PD) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and evaluate procedural outcomes in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) I trial. Background: Following TAVR, PD has been used to treat paravalvular regurgitation. Methods: The PARTNER I trial cohort A (n = 304) and cohort B (n = 194) patients randomized to TAVR and the nonrandomized continued access TAVR (n = 1,637) patients were included in the analysis. PD was performed at the discretion of the operator. Clinical events and echocardiographic variables were collected prospectively out to 1 year. Results: The overall incidence of PD was 12.4%. PD patients had significantly less prosthesis-patient mismatch (p < 0.001) and larger effective orifice areas (p < 0.001) throughout the follow-up period. There were significantly more subacute strokes (occurring <7 days: 4.9% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.04) in PD patients but no difference in late stroke, either at 7 to 30 days (0.0% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.16) or >30 days (1.9 vs. 1.7%; p = 0.75). Although there was no significant increase in early mortality with PD, at 1 year, there was a trend for higher all-cause mortality (p = 0.054) and a significant difference in death or stroke (p = 0.04). When the subgroup of patients with none/trace paravalvular regurgitation were evaluated, there was no significant association of PD with mortality (p = 0.61) and death or stroke (p = 0.96). Multivariable analysis failed to show a relationship between PD and mortality. Conclusions: PD is associated with reduced rates of moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch with no evidence for short-term structural deterioration of the balloon-expandable transcatheter valve. Although PD is associated with a greater incidence of early stroke, there is no significant association between PD and stroke beyond 7 days. Multivariable analysis shows no significant association between PD a

BACKGROUND: Inoperable aortic stenosis may be treated with either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or medical management (MM) with or without balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV). The aim of this study was to compare the long-term echocardiographic findings among TAVR, MM, and BAV in patients with severe, inoperable aortic stenosis. METHODS: A total of 358 inoperable patients in the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves trial were randomized to MM or TAVR. Echocardiograms obtained at baseline, 30 days, and 1, 2, and 3 years were analyzed by a central core laboratory. RESULTS: At baseline, TAVR and MM were similar, with more frequent Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > 10 (51.7% vs 65.0%, P = .03) and larger end-systolic volumes (54.5 ± 29.3 vs 69.1 ± 48.0 mL, P = .03) in MM. By 30 days after TAVR, mean aortic valve gradient had decreased (from 43.8 ± 14.7 to 10.0 ± 4.3 mm Hg, P < .001), ejection fraction had increased (from 53.2 ± 12.4% to 56.7 ± 10.0%, P < .001), and left ventricular (LV) mass index had decreased (from 144.7 ± 36.1 to 140.0 ± 37.9 gm/m(2), P < .05). After 1 year, aortic valve gradients and area were unchanged, while LV mass index had decreased by another 16 gm/m(2) (to 124 gm/m(2)). By 30 days after BAV, mean aortic valve gradient had decreased from 43.4 ± 15.0 to 31.9 ± 11.1 mm Hg, while ejection fraction and LV mass index were unchanged; gradient reverted to baseline at 1 year. No changes in gradients or mass were seen in MM patients. CONCLUSIONS: TAVR results in immediate and sustained relief in pressure overload and improved LV systolic function, with continued regression of hypertrophy over 3 years. Poor clinical results with BAV are explained by the modest and transient reductions in pressure overload with BAV, which were not accompanied by improved LV function or remodeling. TAVR is the preferred treatment in eligible inoperable patients Trials.gov identifier NCT00530894). (J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2015;28:210-17.)

Background—We aimed to determine the incidence, predictors, clinical characteristics, management, and outcomes of infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods and Results—This multicenter registry included 53 patients (mean age, 79±8 years; men, 57%) who suffered IE after TAVI of 7944 patients after a mean follow-up of 1.1±1.2 years (incidence, 0.67%, 0.50% within the first year after TAVI). Mean time from TAVI was 6 months (interquartile range, 1–14 months). Orotracheal intubation (hazard ratio, 3.87; 95% confidence interval, 1.55–9.64; P=0.004) and the self-expandable CoreValve system (hazard ratio, 3.12; 95% confidence interval, 1.37–7.14; P=0.007) were associated with IE (multivariate analysis including 3067 patients with individual data). The most frequent causal microorganisms were coagulase-negative staphylococci (24%), followed by Staphylococcus aureus (21%) and enterococci (21%). Vegetations were present in 77% of patients (transcatheter valve leaflets, 39%; stent frame, 17%; mitral valve, 21%). At least 1 complication of IE occurred in 87% of patients (heart failure in 68%). However, only 11% of patients underwent valve intervention (valve explantation and valve-in-valve procedure in 4 and 2 patients, respectively). The mortality rate in hospital was 47.2% and increased to 66% at the 1-year follow-up. IE complications such as heart failure (P=0.037) and septic shock (P=0.002) were associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Conclusions—The incidence of IE at 1 year after TAVI was 0.50%, and the risk increased with the use of orotracheal intubation and a self-expandable valve system. Staphylococci and enterococci were the most common agents. Although most patients presented at least 1 complication of IE, valve intervention was performed in a minority of patients, and nearly half of the patients died during the hospitalization period.

