Mieghem, Nicolas M. Van

Photon-counting detector CT offers improved assessment of small stents and higher diagnostic accuracy than conventional CT through enhanced spatial resolution and spectral reconstructions.

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe self‐expanding, supra‐annular Evolut valve is an established platform for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI). Evolut PRO introduced an outer sealing wrap to mitigate paravalvular leakage. We evaluated the 3‐year clinical outcomes and valve performance of the Evolut PRO in standard clinical practice for severe aortic stenosis (AS) patients at intermediate or higher risk for surgery.MethodsThe FORWARD PRO prospective, single‐arm, multicentre, post‐market clinical study enrolled 638 patients with native aortic valve stenosis or failed surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve undergoing TAVI, at intermediate or high risk, with the Evolut PRO valve. Clinical and serial echocardiographic outcomes were followed‐up for 3 years.ResultsTAVI using Evolut PRO was attempted in 629 AS patients (implanted in 97%) (mean age 81.7 years; STS PROM score, 4.7%). At 3 years all‐cause mortality was 25.0%, disabling stroke 6.5% (all‐cause mortality or disabling stroke, 28.5%) and rate of new permanent pacemaker implantation 24.7%. Excellent valve haemodynamics were maintained (mean gradient 8.8 ± 4.7 mm Hg; mean effective orifice area 2.0 ± 0.5 cm2) at 3 years. In a paired analysis of patients with ≥ mild paravalvular leakage (PVL) at discharge, more than two‐thirds demonstrated improved PVL at 3 years. Patients with ≥ mild PVL at discharge had higher median total calcium volume than those with no/trace PVL (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn clinical practice TAVI with the Evolut PRO valve is associated with favorable clinical outcomes and excellent haemodynamic performance out to 3 years. The observation of improvements in PVL over time warrants further research.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in patients with severe aortic stenosis, but data are limited on younger, low-risk patients. This analysis compares outcomes in low-surgical-risk patients aged <75 years receiving TAVR versus surgery. METHODS: The Evolut Low Risk Trial randomized 1414 low-risk patients to treatment with a supra-annular, self-expanding TAVR or surgery. We compared rates of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke, associated clinical outcomes, and bioprosthetic valve performance at 3 years between TAVR and surgery patients aged <75 years. RESULTS: In patients <75 years, 352 were randomized to TAVR and 351 to surgery. Mean age was 69.1±4.0 years (minimum 51 and maximum 74); Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 1.7±0.6%. At 3 years, all-cause mortality or disabling stroke for TAVR was 5.7% and 8.0% for surgery ( P =0.241). Although there was no difference between TAVR and surgery in all-cause mortality, the incidence of disabling stroke was lower with TAVR (0.6%) than surgery (2.9%; P =0.019), while surgery was associated with a lower incidence of pacemaker implantation (7.1%) compared with TAVR (21.0%; P <0.001). Valve reintervention rates (TAVR 1.5%, surgery 1.5%, P =0.962) were low in both groups. Valve performance was significantly better with TAVR than surgery with lower mean aortic gradients ( P <0.001) and lower rates of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch ( P <0.001). Rates of valve thrombosis and endocarditis were similar between groups. There were no significant differences in rates of residual ≥moderate paravalvular regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Low-risk patients <75 years treated with supra-annular, self-expanding TAVR had comparable 3-year all-cause mortality and lower disabling stroke compared with patients treated with surgery. There was significantly better valve performance in patients treated with TAVR. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02701283.

ImportanceThe frequency and clinical importance of structural valve deterioration (SVD) in patients undergoing self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgery is poorly understood.ObjectiveTo evaluate the 5-year incidence, clinical outcomes, and predictors of hemodynamic SVD in patients undergoing self-expanding TAVI or surgery.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis post hoc analysis pooled data from the CoreValve US High Risk Pivotal (n = 615) and SURTAVI (n = 1484) randomized clinical trials (RCTs); it was supplemented by the CoreValve Extreme Risk Pivotal trial (n = 485) and CoreValve Continued Access Study (n = 2178). Patients with severe aortic valve stenosis deemed to be at intermediate or increased risk of 30-day surgical mortality were included. Data were collected from December 2010 to June 2016, and data were analyzed from December 2021 to October 2022.InterventionsPatients were randomized to self-expanding TAVI or surgery in the RCTs or underwent self-expanding TAVI for clinical indications in the nonrandomized studies.Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe primary end point was the incidence of SVD through 5 years (from the RCTs). Factors associated with SVD and its association with clinical outcomes were evaluated for the pooled RCT and non-RCT population. SVD was defined as (1) an increase in mean gradient of 10 mm Hg or greater from discharge or at 30 days to last echocardiography with a final mean gradient of 20 mm Hg or greater or (2) new-onset moderate or severe intraprosthetic aortic regurgitation or an increase of 1 grade or more.ResultsOf 4762 included patients, 2605 (54.7%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 82.1 (7.4) years. A total of 2099 RCT patients, including 1128 who received TAVI and 971 who received surgery, and 2663 non-RCT patients who received TAVI were included. The cumulative incidence of SVD treating death as a competing risk was lower in patients undergoing TAVI than surgery (TAVI, 2.20%; surgery, 4.38%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.46; 95% CI, 0.27-0.78; P = .004). This lower risk was most pronounced in patients with smaller annuli (23 mm diameter or smaller; TAVI, 1.32%; surgery, 5.84%; HR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06-0.73; P = .02). SVD was associated with increased 5-year all-cause mortality (HR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.46-2.82; P &amp;lt; .001), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.20-2.90; P = .006), and valve disease or worsening heart failure hospitalizations (HR, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.23-3.84; P = .008). Predictors of SVD were developed from multivariate analysis.Conclusions and RelevanceThis study found a lower rate of SVD in patients undergoing self-expanding TAVI vs surgery at 5 years. Doppler echocardiography was a valuable tool to detect SVD, which was associated with worse clinical outcomes.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01240902, NCT01586910, and NCT01531374

