Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at increased risk for death from surgery; less is known about TAVR in ...low-risk patients.
We performed a randomized noninferiority trial in which TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients who had severe aortic stenosis and were at low surgical risk. When 850 patients had reached 12-month follow-up, we analyzed data regarding the primary end point, a composite of death or disabling stroke at 24 months, using Bayesian methods.
Of the 1468 patients who underwent randomization, an attempted TAVR or surgical procedure was performed in 1403. The patients' mean age was 74 years. The 24-month estimated incidence of the primary end point was 5.3% in the TAVR group and 6.7% in the surgery group (difference, -1.4 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval for difference, -4.9 to 2.1; posterior probability of noninferiority >0.999). At 30 days, patients who had undergone TAVR, as compared with surgery, had a lower incidence of disabling stroke (0.5% vs. 1.7%), bleeding complications (2.4% vs. 7.5%), acute kidney injury (0.9% vs. 2.8%), and atrial fibrillation (7.7% vs. 35.4%) and a higher incidence of moderate or severe aortic regurgitation (3.5% vs. 0.5%) and pacemaker implantation (17.4% vs. 6.1%). At 12 months, patients in the TAVR group had lower aortic-valve gradients than those in the surgery group (8.6 mm Hg vs. 11.2 mm Hg) and larger effective orifice areas (2.3 cm
vs. 2.0 cm
).
In patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, TAVR with a self-expanding supraannular bioprosthesis was noninferior to surgery with respect to the composite end point of death or disabling stroke at 24 months. (Funded by Medtronic; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02701283.).
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
Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few ...years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed.
To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves.
Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 SD, 9.8 years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% interquartile range, 7.7%-16%). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (>21 and <25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves.
Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class.
Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 39.4%), regurgitation (n = 139 30.3%), and combined (n = 139 30.3%). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% 95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008).
In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis.
The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)clinical endpoints to make ...them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection.
A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous.
Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, USA, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, the Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and non-interventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints.
This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavours of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).
Objectives This study sought to compare all-cause mortality in patients at intermediate surgical risk undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement ...(SAVR). Background Physicians are selecting “lower” surgical risk patients to undergo TAVI. No clinical data exist about the clinical outcomes of TAVI versus SAVR among intermediate-surgical-risk patients. Methods We prospectively enrolled symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI or SAVR. Propensity-score matched pairs of TAVI and SAVR patients with Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) scores between 3% and 8% made up the study population. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at 1 year. Results Between November 2006 and January 2010, 3,666 consecutive patients underwent either TAVI (n = 782) or SAVR (n = 2,884). Four hundred five TAVI patients were matched to 405 SAVR patients. Of matched TAVI patients, 99 (24%) patients had STS scores <3%, 255 (63%) had scores between 3% and 8%, and 51 (13%) had scores >8%. Among patients with STS scores between 3% and 8%, 20 (7.8%) versus 18 (7.1%) patients had died up to 30 days (hazard ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 0.58 to 2.15, p = 0.74) and 42 (16.5%) versus 43 (16.9%) patients had died up to 1 year (hazard ratio: 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 1.42, p = 0.64) after TAVI and SAVR, respectively. Effects of treatment on 1-year mortality were similar across all subgroups except for sex, with some evidence for a beneficial effect of TAVI in women but not in men (test for interaction p = 0.024). Conclusions Cumulative all-cause mortality at 30 days and 1 year was similar among propensity-score matched TAVI and SAVR patients at intermediate surgical risk. (Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation SURTAVI; NCT01586910 )
Objectives The aim of the current Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 initiative was to revisit the selection and definitions of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) clinical ...endpoints to make them more suitable to the present and future needs of clinical trials. In addition, this document is intended to expand the understanding of patient risk stratification and case selection. Background A recent study confirmed that VARC definitions have already been incorporated into clinical and research practice and represent a new standard for consistency in reporting clinical outcomes of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. However, as the clinical experience with this technology has matured and expanded, certain definitions have become unsuitable or ambiguous. Methods and Results Two in-person meetings (held in September 2011 in Washington, DC, and in February 2012 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands) involving VARC study group members, independent experts (including surgeons, interventional and noninterventional cardiologists, imaging specialists, neurologists, geriatric specialists, and clinical trialists), the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and industry representatives, provided much of the substantive discussion from which this VARC-2 consensus manuscript was derived. This document provides an overview of risk assessment and patient stratification that need to be considered for accurate patient inclusion in studies. Working groups were assigned to define the following clinical endpoints: mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, acute kidney injury, vascular complications, conduction disturbances and arrhythmias, and a miscellaneous category including relevant complications not previously categorized. Furthermore, comprehensive echocardiographic recommendations are provided for the evaluation of prosthetic valve (dys)function. Definitions for the quality of life assessments are also reported. These endpoints formed the basis for several recommended composite endpoints. Conclusions This VARC-2 document has provided further standardization of endpoint definitions for studies evaluating the use of TAVI, which will lead to improved comparability and interpretability of the study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of evidence with respect to TAVI and/or surgical aortic valve replacement. This initiative and document can furthermore be used as a model during current endeavors of applying definitions to other transcatheter valve therapies (for example, mitral valve repair).
