Abstract Background Optimal upfront dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration after complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) remains unclear. Objectives This ...study investigated the efficacy and safety of long- (≥12 months) versus short-term (3 or 6 months) DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel according to PCI complexity. Methods We pooled patient-level data from 6 randomized controlled trials investigating DAPT durations after PCI. Complex PCI was defined as having at least 1 of the following features: 3 vessels treated, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, total stent length >60 mm, or chronic total occlusion. The primary efficacy endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Intention-to-treat was the primary analytic approach. Results Of 9,577 patients included in the pooled dataset for whom procedural variables were available, 1,680 (17.5%) underwent complex PCI. Overall, 85% of patients received new-generation DES. At a median follow-up time of 392 days (interquartile range: 366 to 710 days), patients who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio HR: 1.98; 95% confidence interval CI: 1.50 to 2.60; p < 0.0001). Compared with short-term DAPT, long-term DAPT yielded significant reductions in MACE in the complex PCI group (adjusted HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.89) versus the noncomplex PCI group (adjusted HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.35; pinteraction = 0.01). The magnitude of the benefit with long-term DAPT was progressively greater per increase in procedural complexity. Long-term DAPT was associated with increased risk for major bleeding, which was similar between groups (pinteraction = 0.96). Results were consistent by per-treatment landmark analysis. Conclusions Alongside other established clinical risk factors, procedural complexity is an important parameter to take into account in tailoring upfront duration of DAPT.
Abstract
Aims
The Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC), founded in 2010, was intended to (i) identify appropriate clinical endpoints and (ii) standardize definitions of these endpoints for ...transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical trials. Rapid evolution of the field, including the emergence of new complications, expanding clinical indications, and novel therapy strategies have mandated further refinement and expansion of these definitions to ensure clinical relevance. This document provides an update of the most appropriate clinical endpoint definitions to be used in the conduct of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve clinical research.
Methods and results
Several years after the publication of the VARC-2 manuscript, an in-person meeting was held involving over 50 independent clinical experts representing several professional societies, academic research organizations, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives to (i) evaluate utilization of VARC endpoint definitions in clinical research, (ii) discuss the scope of this focused update, and (iii) review and revise specific clinical endpoint definitions. A writing committee of independent experts was convened and subsequently met to further address outstanding issues. There were ongoing discussions with FDA and many experts to develop a new classification schema for bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure. Overall, this multi-disciplinary process has resulted in important recommendations for data reporting, clinical research methods, and updated endpoint definitions. New definitions or modifications of existing definitions are being proposed for repeat hospitalizations, access site-related complications, bleeding events, conduction disturbances, cardiac structural complications, and bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and failure (including valve leaflet thickening and thrombosis). A more granular 5-class grading scheme for paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) is being proposed to help refine the assessment of PVR. Finally, more specific recommendations on quality-of-life assessments have been included, which have been targeted to specific clinical study designs.
Conclusions
Acknowledging the dynamic and evolving nature of less-invasive aortic valve therapies, further refinements of clinical research processes are required. The adoption of these updated and newly proposed VARC-3 endpoints and definitions will ensure homogenous event reporting, accurate adjudication, and appropriate comparisons of clinical research studies involving devices and new therapeutic strategies.
Graphical Abstract
Objectives In an effort to define the gold standard for annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), we sought to critically analyze and compare the predictive value of multiple ...measures of the aortic annulus for post-TAVR paravalvular (PV) regurgitation and then assess the impact of a novel cross-sectional computed tomographic (CT) approach to annular sizing. Background Recent studies have shown clear discrepancies between conventional 2-dimensional (2D) echocardiographic and CT measurements. In terms of aortic annular measurement for TAVR, such findings have lacked the outcome analysis required to inform clinical practice. Methods The discriminatory value of multiple CT annular measures for post-TAVR PV aortic regurgitation was compared with 2D echocardiographic measures. TAVR outcomes with device selection according to aortic annular sizing using a traditional 2D transesophageal echocardiography–guided or a novel CT-guided approach were also studied. Results In receiver-operating characteristic models, cross-sectional CT parameters had the highest discriminatory value for post-TAVR PV regurgitation: This was with the area under the curve for maximal cross-sectional diameter minus prosthesis size of 0.82 (95% confidence interval: 0.69 to 0.94; p < 0.001) and that for circumference-derived cross-sectional diameter minus prosthesis size of 0.81 (95% confidence interval: 0.7 to 0.94; p < 0.001). In contrast, traditional echocardiographic measures were nondiscriminatory in relation to post-TAVR PV aortic regurgitation. The prospective application of a CT-guided annular sizing approach resulted in less PV aortic regurgitation of grade worse than mild after TAVR (7.5% vs. 21.9%; p = 0.045). Conclusions Our data lend strong support to 3-dimensional cross-sectional measures, using CT as the new gold standard for aortic annular evaluation for TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN device.
Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits ...trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
Prior unblinded studies have suggested that catheter-based renal-artery denervation reduces blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension.