Objectives: This study sought to characterize the patients receiving post-implantation balloon dilation (PD) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and evaluate procedural outcomes in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) I trial. Background: Following TAVR, PD has been used to treat paravalvular regurgitation. Methods: The PARTNER I trial cohort A (n = 304) and cohort B (n = 194) patients randomized to TAVR and the nonrandomized continued access TAVR (n = 1,637) patients were included in the analysis. PD was performed at the discretion of the operator. Clinical events and echocardiographic variables were collected prospectively out to 1 year. Results: The overall incidence of PD was 12.4%. PD patients had significantly less prosthesis-patient mismatch (p < 0.001) and larger effective orifice areas (p < 0.001) throughout the follow-up period. There were significantly more subacute strokes (occurring <7 days: 4.9% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.04) in PD patients but no difference in late stroke, either at 7 to 30 days (0.0% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.16) or >30 days (1.9 vs. 1.7%; p = 0.75). Although there was no significant increase in early mortality with PD, at 1 year, there was a trend for higher all-cause mortality (p = 0.054) and a significant difference in death or stroke (p = 0.04). When the subgroup of patients with none/trace paravalvular regurgitation were evaluated, there was no significant association of PD with mortality (p = 0.61) and death or stroke (p = 0.96). Multivariable analysis failed to show a relationship between PD and mortality. Conclusions: PD is associated with reduced rates of moderate or severe prosthesis-patient mismatch with no evidence for short-term structural deterioration of the balloon-expandable transcatheter valve. Although PD is associated with a greater incidence of early stroke, there is no significant association between PD and stroke beyond 7 days. Multivariable analysis shows no significant association between PD a

Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine whether a less-invasive approach to aortic valve replacement (AVR) improves clinical outcomes in diabetic patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Background: Diabetes is associated with increased morbidity and mortality after surgical AVR for AS. Methods: Among treated patients with severe symptomatic AS at high risk for surgery in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial, we examined outcomes stratified according to diabetes status of patients randomly assigned to receive transcatheter or surgical AVR. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Results: Among 657 patients enrolled in PARTNER who underwent treatment, there were 275 patients with diabetes (145 transcatheter, 130 surgical). There was a significant interaction between diabetes and treatment group for 1-year all-cause mortality (p = 0.048). Among diabetic patients, all-cause mortality at 1 year was 18.0% in the transcatheter group and 27.4% in the surgical group (hazard ratio: 0.60 [95% confidence interval: 0.36 to 0.99]; p = 0.04). Results were consistent among patients treated via transfemoral or transapical routes. In contrast, among nondiabetic patients, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality at 1 year (p = 0.48). Among diabetic patients, the 1-year rates of stroke were similar between treatment groups (3.5% transcatheter vs. 3.5% surgery; p = 0.88), but the rate of renal failure requiring dialysis >30 days was lower in the transcatheter group (0% vs. 6.1%; p = 0.003). Conclusions: Among patients with diabetes and severe symptomatic AS at high risk for surgery, this post-hoc stratified analysis of the PARTNER trial suggests there is a survival benefit, no increase in stroke, and less renal failure from treatment with transcatheter AVR compared with surgical AVR. (The PARTNER Trial: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894)