Abstract Background Limited information exists describing the results of transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) disease (TAV-in-BAV). Objectives ...This study sought to evaluate clinical outcomes of a large cohort of patients undergoing TAV-in-BAV. Methods We retrospectively collected baseline characteristics, procedural data, and clinical follow-up findings from 12 centers in Europe and Canada that had performed TAV-in-BAV. Results A total of 139 patients underwent TAV-in-BAV with the balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) (n = 48) or self-expandable THV (n = 91) systems. Patient mean age and Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality scores were 78.0 ± 8.9 years and 4.9 ± 3.4%, respectively. BAV stenosis occurred in 65.5%, regurgitation in 0.7%, and mixed disease in 33.8% of patients. Incidence of type 0 BAV was 26.7%; type 1 BAV was 68.3%; and type 2 BAV was 5.0%. Multislice computed tomography (MSCT)-based TAV sizing was used in 63.5% of patients (77.1% balloon-expandable THV vs. 56.0% self-expandable THV, p = 0.02). Procedural mortality was 3.6%, with TAV embolization in 2.2% and conversion to surgery in 2.2%. The mean aortic gradient decreased from 48.7 ± 16.5 mm Hg to 11.4 ± 9.9 mm Hg (p < 0.0001). Post-implantation aortic regurgitation (AR) grade ≥2 occurred in 28.4% (19.6% balloon-expandable THV vs. 32.2% self-expandable THV, p = 0.11) but was prevalent in only 17.4% when MSCT-based TAV sizing was performed (16.7% balloon-expandable THV vs. 17.6% self-expandable THV, p = 0.99). MSCT sizing was associated with reduced AR on multivariate analysis (odds ratio OR: 0.19, 95% confidence intervals CI: 0.08 to 0.45; p < 0.0001). Thirty-day device safety, success, and efficacy were noted in 79.1%, 89.9%, and 84.9% of patients, respectively. One-year mortality was 17.5%. Major vascular complications were associated with increased 1-year mortality (OR: 5.66, 95% CI: 1.21 to 26.43; p = 0.03). Conclusions TAV-in-BAV is feasible with encouraging short- and intermediate-term clinical outcomes. Importantly, a high incidence of post-implantation AR is observed, which appears to be mitigated by MSCT-based TAV sizing. Given the suboptimal echocardiographic results, further study is required to evaluate long-term efficacy.
Abstract Background Psoas muscle area (PMA) is a novel measure of frailty that can be efficiently measured from computed tomography images to help predict risk in older adults referred for ...transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The objective of this study was to determine if PMA would be incrementally predictive of mortality and morbidity after TAVR. Methods The pre-TAVR computed tomography scans of 208 consecutive patients at 2 hospitals in Montreal and Munich were analyzed to measure the cross-sectional area of the left and right psoas muscles on a single axial slice at the level of L4. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality assessed according to sex-stratified Cox regression models adjusted for the Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality. Results The mean age was 80.7 ± 6.8 years with 55% women and a total of 57 deaths over a mean follow-up of 504 days. PMA was lower in nonsurvivors compared with survivors among women (12.9 vs 14.5 cm2 ; P = 0.047) but not men (21.7 vs 22.4 cm2 ; P = 0.50). The association between PMA and all-cause mortality in women persisted after adjustment for Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk (hazard ratio, 0.88 per cm2 ; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-0.99). An association between PMA and bleeding complications was seen in men (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.97). Sensitivity analyses with PMA normalized to body mass index yielded similar results. Conclusions This study has shown that PMA is a marker of frailty associated with midterm survival in women who undergo TAVR. Further research is warranted to pursue PMA as a prognostic marker and therapeutic target in this vulnerable population.
While rheumatic mitral stenosis has been effectively treated percutaneously for more than 20 years, mitral and tricuspid regurgitation treatment appear as a contemporary unmet need. The advent of ...transcatheter therapies offer new treatment options to often elderly and frail patients at high risk for open surgery. We aimed at providing an updated review of fast-growing domain of transcatheter mitral and tricuspid technology.
We reviewed the existing literature on mitral and tricuspid transcatheter therapies. Mitraclip is becoming an established therapy for secondary mitral regurgitation in selected patients with disproportionately severe regurgitation associated with moderate left ventricle dysfunction. Evidence is less convincing for primary mitral regurgitation. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement is a promising emerging alternative to transcatheter repair, for secondary as well as primary mitral regurgitation. But further development is needed to improve delivery. Transcatheter tricuspid intervention arrives late after similar technologies have been developed for aortic and mitral valves and is currently at its infancy. This is likely due in part to previously under-recognized impact of tricuspid regurgitation on patient outcomes. Edge-to-edge repair is the most advanced transcatheter solution in development. Data on tricuspid annuloplasty and replacement is limited, and more research is warranted.
The future appears bright for transcatheter mitral therapies, albeit their place in clinical practice is yet to be clearly defined. Tricuspid transcatheter therapies might address the unmet need of tricuspid regurgitation treatment.
PDF
