Shavelle, David M.

Importance In patients with severe aortic valve stenosis at intermediate surgical risk, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with a self-expanding supra-annular valve was noninferior to surgery for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke at 2 years. Comparisons of longer-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes in these patients are limited. Objective To report prespecified secondary 5-year outcomes from the Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis in Intermediate Risk Subjects Who Need Aortic Valve Replacement (SURTAVI) randomized clinical trial. Design, Setting, and Participants SURTAVI is a prospective randomized, unblinded clinical trial. Randomization was stratified by investigational site and need for revascularization determined by the local heart teams. Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate risk of 30-day surgical mortality were enrolled at 87 centers from June 19, 2012, to June 30, 2016, in Europe and North America. Analysis took place between August and October 2021. Intervention Patients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular transcatheter or a surgical bioprosthesis. Main Outcomes and Measures The prespecified secondary end points of death or disabling stroke and other adverse events and hemodynamic findings at 5 years. An independent clinical event committee adjudicated all serious adverse events and an independent echocardiographic core laboratory evaluated all echocardiograms at 5 years. Results A total of 1660 individuals underwent an attempted TAVR (n = 864) or surgical (n = 796) procedure. The mean (SD) age was 79.8 (6.2) years, 724 (43.6%) were female, and the mean (SD) Society of Thoracic Surgery Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 4.5% (1.6%). At 5 years, the rates of death or disabling stroke were similar (TAVR, 31.3% vs surgery, 30.8%; hazard ratio, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.85-1.22]; P = .85). Transprosthetic gradients remained lower (mean [SD], 8.6 [5.5] mm Hg vs 11.2 [6.0] mm Hg; P < .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm 2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm 2 ; P < .001) with TAVR vs surgery. More patients had moderate/severe paravalvular leak with TAVR than surgery (11 [3.0%] vs 2 [0.7%]; risk difference, 2.37% [95% CI, 0.17%- 4.85%]; P = .05). New pacemaker implantation rates were higher for TAVR than surgery at 5 years (289 [39.1%] vs 94 [15.1%]; hazard ratio, 3.30 [95% CI, 2.61-4.17]; log-rank P < .001), as were valve reintervention rates (27 [3.5%] vs 11 [1.9%]; hazard ratio, 2.21 [95% CI, 1.10-4.45]; log-rank P = .02), although between 2 and 5 years only 6 patients who underwent TAVR and 7 who underwent surgery required a reintervention. Conclusions and Relevance Among intermediate-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, major clinical outcomes at 5 years were similar for TAVR and surgery. TAVR was associated with superior hemodynamic valve performance but also with more paravalvular leak and valve reinterventions.

Background: Prior studies suggest an association between naturally high circulating levels of CD34+ cells (CD34) and better outcomes following ischemic events. Pts in the treatment arm of the PreSERVE-AMI study were infused with all CD34 yielded from their bone marrow harvest, resulting in pts with naturally higher CD34 cell counts being infused with a higher cell dose. To determine whether selection bias may have influenced results, we performed an analysis of the relationship between BM CD34 content and outcomes in PreSERVE-AMI. Methods: PreSERVE-AMI is a Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of autologous, BM derived CD34 (CLBS10) in pts with LV dysfunction (LVEF ≤48% by MRI) ≥4 days post-STEMI. All pts underwent mini BM harvest and were randomized 1:1 to intracoronary infusion of CD34 (minimum dose 10M±20% cells) or placebo (cell diluent). Primary safety endpoints included AEs, SAEs and MACE (CV mortality, HF hospitalization, reinfarction, revascularization). Secondary endpoints included LVEF change from baseline. Regression analyses were performed to assess the influence of BM CD34 content on outcomes. Results: 161 patients were randomized and received intracoronary infusion (Jan 2013-Dec 2014). Mean age was 57±10 and 82% were men. Mean follow-up time was 18 mo, and safety data are accruing. BM CD34 content was not associated with differences in baseline characteristics with the exception of diabetes prevalence being higher in those with higher BM CD34 count (p=0.03). In controls, regression analyses showed no association of BM CD34 content with rates of MACE (p=0.2), SAEs (p=0.4), or change in LVEF (p=0.9). However, in CD34 treated pts, there was a dose-dependent improvement in LV function (p=0.045) and dose-dependent trends in MACE and SAE reduction compared to controls. As previously reported SPECT perfusion improved to a similar degree in control and treated pts. Conclusions: These data suggest that intracoronary infusion of CD34 cells, rather than BM CD34 cell content, is responsible for the benefit observed in the CD34 treatment group. The finding of a dose-response relationship is an important advance for defining the CD34 as an active agent for tissue repair. Future studies will further define CD34 dosimetry.