Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with Evolut R versus Sapien 3 in Japanese patients with a small aortic annulus: The OCEAN-TAVI registry.
indexed effective orifice area
prosthesis-patient mismatch
transcatheter heart valves
valve-in-valve
Journal
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 05 2021
01 05 2021
Historique:
revised:
20
08
2020
received:
06
08
2020
accepted:
21
08
2020
pubmed:
15
9
2020
medline:
12
10
2021
entrez:
14
9
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare safety, efficacy, and hemodynamics of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THVs) in patients with a small aortic annulus. Few studies have directly compared TAVR outcomes using third-generation THVs, focusing on patients with small aortic annuli. In a multicenter TAVR registry, we analyzed data from 576 patients with a small annulus and who underwent transfemoral TAVR using third-generation THVs. Propensity score matching was used to adjust baseline clinical characteristics. The device success rate in the overall cohort was 92.0% (Evolut R: 92.1% vs. Sapien 3:92.0%, p = 0.96). One year after TAVR, patients treated with Evolut R maintained a lower mean pressure gradient (mPG) and a higher indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) in the matched cohort {mPG: 9.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-11.9] vs. 12.0 [IQR: 9.9-16.3] mmHg, p < .001; iEOA: 1.20 [IQR: 1.01-1.46] vs. 1.08 [IQR: 0.90-1.28] cm TAVR for patients with a small annulus using third-generation THVs was associated with high device success. Evolut R seems to be superior to Sapien 3 in hemodynamic performance for patients with a small annulus and body surface area up to 1 year after TAVR. Nevertheless, all-cause mortality at 1 year was similar between both groups.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVES
To compare safety, efficacy, and hemodynamics of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using self-expanding and balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves (THVs) in patients with a small aortic annulus.
BACKGROUND
Few studies have directly compared TAVR outcomes using third-generation THVs, focusing on patients with small aortic annuli.
METHODS
In a multicenter TAVR registry, we analyzed data from 576 patients with a small annulus and who underwent transfemoral TAVR using third-generation THVs. Propensity score matching was used to adjust baseline clinical characteristics.
RESULTS
The device success rate in the overall cohort was 92.0% (Evolut R: 92.1% vs. Sapien 3:92.0%, p = 0.96). One year after TAVR, patients treated with Evolut R maintained a lower mean pressure gradient (mPG) and a higher indexed effective orifice area (iEOA) in the matched cohort {mPG: 9.0 [interquartile range (IQR): 6.0-11.9] vs. 12.0 [IQR: 9.9-16.3] mmHg, p < .001; iEOA: 1.20 [IQR: 1.01-1.46] vs. 1.08 [IQR: 0.90-1.28] cm
CONCLUSIONS
TAVR for patients with a small annulus using third-generation THVs was associated with high device success. Evolut R seems to be superior to Sapien 3 in hemodynamic performance for patients with a small annulus and body surface area up to 1 year after TAVR. Nevertheless, all-cause mortality at 1 year was similar between both groups.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
E875-E886Subventions
Organisme : Daiichi Sankyo Company
Organisme : Edwards Lifesciences
Organisme : Abbott Medical
Organisme : Boston Scientific
Organisme : Medtronic
Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
Références
Kalavrouziotis D, Rodes-Cabau J, Bagur R, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58:1016-1024.
Guimaraes L, Voisine P, Mohammadi S, et al. Valve hemodynamics following transcatheter or surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with small aortic annulus. Am J Cardiol. 2020;125(6):956-963.
Pibarot P, Weissman NJ, Stewart WJ, et al. Incidence and sequelae of prosthesis-patient mismatch in transcatheter versus surgical valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis: a PARTNER trial cohort-a analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64:1323-1334.
Kamioka N, Arita T, Hanyu M, et al. Valve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement for a small aortic annulus. Int Heart J. 2019;60:86-92.
Webb JG, Mack MJ, White JM, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation within degenerated aortic surgical bioprostheses: PARTNER 2 valve-in-valve registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:2253-2262.