We designed a prospective, single-blind, ...randomized, sham-controlled trial. Patients with severe resistant hypertension were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to undergo renal denervation or a sham procedure. Before randomization, patients were receiving a stable antihypertensive regimen involving maximally tolerated doses of at least three drugs, including a diuretic. The primary efficacy end point was the change in office systolic blood pressure at 6 months; a secondary efficacy end point was the change in mean 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure. The primary safety end point was a composite of death, end-stage renal disease, embolic events resulting in end-organ damage, renovascular complications, or hypertensive crisis at 1 month or new renal-artery stenosis of more than 70% at 6 months.
A total of 535 patients underwent randomization. The mean (±SD) change in systolic blood pressure at 6 months was -14.13±23.93 mm Hg in the denervation group as compared with -11.74±25.94 mm Hg in the sham-procedure group (P<0.001 for both comparisons of the change from baseline), for a difference of -2.39 mm Hg (95% confidence interval CI, -6.89 to 2.12; P=0.26 for superiority with a margin of 5 mm Hg). The change in 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure was -6.75±15.11 mm Hg in the denervation group and -4.79±17.25 mm Hg in the sham-procedure group, for a difference of -1.96 mm Hg (95% CI, -4.97 to 1.06; P=0.98 for superiority with a margin of 2 mm Hg). There were no significant differences in safety between the two groups.
This blinded trial did not show a significant reduction of systolic blood pressure in patients with resistant hypertension 6 months after renal-artery denervation as compared with a sham control. (Funded by Medtronic; SYMPLICITY HTN-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01418261.).
Objectives This study sought to compare echocardiographic findings in patients with critical aortic stenosis following surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) or transcatheter aortic valve ...replacement (TAVR). Background The PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial randomized patients 1:1 to SAVR or TAVR. Methods Echocardiograms were obtained at baseline, discharge, 30 days, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years after the procedure and analyzed in a core laboratory. For the analysis of post-implantation variables, the first interpretable study (≤6 months) was used. Results Both groups showed a decrease in aortic valve gradients and increase in effective orifice area (EOA) (p < 0.0001), which remained stable over 2 years. Compared with SAVR, TAVR resulted in larger indexed EOA (p = 0.038), less prosthesis-patient mismatch (p = 0.019), and more total and paravalvular aortic regurgitation (p < 0.0001). Baseline echocardiographic univariate predictors of death were lower peak transaortic gradient in TAVR patients, and low left ventricular diastolic volume, low stroke volume, and greater severity of mitral regurgitation in SAVR patients. Post-implantation echocardiographic univariate predictors of death were: larger left ventricular diastolic volume, left ventricular systolic volume and EOA, decreased ejection fraction, and greater aortic regurgitation in TAVR patients; and smaller left ventricular systolic and diastolic volumes, low stroke volume, smaller EOA, and prosthesis-patient mismatch in SAVR patients. Conclusions Patients randomized to either SAVR or TAVR experience enduring, significant reductions in transaortic gradients and increase in EOA. Compared with SAVR, TAVR patients had higher indexed EOA, lower prosthesis-patient mismatch, and more aortic regurgitation. Univariate predictors of death for the TAVR and SAVR groups differed and might allow future refinement in patient selection. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894 )
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) indications are expanding, leading to an increasing number of patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. Pivotal randomized trials conducted ...to obtain US Food and Drug Administration approval excluded bicuspid anatomy.
To compare the outcomes of TAVR with a balloon-expandable valve for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis.
Registry-based prospective cohort study of patients undergoing TAVR at 552 US centers. Participants were enrolled in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS)/American College of Cardiology (ACC) Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry from June 2015 to November 2018.
TAVR for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis.
Primary outcomes were 30-day and 1-year mortality and stroke. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications, valve hemodynamics, and quality of life assessment.
Of 81 822 consecutive patients with aortic stenosis (2726 bicuspid; 79 096 tricuspid), 2691 propensity-score matched pairs of bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis were analyzed (median age, 74 years interquartile range {IQR}, 66-81 years; 39.1%, women; mean SD STS-predicted risk of mortality, 4.9% 4.0% and 5.1% 4.2%, respectively). All-cause mortality was not significantly different between patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis at 30 days (2.6% vs 2.5%; hazard ratio HR, 1.04, 95% CI, 0.74-1.47) and 1 year (10.5% vs 12.0%; HR, 0.90 95% CI, 0.73-1.10). The 30-day stroke rate was significantly higher for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis (2.5% vs 1.6%; HR, 1.57 95% CI, 1.06-2.33). The risk of procedural complications requiring open heart surgery was significantly higher in the bicuspid vs tricuspid cohort (0.9% vs 0.4%, respectively; absolute risk difference RD, 0.5% 95% CI, 0%-0.9%). There were no significant differences in valve hemodynamics. There were no significant differences in moderate or severe paravalvular leak at 30 days (2.0% vs 2.4%; absolute RD, 0.3% 95% CI, -1.3% to 0.7%) and 1 year (3.2% vs 2.5%; absolute RD, 0.7% 95% CI, -1.3% to 2.7%). At 1 year there was no significant difference in improvement in quality of life between the groups (difference in improvement in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score, -2.4 95% CI, -5.1 to 0.3; P = .08).
