Left Atrial to Coronary Sinus Shunting for Treatment of Heart Failure with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction: The ALT FLOW Early Feasibility Study 1-Year Results
Abstract Aims Patients with heart failure and mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction have limited therapeutic options. The ALT-FLOW Early Feasibility Study evaluated safety, haemodynamics and outcomes for the APTURE transcatheter shunt system, a novel left atrium to coronary sinus shunt in these patients. Methods and results Safety and shunt implantation success was evaluated for all 116 enrolled patients. An analysis population of implanted patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) >40% (n = 95) was chosen to assess efficacy via paired comparison between baseline and follow-up haemodynamic (3 and 6 months), and echocardiographic, clinical and functional outcomes (6 months and 1 year). Health status and quality of life outcomes were assessed using the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire overall summary score (KCCQ-OSS). The primary safety endpoint, major adverse cardiac, cerebral, and renal events, and reintervention through 30 days, occurred in 3/116 patients (2.6%). All implanted shunts were patent at 1 year. In patients with LVEF >40%, the mean (95% confidence interval) reduction in exercise pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) at 20 W was −5.7 (−8.6, −2.9) mmHg at 6 months (p < 0.001). At baseline, 8% had New York Heart Association class I–II status and improved to 68% at 1 year (p < 0.001). KCCQ-OSS at baseline was 39 (35, 43) and improved at 6 months and 1 year by 25 (20–30) and 27 (22–32) points, respectively (both p < 0.0001). No adverse changes in haemodynamic and echocardiographic indices of right heart function were observed at 1 year. Overall, the reduction in PCWP at 20 W and improvement in KCCQ-OSS in multiple subgroups were consistent with those observed for the entire population. Conclusions In patients with heart failure and LVEF >40%, the APTURE shunt demonstrated an acceptable safety profile with significant sustained improvements in haemodynamic and patient-centred outcomes, underscoring the need for further evaluation of the APTURE shunt in a randomized trial.
Self-expanding Transcatheter vs Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients
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 &lt; .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm 2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm 2 ; P &lt; .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 &lt; .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.
Impact of blood pressure on coronary perfusion and valvular hemodynamics after aortic valve replacement
Abstract Objective Our objective was to evaluate the impact of various blood pressures (BPs) on coronary perfusion and valvular hemodynamics following aortic valve replacement (AVR). Background Lower systolic and diastolic (SBP/DBP) pressures from the recommended optimal target range of SBP < 120–130 mmHg and DBP < 80 mmHg after AVR have been independently associated with increased cardiovascular and all‐cause mortality. Methods The hemodynamic assessment of a 26 mm SAPIEN 3 transcatheter aortic valve (TAV), 29 mm Evolut R TAV, and 25 mm Magna Ease surgical aortic valve (SAV) was performed in a pulsed left heart simulator with varying SBP, DBP, and heart rate (HR) conditions (60 and 120 bpm) at 5 L/min cardiac output (CO). Average coronary flow (CF), effective orifice areas (EOAs), and valvulo‐arterial impedance (Zva) were calculated. Results At HR of 60 bpm, at SBP < 120 mmHg and DBP < 60 mmHg, CF decreased below the physiological lower limit with several different valves. Zva and EOA were found to increase and decrease respectively with increasing SBP and DBP. The same results were found with an HR of 120 bpm. The trends of CF variation with BP were similar in all valves however the drop below the lower physiological CF limit was valve dependent. Conclusion In a controlled in vitro system, with different aortic valve prostheses in place, CF decreased below the physiologic minimum when SBP and DBP were in the range targeted by blood pressure guidelines. Combined with recent observations from patients treated with AVR, these findings underscore the need for additional studies to identify the optimal BP in patients treated with AVR for AS.
Cardiopulmonary bypass and intra‐aortic balloon pump use is associated with higher short and long term mortality after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A PARTNER trial substudy