Aim: The impact of paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains uncertain. In this analysis, we sought to evaluate the impact of varying degrees of PVR on both mortality and changes in ventricular geometry and function. Methods and results: Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients who underwent TAVR from the randomized cohorts and continued access registries in the PARTNER trial were analysed after stratifying by severity of post-implant PVR, which was graded as none/trace in 52.9% (n = 1288), mild in 38.0% (n = 925), and moderate/severe in 9.1% (n = 221). There were significant differences in baseline clinical and echocardiographic characteristics. After TAVR, all the patients demonstrated increase in left ventricular (LV) function and reduction in the LV mass index, although the magnitude of mass regression was lower in the moderate/severe PVR group. The 30-day mortality (3.1 vs. 3.4 vs. 4.5%, P = 0.56) and stroke (3.4 vs. 3.7 vs. 2.3%, P = 0.59) were similar in all groups (none/trace, mild, and moderate/severe). At 1 year, there was increased all-cause mortality (15.9 vs. 22.2 vs. 35.1%, P < 0.0001), cardiac mortality (6.1 vs. 7.4% vs. 16.3%, P < 0.0001) and re-hospitalization (14.4 vs. 23.0 vs. 31.3%, P < 0.0001) with worsening PVR. A multivariable analysis indicated that the presence of moderate/severe PVR (HR: 2.18, 95% CI: 1.57–3.02, P < 0.0001) or mild PVR (HR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.14–1.90, P = 0.012) was associated with higher late mortality. Conclusion: Differences in baseline characteristics in patients with increasing severities of PVR may increase the risk of this complication. Despite these differences, multivariable analysis demonstrated that both mild and moderate/severe PVR predicted higher 1-year mortality.

Background—The prognosis and treatment of patients with low-flow (LF) severe aortic stenosis are controversial. Methods and Results—The Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) trial randomized patients with severe aortic stenosis to medical management versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR; inoperable cohort) and surgical aortic valve replacement versus TAVR (high-risk cohort). Among 971 patients with evaluable echocardiograms (92%), LF (stroke volume index =35 mL/m2) was observed in 530 (55%); LF and low ejection fraction (<50%) in 225 (23%); and LF, low ejection fraction, and low mean gradient (<40 mm Hg) in 147 (15%). Two-year mortality was significantly higher in patients with LF compared with those with normal stroke volume index (47% versus 34%; hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.25–1.89; P=0.006). In the inoperable cohort, patients with LF had higher mortality than those with normal flow, but both groups improved with TAVR (46% versus 76% with LF and 38% versus 53% with normal flow; P<0.001). In the high-risk cohort, there was no difference between TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement. In patients with paradoxical LF and low gradient (preserved ejection fraction), TAVR reduced 1-year mortality from 66% to 35% (hazard ratio, 0.38; P=0.02). LF was an independent predictor of mortality in all patient cohorts (hazard ratio, ˜1.5), whereas ejection fraction and gradient were not. Conclusions—LF is common in severe aortic stenosis and independently predicts mortality. Survival is improved with TAVR compared with medical management and similar with TAVR and surgical aortic valve replacement. A measure of flow (stroke volume index) should be included in the evaluation and therapeutic decision making of patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Aims To critically review the available transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques and their results, as well as propose recommendations for their use and development. Methods and results A committee of experts including European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and European Society of Cardiology representatives met to reach a consensus based on the analysis of the available data obtained with transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their own experience. The evidence suggests that this technique is feasible and provides haemodynamic and clinical improvement for up to 2 years in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high risk or with contraindications for surgery. Questions remain mainly concerning safety and long-term durability, which have to be assessed. Surgeons and cardiologists working as a team should select candidates, perform the procedure, and assess the results. Today, the use of this technique should be restricted to high-risk patients or those with contraindications for surgery. However, this may be extended to lower risk patients if the initial promise holds to be true after careful evaluation. Conclusion Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising technique, which may offer an alternative to conventional surgery for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Today, careful evaluation is needed to avoid the risk of uncontrolled diffusion

Aims: To critically review the available transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques and their results, as well as propose recommendations for their use and development. Methods and results: A committee of experts including European Association of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and European Society of Cardiology representatives met to reach a consensus based on the analysis of the available data obtained with transcatheter aortic valve implantation and their own experience. The evidence suggests that this technique is feasible and provides haemodynamic and clinical improvement for up to 2 years in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high risk or with contraindications for surgery. Questions remain mainly concerning safety and long-term durability, which have to be assessed. Surgeons and cardiologists working as a team should select candidates, perform the procedure, and assess the results. Today, the use of this technique should be restricted to high-risk patients or those with contraindications for surgery. However, this may be extended to lower risk patients if the initial promise holds to be true after careful evaluation. Conclusion: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a promising technique, which may offer an alternative to conventional surgery for high-risk patients with aortic stenosis. Today, careful evaluation is needed to avoid the risk of uncontrolled diffusion