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 &amp;lt; .001) and aortic valve areas were higher (mean [SD], 2.2 [0.7] cm 2 vs 1.8 [0.6] cm 2 ; P &amp;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 &amp;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.

AbstractObjectivesThe Evolut R FORWARD study confirmed safety and effectivenesss of the Evolut R THV in routine clinical practice out to 1 year. Herein, we report the final 3‐year clinical follow up of the FORWARD study.BackgroundTranscatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a proven alternative to surgery in elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. Long‐term clinical outcome data with the Evolut R platform are scarce.MethodsFORWARD is a prospective multicenter observational study that evaluated the Evolut R system in routine clinical practice at 53 centres. Eligible patients had symptomatic native aortic valve stenosis or failed surgical aortic bioprosthesis and elevated operative risk per Heart‐Team assessment. TAVR was attempted in 1039 patients.ResultsMean age was 81.8 ± 6.2 years, 64.9% were women, STS score was 5.5 ± 4.5% and 34.2% were frail. Rates of all‐cause mortality and disabling stroke were 24.8% and 4.8% at 3 years. Early need for a new pacemaker implantation after TAVR (all‐cause mortality: with new PPI; 21.0% vs. without; 22.8%, p = 0.55) and the presence of > trace paravalvular regurgitation (all‐cause mortality: no or trace; 22.0% vs. ≥ mild; 25.5%, p = 0.29) did not affect survival. Between 1 and 3 years incidence rates of valve related intervention, endocarditis and clinically relevant valve thrombosis were low.ConclusionsThe Evolut R valve maintained a favorable safety profile through 3 years in routine clinical practice. Rates of transcatheter heart valve‐related adverse events were low.

Background: Hemodynamic performance of prostheses after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is generally better than after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), especially in patients with a small native annulus size. However, it remains unclear whether differences are consistent for patients with a different propensity for developing prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), considering annulus size and body size of patients. Methods and Results: The SURTAVI trial (Surgical Replacement and Transcatheter Aortic Implantation) compared TAVR using a self-expandable valve with SAVR in intermediate-risk patients. Multidetector computed tomography–based aortic annulus size consisted of the perimeter-derived diameter, which was divided by body surface area to produce an indexed annulus size. Patients were categorized into a small (9–12 mm/m 2 ), medium (>12–14 mm/m 2 ), and large (>14–18 mm/m 2 ) group according to indexed annulus size. We compared TAVR and SAVR for PPM, hemodynamics, and clinical, and functional outcomes through 1-year follow-up within the size groups. Patients who underwent TAVR received a larger prosthesis with increasing indexed annulus size ( P <0.001), while there was no difference in prosthesis size in patients who underwent SAVR ( P =0.74). Patients in all size groups had significantly larger indexed effective orifice area and lower mean gradients at discharge after TAVR versus SAVR. Rates of PPM were significantly lower with TAVR versus SAVR in all groups ( P <0.001) and declined with larger indexed annulus sizes with both TAVR ( P =0.04) and SAVR ( P =0.03). Indexed annulus size was an independent predictor of PPM after TAVR and SAVR. Clinical outcomes were comparable between TAVR and SAVR across all groups, apart from a significantly higher rate of reintervention after TAVR versus SAVR in the large indexed annulus size group (2.5% versus 0%; P =0.01) but without significant interaction ( P int =0.81). Conclusions: Rates of PPM were significantly lower after TAVR than after SAVR across all groups of indexed annulus size, reflecting better hemodynamic performance of transcatheter versus surgical valves, irrespective of the propensity to develop PPM. More attention should be directed to prevention of PPM after SAVR. This information should be considered by the Heart Team to recommend a specific procedure or valve. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01586910.