Davidson, Charles J.

BACKGROUND: The EARLY TAVR trial (Evaluation of TAVR Compared to Surveillance for Patients with Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis) demonstrated that early transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) was superior to clinical surveillance (CS) in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. The relative impact of early TAVR versus CS strategy by age is unknown. METHODS: The study population of the EARLY TAVR trial was stratified into 4 age groups: 65 to 69 years (n=141), 70 to 74 years (n=263), 75 to 79 years (n=250), and ≥80 years (n=247). Associations between age and the trial primary end point of death, stroke, or unplanned cardiovascular hospitalization; the composite end point of death, stroke, or heart failure hospitalization; and its individual components were examined. Interaction tests evaluated whether the treatment effect of early TAVR versus CS differed by age. RESULTS: No interaction was detected between age and the treatment effect of early TAVR versus CS for the composites or individual outcomes. We observed lower stroke rates with early TAVR compared with CS in the youngest (65–69 years, absolute risk reduction, 13%; P =0.008) and oldest (≥80 years; absolute risk reduction, 12.3%; P =0.029) age groups. The absolute difference in heart failure hospitalization rates between the early TAVR and CS arms at 2 years was greatest in the oldest patients (≥80 years, 9.1%; 75–79 years, 5.9%; 70–74 years, 5.1%; 65–69 years, 4.4%). In the CS group, time to conversion to AVR was similar across all age groups (median, 11 months; P =0.73). Approximately one-third of younger patients (65–69 years) in the CS arm presented with acute valve syndrome at the time of conversion, the frequency of which tended to increase with age ( P =0.06). CONCLUSIONS: In the EARLY TAVR trial, the relative benefit of early TAVR over CS was consistent among all age groups. The greatest absolute reduction in stroke rate with early TAVR compared with CS appeared in the youngest and oldest groups, whereas reduction in heart failure hospitalization was most pronounced in the oldest patients. These data suggest that early TAVR should be considered in all age groups above 65 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03042104.

Importance Transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) demonstrated superior outcomes over medical therapy in patients with severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) in the Edwards EVOQUE Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Replacement: Pivotal Clinical Investigation of Safety and Clinical Efficacy Using a Novel Device II (TRISCEND II) randomized clinical trial, and received regulatory approval in the US in 2024. Contemporary real-world data on its effectiveness and safety remain limited. Objective To evaluate 30-day clinical, echocardiographic, and health status outcomes of TTVR in real-world use. Design, Setting, and Population Retrospective cohort study of all consecutive patients who underwent TTVR in the US from February 2024 through March 2025 in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Patients had symptomatic, severe TR despite optimal medical therapy and TTVR was deemed appropriate by a heart team. Statistical analysis was conducted from September 2025 to February 2026. Exposure Device-enabled TTVR. Main Outcomes and Measures Thirty-day event rates (all-cause death, stroke, bleeding, new cardiac implantable electronic device [CIED] implantation, heart failure hospitalizations), TR reduction, and changes in health status (New York Heart Association [NYHA] functional class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary [KCCQ-OS] score) are reported. Subgroup analyses examined the impact of baseline CIED status on outcomes. Results Among 1034 attempted procedures at 82 centers (mean [SD] age, 77.1 [10.6] years; 69.1% female; 73.2% NYHA functional class III/IV), a valve was successfully implanted in 1017 patients (98.4%). Mild or less TR was achieved in 98.4% of patients post procedure and in 97.7% at 30 days. At 30 days, all-cause mortality was 3.1%; stroke, 0.2%; bleeding, 7.9%; new CIED, 15.9% in CIED-naive patients; and heart failure hospitalization, 3.1%. There were significant improvements in NYHA functional class (class I/II, 82.7%; P < .001) and mean KCCQ-OS score (22.4 points; P < .001) from baseline to 30 days. There were no significant differences in 30-day mortality ( P = .47), heart failure hospitalization ( P > .99), and functional outcomes ( P = .55) when patients were stratified by baseline CIED status. Conclusions and Relevance Early US real-world experience with TTVR confirms safety and effectiveness in patients with severe TR. Thirty-day outcomes are consistent with the TRISCEND II pivotal trial, demonstrating acceptable safety, near-complete TR elimination, and significant health status improvements in an older, comorbid population. Rates of new CIED implantation and bleeding were lower than randomized clinical trial experience.

