Search

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the management of aortic stenosis. We aimed at appraising effectiveness of a new self-expandable TAVI device.We retrospectively analyzed our institutional experience with Allegra (Biosensors, Morges, Switzerland) for TAVI, focusing on procedural outcomes and 1-month adverse events. We explored the impact of operator experience with this device, dividing patients according to their time of intervention.Between 2018 and 2021, a total of 50 patients underwent TAVI with Allegra, with average age of 81 years, 80% women, and 50% at low or intermediate surgical risk. No major significant difference in baseline patient features were found when comparing the Phase 1 and Phase 2, except for baseline left ventricular ejection fraction and New York Heart Association, which were worse in Phase 1. All procedures were performed transfemorally and percutaneously, with predilation in 94% and postdilation in 36%, yielding device success in 98%, and procedural success in 96%. No significant differences in procedural features were found when comparing Phase 1 vs. Phase 2 (all P0.05). One-month follow-up was also favorable, with no significant difference in adverse outcomes according to phase, and a total of 1 (4%) death, 1 (4%) myocardial infarction, 1 (4%) minor vascular complication, and 4 (8%) permanent pacemaker implantations. Consistent findings were obtained at 6-month follow-up.The Allegra TAVI device is associated with favorable short-to-midterm outcomes in experienced hands. Operators already proficient with other devices can achieve satisfactory results even in the early phase of adoption of Allegra.

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.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a safe and beneficial treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high and intermediate surgical risk. The safety of the procedure continues to improve thanks to more refined procedural approaches and devices but, also and above all, to the accrual of the procedural knowledge and expertise by the operators. The diversification of the approaches and the possibility to tailor the treatment on the individual needs and anatomical features of the patients allows a rapid learning curve in the management of even complications. Indeed, there are several approaches with which TAVI can be carried out: transfemoral arterial, subclavian, transcarotid, transaortic, transaxillary, transapical, and through right anterior thoracotomy. Although transfemoral venous TAVI is less common, it has already have been carried out using caval-aortic punctures. This field is rapidly evolving, and it will be of paramount importance for interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons to keep up to date with further developments. This review intends to give an in-depth and update overview of both conventional and innovative TAVI approaches, with the scope to highlight the relevant advantages, major disadvantages, safety aspects and techniques.

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 were85 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 those85 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 those85 years with comparable risk profile.

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.To evaluate the comparative clinical outcomes of patients with MAVD and AS undergoing TAVI using data from the RISPEVA registry.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.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.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.

