Search

BACKGROUND: The choice of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) prosthesis is crucial in optimizing short- and long-term outcomes. The objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis comparing outcomes of third-generation balloon-expandable valves (BEV) vs self-expanding valves (SEV). METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to June 2023 for studies comparing third-generation BEV vs SEV. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical and hemodynamic end points. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs). RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 16 studies and 10,174 patients (BEV, 5753 and SEV, 4421). There were no significant differences in 1-year all-cause mortality (OR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.89-1.48) between third-generation BEV vs SEV. TAVR with third generation BEV was associated with a significantly lower risk of TIA/stroke (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44-0.87), permanent pacemaker implantation (OR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.44-0.70), and ≥moderate paravalvular leak (PVL, OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25-0.75), and higher risk of ≥moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch (OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 2.33-6.05), higher mean gradient (WMD, 4.35; 95% CI, 3.63-5.08), and smaller effective orifice area (WMD, -0.30; 95% CI, -0.37 to -0.23), compared with SEV. CONCLUSION: In this meta-analysis, TAVR with third-generation BEV vs SEV was associated with similar all-cause mortality, lower risk of TIA/stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, and ≥moderate PVL, but higher risk of ≥moderate patient-prosthesis mismatch, higher mean gradient, and smaller effective orifice area. Large, adequately powered randomized trials are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes of TAVR with latest generations of BEV vs SEV.

Background Many patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and an indication for aortic valve replacement (AVR) do not undergo treatment. The reasons for this have not been well studied in the transcatheter AVR era. We sought to determine how patient- and process-specific factors affected AVR use in patients with severe AS. Methods and Results We identified ambulatory patients from 2016 to 2018 demonstrating severe AS, defined by aortic valve area [Formula: see text]1.0 cm2. Propensity scoring analysis with inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to evaluate associations between predictors and the odds of undergoing AVR at 365 days and subsequent mortality at 730 days. Of 324 patients with an indication for AVR (79.3±9.7 years, 57.4% men), 140 patients (43.2%) did not undergo AVR. The odds of AVR were reduced in patients aged >90 years (odds ratio [OR], 0.24 [95% CI, 0.08-0.69]; P=0.01), greater comorbid conditions (OR, 0.88 per 1-point increase in Combined Comorbidity Index [95% CI, 0.79-0.97]; P=0.01), low-flow, low-gradient AS with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.06-0.21]), and low-gradient AS with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.08-0.40]) and were increased if the transthoracic echocardiogram ordering provider was a cardiologist (OR, 2.46 [95% CI, 1.38-4.38]). Patients who underwent AVR gained an average of 85.8 days of life (95% CI, 40.9-130.6) at 730 days. Conclusions The proportion of ambulatory patients with severe AS and an indication for AVR who do not receive AVR remains significant. Efforts are needed to maximize the recognition of severe AS, especially low-gradient subtypes, and to encourage patient referral to multidisciplinary heart valve teams.

Introduction: This physician-initiated study provides 5-year (i.e., long-term) treatment durability data from 3 top recruitment sites that participated in the prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized, single-arm VBX FLEX clinical study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02080871). It evaluates the long-term treatment durability of the GORE VIABAHN VBX Balloon Expandable Endoprosthesis (VBX Stent-Graft) in the treatment of subjects with de novo or restenotic aortoiliac lesions. Materials and Methods: A total of 59 subjects with 94 treated lesions were enrolled at the 3 participating sites from the original 140 intent-to-treat subjects in the VBX FLEX study. The primary durability endpoint was long-term primary patency. Secondary long-term outcomes included freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR), freedom from target vessel revascularization (TVR), as well as resting ankle-brachial index (ABI), Rutherford category, EuroQol 5 Dimensions, and Walking Impairment status. Results: Fifty-nine subjects participated and twenty-eight (47.5%) were available through the end of the study at 5-year follow-up (the median follow-up time was 6.6 years due to complications resulting from COVID-19 precautions). At 3 and 5 years, the Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from all-cause mortality were 94.5% and 81.7%, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for primary patency at 3 and 5 years were 94.0% and 89.5% (by lesion) and 91.7% and 84.4% (by subject). Primary assisted patency at 3 and 5 years were 93.3% and 93.3%. Kaplan-Meier estimate for freedom from TLR at 5 years was 89.1%. The majority of subjects were asymptomatic (Rutherford category 0) at 3 years (29/59; 72%), and at 5-year follow-up (18/28; 64%). The 5-year mean resting ankle-brachial index was 0.95±0.18, an improvement of 0.15±0.26 from the baseline (p<0.001). Quality of life measures also showed sustained improvement through long-term follow-up. Conclusion: The 5-year long-term follow-up data underscore the robustness and durability of the Viabahn Balloon-Expandable Endoprosthesis for treating aortoiliac occlusive disease. Clinical Impact: Durable improvement after endovascular treatment of iliac occlusive disease is clinically important because many of these patients are claudicants with significant life expectancy. This study is the first to evaluate the long-term outcomes in patients with iliac occlusive disease treated with the Viabahn VBX balloon-expandable endopirostheses. The study reports excellent long-term patency outcomes with prolonged clinical benefit. These durable results are likely to be an important consideration for clinicians undertaking iliac artery revascularization procedures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Only a few small studies have shown the association between high ankle-brachial pressure index (ABI >1.4) and adverse cardiovascular (CV) events and mortality. Although there is abundant literature depicting the association between ABI and overall systemic atherosclerosis, it typically focuses on low ABI. Furthermore, historically, many studies focusing on peripheral artery disease have excluded high ABI participants. We aimed to study the mortality outcomes of persons with high ABI in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). We obtained ABI from participants aged ≥40 years for survey years 1999 to 2004. We defined low a ABI as ≤0.9, normal ABI as 0.9 to 1.4, and high ABI as >1.4 or if the ankle pressures were >245 mm Hg. Demographics, various comorbidities, and laboratory test results were obtained at the time of the survey interview. Multivariable adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for CV and all-cause mortality via Cox proportional hazards regression. Mortality was linked to all NHANES participants for follow-up through December 31, 2019, by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We identified 7639 NHANES participants with available ABI. Of these, 6787 (89%) had a normal ABI, 646 (8%) had a low ABI, and 206 (3%) had elevated ABI. Of participants with high ABI, 50% were men, 15% were African Americans, 10% were current smokers, 56% had hypertension, 33% had diabetes, 15% had chronic kidney disease (CKD), and 18% had concomitant coronary artery disease (CAD). Diabetes (odds ratio [OR], 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.2), CAD (OR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.0-2.4), and CKD (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.0-2.3) at baseline were associated with having a high ABI, respectively. A high ABI was associated independently with elevated CV (HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.1-3.1; P <.0001) and all-cause mortality (HR, 2.5; 95% CI, 2.2-2.8; P <.0001) after adjusting for covariates, including diabetes, CKD, CAD, current smoking, cancer, and hypertension. A high ABI is associated with an elevated CV and all-cause mortality, similar to patients with PAD. High ABI participants should receive the same attention and aggressive medical therapies as patients with PAD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]