In this preliminary, registry-based study of propensity-matched patients who had undergone transcatheter aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, patients with bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis had no significant difference in 30-day or 1-year mortality but had increased 30-day risk for stroke. Because of the potential for selection bias and the absence of a control group treated surgically for bicuspid stenosis, randomized trials are needed to adequately assess the efficacy and safety of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic stenosis.
Objectives This study sought to identify incidence, predictors, and impact of vascular complications (VC) after transfemoral (TF) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Background VC after ...TF-TAVR are frequent and may be associated with unfavorable prognosis. Methods From the randomized controlled PARTNER (Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve) trial, a total of 419 patients (177 from cohort B inoperable and 242 from cohort A operable high-risk) were randomly assigned to TF-TAVR and actually received the designated treatment. First-generation Edwards-Sapien valves and delivery systems were used, via a 22- or 24-F sheath. The 30-day rates of major and minor VC (modified Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions), predictors, and effect on 1-year mortality were assessed. Results Sixty-four patients (15.3%) had major VC and 50 patients (11.9%) had minor VC within 30 days of the procedure. Among patients with major VC, vascular dissection (62.8%), perforation (31.3%), and access-site hematoma (22.9%) were the most frequent modes of presentation. Major VC, but not minor VC, were associated with significantly higher 30-day rates of major bleeding, transfusions, and renal failure requiring dialysis, and with a significantly higher rate of 30-day and 1-year mortality. The only identifiable independent predictor of major VC was female gender (hazard ratio HR: 2.31 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08 to 4.98, p = 0.03). Major VC (HR: 2.31 95% CI: 1.20 to 4.43, p = 0.012), and renal disease at baseline (HR: 2.26 95% CI: 1.34 to 3.81, p = 0.002) were identified as independent predictors of 1-year mortality. Conclusions Major VC were frequent after TF-TAVR in the PARTNER trial using first-generation devices and were associated with high mortality. However, the incidence and impact of major VC on 1-year mortality decreased with lower-risk populations.
Abstract Background The incidence and prognostic impact of late bleeding complications after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are unknown. Objectives The aim of this study was to ...identify the incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of major late bleeding complications (MLBCs) (≥30 days) after TAVR. Methods Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of patients who underwent TAVR within the randomized cohorts and continued access registries in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) trial were analyzed after stratifying by the occurrence of MLBCs. Predictors of MLBCs and their association with 30-day to 1-year mortality were assessed. Results Among 2,401 patients who underwent TAVR and survived to 30 days, MLBCs occurred in 142 (5.9%) at a median time of 132 days (interquartile range: 71 to 230 days) after the index procedure. Gastrointestinal complications (n = 58 40.8%), neurological complications (n = 22 15.5%), and traumatic falls (n = 11 7.8%) were identified as the most frequent types of MLBCs. Independent predictors of MLBCs were the presence of low hemoglobin at baseline, atrial fibrillation or flutter at baseline or 30 days, the presence of moderate or severe paravalvular leak at 30 days, and greater left ventricular mass at 30 days. MLBCs were identified as a strong independent predictor of mortality between 30 days and 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio: 3.91; 95% confidence interval: 2.67 to 5.71; p < 0.001). Conclusions MLBCs after TAVR were frequent and associated with increased mortality. Better individualized and risk-adjusted antithrombotic therapy after TAVR is urgently needed in this high-risk population. (THE PARTNER TRIAL: Placement of AoRTic TraNscathetER Valve Trial; NCT00530894 )
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an effective treatment for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) in patients who are inoperable or at high risk for surgery. However, the ...intermediate- to long-term mortality is high, emphasizing the importance of patient selection. We, therefore, sought to evaluate the prognostic value of frailty in older recipients of TAVR, hypothesizing that frail patients would experience a higher mortality rate and a higher likelihood of poor outcome 1 year after TAVR. This substudy of the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves trial was conducted at 3 high-enrolling sites where frailty was assessed systematically before TAVR. In total, 244 patients received TAVR at the participating sites. Frailty was assessed using a composite of 4 markers (serum albumin, dominant handgrip strength, gait speed, and Katz activity of daily living survey), which were combined into a frailty score. The cohort was dichotomized at median frailty score. Outcomes measures were the time to death from any cause for >1 year of follow-up and poor outcome at 1 year. Poor outcome was defined as (1) death, (2) Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary (KCCQ-OS) score <60, or (3) decrease of ≥10 points in the KCCQ-OS score from baseline to 1 year. At 1 year, the Kaplan-Meier–estimated all-cause mortality rate was 32.7% in the frail group and 15.9% in the nonfrail group (log-rank p = 0.004). At 1 year, poor outcome occurred in 50.0% of the frail group and 31.5% of the nonfrail group (p = 0.02). In conclusion, frailty was associated with increased mortality and a higher rate of poor outcome 1 year after TAVR.
PDF