The next iteration of drug-eluting stents (DESs) for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has focused on bioresorbable polymers and thin struts. The Alex Plus DES is a new-generation sirolimus-eluting device with 70-μm cobalt chromium struts, a 5-μm bioresorbable polymer and a very small profile. Despite such favorable features, limited data are available to estimate the risk-benefit profile of Alex Plus. We aimed at comparing the effectiveness of Alex Plus in real-world practice.Retrospective clinical data on patients treated with Alex Plus at our institutions were collected and clinical outcome data over follow-up were obtained, comparing them with those of subjects receiving Xience, a leading DES with permanent polymer.A total of 100 patients (126 lesions) treated with Alex Plus and 753 subjects (1020 lesions) receiving Xience were included. Baseline and procedural features were largely similar in the 2 groups, with the notable exception of age, sex, and left circumflex coronary artery as the target vessel. Clinical follow-up showed that patients with Alex Plus had a significantly higher risk of major adverse clinical event (MACE), mainly driven by an excess in repeat PCI (hazard ratio, 4.81; 95% confidence interval, 2.83-8.20; P.001). Even after propensity-score matching, Alex Plus was associated with an increased risk of MACE (P.001).Our clinical experience to date with Alex Plus has been disappointing, despite the favorable promises. Further improvements are likely needed in the Alex Plus DES, most likely in drug delivery, before this device is considered for routine clinical use in complex patients or lesions.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is emerging a an appealing management strategy for patients with severe aortic stenosis at intermediate, high or exceedingly high risk, but its risk-benefit profile in younger patients is less certain. We aimed at exploring the outlook of patients aged 70 years or less and undergoing TAVI at 2 high-volume Italian institituions.We retrospectively collected baseline, imaging, procedural and outcome features of patients with age ≤70 years in whom TAVI was attempted at participating centers between 2012 and 2021. Non-parametric tests and bootstrap resampling were used for inferential purposes.A total of 39 patients were included, out of3,000 screened with heart team involvement and1,500 receiving TAVI. Most common or relevant indications for TAVI were reduced life expectancy (eg cardiogenic shock or severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, morbid obesity, active or recent extra-cardiac cancer, porcelain aorta, neurologic disability, cirrhosis, or prior surgical aortic valve replacement, as well as extreme cachexia, and Hutchinson-Gilford progeria. At least two contemporary high-risk features were present in most cases. Transapical access was used in 5 (12.8%) cases, and a sheathless approach in 15 (38.5%). A variety of devices were used, including both balloon- and selfexpandable devices. Clinical outcomes were satisfactory, despite the high risk profile, at both shortand mid-term, with no in-hospital death, and 5.1% (95% confidence interval 0-12.8%) mortality at a median follow-up of 15 months (minimum 1; maximum 85). Notably, no case of significant valve deterioration requiring reintervention occurred.In carefully selected patients with 70 years or less of age and prohibitive risk for surgery or reduced life expectancy, TAVI represents a safe option with a favorable mid-term survival and low rate of adverse events.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has proved beneficial in patients with severe aortic stenosis, especially when second-generation devices are used. We aimed at reporting our experience with Navitor, a third-generation device characterized by intrannular, large cell, and cuffed design, as well as high deliverability and minimization of paravalvular leak. Between June and December 2021, a total of 39 patients underwent TAVI with Navitor, representing 20% of all TAVI cases. Mean age was 80.0 ± 6.7 years, and 14 (36.8%) women were included. Severe aortic stenosis was the most common indication to TAVI (37 [97.4%] cases), whereas 2 (5.3%) individuals were at low surgical risk. Device and procedural success was obtained in all patients, with a total hospital stay of 6.6 ± 4.5 days. One (2.9%) patient required permanent pacemaker implantation, but no other hospital events occurred. At 1-month follow-up, a cardiac death was adjudicated in an 87-year-old man who had been at high surgical risk. Echocardiographic follow-up showed no case of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation, with mild regurgitation in 18 (47%), and none or trace regurgitation in 20 (53%). The Navitor device, thanks to its unique features, is a very promising technology suitable to further expand indications and risk-benefit profile of TAVI.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a safe and beneficial treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis at high and intermediate surgical risk. Success rates for TAVI continue to increase due to more refined procedural approaches and devices, and above all, to the improvements in procedural knowledge by TAVI operators. The development of a new delivery system represents an important evolutionary process in the TAVI procedure, both for the type of device and for the operators, as it may substantially expand indications, success rates, and safety. FlexNav (Abbott Cardiovascular) is a novel delivery system designed to improve ease and precision of TAVI using the Abbott Portico valve. Despite limited results on its advantages, such as those provided in the PORTICO investigational device exemption substudy, uncertainty persists on the actual role of FlexNav in real-world practice.We hereby present our preliminary experience with FlexNav in a consecutive series of 18 patients undergoing TAVI with Portico valve in early 2020 (3 with axillary access). Procedural results were excellent, as shown by the absence of deaths, strokes, and major vascular complications (95% confidence interval, 0%-18.5%), and pacemaker implantation in 3 subjects (21.4%; 95% confidence interval, 4.7%-50.8%).Despite the small sample size, the present case series suggests that adoption of the FlexNav novel delivery system for TAVI with Portico valve is feasible and safe, and holds the promise of further improving early and long-term results of this procedure.