Abstract Background and Aims The TRISCEND II trial demonstrated superior clinical benefits for patients with ≥severe tricuspid regurgitation (TR) treated with the EVOQUE transcatheter tricuspid valve replacement (TTVR) system plus medical therapy vs medical therapy alone. This work reports 1-year and 18-month outcomes in patients stratified by baseline TR severity. Methods The multicentre, prospective TRISCEND II trial enrolled 400 patients with symptomatic, ≥severe TR, and randomized 2:1 to TTVR (n = 267) or control (n = 133). In a post hoc analysis, patients were stratified into severe TR (n = 172) and massive/torrential TR (n = 220) cohorts. Clinical and quality-of-life outcomes were reported at 1 year, with Kaplan–Meier estimates for all-cause mortality and heart failure (HF) hospitalization assessed at 18 months. Study oversight included an independent echocardiographic core laboratory, clinical events committee, and data safety monitoring board. Results One year after TTVR, TR was ≤mild in 95.2% of severe TR and 95.3% of massive/torrential TR patients. The primary safety and effectiveness endpoint (win ratio) favoured TTVR over control regardless of baseline TR severity: severe {1.64 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11, 2.43]} and massive/torrential [2.20 (1.55, 3.14)]. At 18 months, TTVR patients had similar mortality to controls [rate difference: severe 0.2% (−11.6, 11.9), massive/torrential −5.8% (−17.6, 6.0)], whereas HF hospitalization rates favoured TTVR in the massive/torrential cohort [vs control, severe 9.8% (−3.0, 22.7), massive/torrential -15.2% (−28.9, −1.5)]. Conclusions Patients with ≥severe TR benefit from TTVR, experiencing improvements in TR severity, functional capacity, and quality of life regardless of baseline TR severity, with a signal for greater benefit in patients with more advanced disease.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement offers a less-invasive alternative for high-risk patients with bioprosthetic valve failure. Limited experience exists in intermediate-risk patients. We aim to evaluate 1-year outcomes of the PARTNER 3 mitral valve-in-valve study. METHODS: This prospective, single-arm, multicenter study enrolled symptomatic patients with a failing mitral bioprosthesis demonstrating greater than or equal to moderate stenosis and regurgitation and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score ≥3% and <8%. A balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences) was used via a transeptal approach. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality and stroke at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients from 12 sites underwent mitral valve-in-valve from 2018 to 2021. The mean age was 70.1±9.7 years, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 4.1%±1.6%, and 54% were female. There were no primary end point events (mortality or stroke) through 1 year, and no left-ventricular outflow tract obstruction, endocarditis, or mitral valve reintervention was reported. Six patients (12%) required rehospitalization, including heart failure (n=2), minor procedural side effects (n=2), and valve thrombosis (n=2; both resolved with anticoagulation). An additional valve thrombosis was associated with no significant clinical sequelae. From baseline to 1 year, all subjects with available data had none/trace or mild (grade 1+) mitral regurgitation and the New York Heart Association class improved in 87.2% (41/47) of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Mitral valve-in-valve with a balloon-expandable valve via transseptal approach in intermediate-risk patients was associated with improved symptoms and quality of life, adequate transcatheter valve performance, and no mortality or stroke at 1-year follow-up. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03193801.

Background: Refractory angina(Ang) effects 150 –250,000 pts in the US alone. These individuals have exhausted options for revasc and continue to have lifestyle limiting ang despite optimal medical Rx. Pre-clinical studies provided evidence that human CD34+ cells(CD34) can stimulate new blood vessel formation in ischemic myocardium(Myo), improving perfusion and function. We performed a phase 2 study of intraMyo injection of autologous CD34 in pts with CCS Class 3 and 4 Ang to obtain evidence for feasibility, safety and bioactivity. Methods: A phase 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was performed at 26 centers in the United States. There were 3 treatment groups: placebo, low dose (1×10^5 CD34/kg body wt) and high dose (5×10^5 CD34/kg). All pts underwent mobilization with GCSF 5 mcg/kg/day SC for 5 d, followed by apheresis on d5 to collect mononuclear cells. On day 6 CD34 were purified from the collected cells using the Isolex 300i device. After lot release testing, CD34 were injected endocardially at 10 locations in the ischemic Myo using the Myostar catheter following NOGA mapping. Placebo injections consisted of identical volumes of the diluent only. Results: A total of 167 pts were randomized and completed the injection procedure and 162 completed the 6 mo evaluation. The mean age of subjects was 61.0±8.9, there were 22 female and 145 male subjects. Trop was elevated in 26 pts at baseline and in 71 at some point following GCSF or injection. At 6 mo CD34 treated pts showed more reduction in ang frequency (−8.6 placebo vs 14.2 low dose) and improved ETT time (+69 sec placebo vs. +138 low dose). At 12m CD34 treated continue to show more reduction in angina (−8.2 placebo vs. −15.0 low dose) and improved ETT (+58 sec placebo vs. + 139 sec low dose). For key endpoints the high dose group results were inferior to low dose. The 12m data set has been locked and is being analyzed and the results of the completed analysis will be presented. Conclusions: Autologous CD34 cell therapy was associated with improved exercise tolerance and reduced angina in no-option pts with intractable angina. Ongoing analysis will determine endpoints, sample size and suitability of this therapy for a phase III study in no-option pts with refractory angina.

Background— The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial assigned patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus to prompt coronary revascularization plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone and reported no significant difference in mortality. Among patients selected for coronary artery bypass graft surgery, prompt coronary revascularization was associated with a significant reduction in death/myocardial infarction/stroke compared with intensive medical therapy. We hypothesized that clinical and angiographic risk stratification would affect the effectiveness of the treatments overall and within revascularization strata. Methods and Results— An angiographic risk score was developed from variables assessed at randomization; independent prognostic factors were myocardial jeopardy index, total number of coronary lesions, prior coronary revascularization, and left ventricular ejection fraction. The Framingham Risk Score for patients with coronary disease was used to summarize clinical risk. Cardiovascular event rates were compared by assigned treatment within high-risk and low-risk subgroups. Overall, no outcome differences between the intensive medical therapy and prompt coronary revascularization groups were seen in any risk stratum. The 5-year risk of death/myocardial infarction/stroke was 36.8% for intensive medical therapy compared with 24.8% for prompt coronary revascularization among the 381 coronary artery bypass graft surgery–selected patients in the highest angiographic risk tertile ( P =0.005); this treatment effect was amplified in patients with both high angiographic and high Framingham risk (47.3% intensive medical therapy versus 27.1% prompt coronary revascularization; P =0.010; hazard ratio=2.10; P =0.009). Treatment group differences were not significant in other clinical-angiographic risk groups within the coronary artery bypass graft surgery stratum, or in any subgroups within the percutaneous coronary intervention stratum. Conclusion— Among patients with diabetes mellitus and stable ischemic heart disease, a strategy of prompt coronary artery bypass graft surgery significantly reduces the rate of death/myocardial infarction MI/stroke in those with extensive coronary artery disease or impaired left ventricular function. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00006305.