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.A national prospective database was queried for baseline, procedural, and outcome details of patients undergoing TAVI according to established BMI categories: underweight (BMI18.5 kg/mA 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 P0.05). Several procedural differences were also evident, including percutaneous approach, predilation, prosthesis type and size (all P0.05), with postprocedural aortic regurgitation2+ significantly more common in underweight patients (P0.05). Nonetheless, unadjusted analysis for one-month outcomes showed similar rates for fatal and non-fatal outcomes, including MAE (all P0.05), 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 (P0.05 for all comparisons).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.

Thrombocytopenia after TAVI is common and clinically detrimental. Retrospectively, we observed Portico recipients had a more profound platelet drop than Evolut recipients. We thus investigated periprocedural platelet damage and/orpro-inflammatory state in 64 TAVI recipients at baseline and after implantation. Platelet damage was assessed by annexin V staining and monocyte-phagocytic phenotype was assessed according to CD14/CD36 expression. Serum cytokines were measured in 20 patients. The formaldehyde-based storage solution altered platelets. When, before being loaded onto the delivery system, Portico underwent one additional flushing to those recommended, the receiving patients showed thrombocytopenia, platelet damage, and CD36-monocyte count were mitigated. A general increase in IL-6 was recorded in overall TAVI recipients, but a high serum level of IL-8, a potent thrombocytopenia inducer, was measured in Portico recipients only, including those with extra-rinsed valve. Our study suggests a platelet-injury effect by storage-solution and generates the hypothesis of a role for the biomaterial in stimulating innate-immunity. Larger prospective studies are needed. Graphical Abstract Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12265-021-10117-9.

New-generation devices such as Evolut and Portico have provided favorable results in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for aortic stenosis, but their comparative effectiveness remains debated, despite its relevance when envisioning TAVI in low-risk patients. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of 2 leading TAVI devices (Evolut and Portico) used by the same team of experienced TAVI operators, focusing on long-term outcomes, including major adverse events (i.e., the composite of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complication, or major bleeding). Unadjusted and propensity score-adjusted analyses were carried out. A total of 233 patients were included, 119 (51.1%) receiving Evolut and 114 (49%) Portico. Baseline and procedural data showed significant between-device differences, including functional class, surgical risk, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, renal function, transesophageal guidance, device size, postdilation, and procedural time (all p0.05). Yet, acute and in-hospital outcomes were not significantly different (all p0.05). Follow-up status was ascertained in 228 (98%) patients after 15.0 ± 7.6 months. Unadjusted analysis showed similar rates of major adverse events, as well as the individual risk of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complication, major bleeding, and pacemaker implantation (all p0.05). Even at propensity score-adjusted analysis outcomes were not significantly different with Evolut and Portico (all p0.05). In conclusion, Evolut and Portico devices yield similarly favorable results at long-term follow-up when used by experienced TAVI operators.

Background The twelve‑lead electrocardiogram (ECG) has become an essential tool for the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, several areas of residual controversies or gaps in evidence exist. Among them, P-wave abnormalities identifying atrial ischemia/infarction are largely neglected in clinical practice, and their diagnostic and prognostic implications remain elusive; the value of ECG to identify the culprit lesion has been investigated, but validated criteria indicating the presence of coronary occlusion in patients without ST-elevation are lacking; finally, which criteria among the multiple proposed, better define pathological Q-waves or success of revascularisation deserve further investigations. Methods The Minimizing Adverse hemorrhagic events via TRansradial access site and systemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX) trial was designed to test the impact of bleeding avoidance strategies on ischemic and bleeding outcomes across the whole spectrum of patients with ACS receiving invasive management. The ECG-MATRIX is a pre-specified sub-study of the MATRIX programme which aims at analyzing the clinical value of ECG metrics in 4516 ACS patients (with and without ST-segment elevation in 2212 and 2304 cases, respectively) with matched pre and post-treatment ECGs. Conclusions This study represents a unique opportunity to further investigate the role of ECGs in the diagnosis and risk stratification of ACS patients with or without ST-segment deviation, as well as to assess whether the radial approach and bivalirudin may affect post-treatment ECG metrics and patterns in a large contemporary ACS population.