Mosleh WAM, Joshi S, Mather J, et al. Comparative outcomes of balloon-expandable S3 versus self-expanding Evolut bioprostheses for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2019;124:1621-1629.
He C, Xiao L, Liu J. Safety and efficacy of self-expandable Evolut R vs. balloon-expandable Sapien 3 valves for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Exp Ther Med. 2019;18:3893-3904.
Costa G, Buccheri S, Barbanti M, et al. Outcomes of three different new generation transcatheter aortic valve prostheses. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;95:398-407.
Deharo P, Bisson A, Herbert J, et al. Impact of Sapien 3 balloon-expandable versus Evolut R self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with aortic stenosis: data from a nationwide analysis. Circulation. 2020;141:260-268.
Abdelghani M, Mankerious N, Allali A, et al. Bioprosthetic valve performance after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding versus balloon-expandable valves in large versus small aortic valve annuli: insights from the CHOICE trial and the CHOICE-extend registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11:2507-2518.
Hahn RT, Leipsic J, Douglas PS, et al. Comprehensive echocardiographic assessment of normal transcatheter valve function. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2019;12:25-34.
Watanabe Y, Kozuma K, Hioki H, et al. Comparison of results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with versus without active cancer. Am J Cardiol. 2016;118:572-577.
Kano S, Yamamoto M, Shimura T, et al. Gait speed can predict advanced clinical outcomes in patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from a Japanese Multicenter Registry. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:e005088.
Inohara T, Hayashida K, Watanabe Y, et al. Streamlining the learning process for TAVI: insight from a comparative analysis of the OCEAN-TAVI and the massy registries. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;87:963-970.
Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the valve academic research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:1438-1454.
Hahn RT, Pibarot P, Stewart WJ, et al. Comparison of transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in severe aortic stenosis: a longitudinal study of echocardiography parameters in cohort A of the PARTNER trial (placement of aortic transcatheter valves). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:2514-2521.
Watanabe Y, Hayashida K, Takayama M, et al. First direct comparison of clinical outcomes between European and Asian cohorts in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Massy study group vs. the PREVAIL Japan trial. J Cardiol. 2015;65:112-116.
Herrmann HC, Daneshvar SA, Fonarow GC, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: from the STS/ACC TVT registry. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72:2701-2711.
Miyasaka M, Tada N, Taguri M, et al. Incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in Asian patients: the OCEAN-TAVI registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11:771-780.
Abdelghani M, Allali A, Kaur J, et al. Impact of prosthesis-iteration evolution and sizing practice on the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93:971-979.
Theron A, Pinto J, Grisoli D, et al. Patient-prosthesis mismatch in new generation trans-catheter heart valves: a propensity score analysis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;19:225-233.
Regazzoli D, Chiarito M, Cannata F, et al. Transcatheter self-expandable valve implantation for aortic stenosis in small aortic annuli: the TAVI-SMALL registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;13:196-206.
Ando T, Briasoulis A, Telila T, Afonso L, Grines CL, Takagi H. Does mild paravalvular regurgitation post transcatheter aortic valve implantation affect survival? A meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;91:135-147.
Yoshijima N, Yanagisawa R, Hase H, Tanaka M, Tsuruta H, Shimizu H, Fukuda K, Naganuma T, Mizutani K, Araki M, Tada N, Yamanaka F, Shirai S, Tabata M, Ueno H, Takagi K, Higashimori A, Watanabe Y, Yamamoto M, Hayashida K, investigators O-T. Update on the clinical impact of mild aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights from the Japanese multicenter OCEAN-TAVI registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2020;95:35-44.
Maeno Y, Abramowitz Y, Yoon SH, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with different valve types in elliptic aortic annuli. Circ J. 2017;81:1036-1042.
Husser O, Kim WK, Pellegrini C, et al. Multicenter comparison of novel self-expanding versus balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;10:2078-2087.
Enriquez-Rodriguez E, Amat-Santos IJ, Jimenez-Quevedo P, et al. Comparison of the hemodynamic performance of the balloon-expandable SAPIEN 3 versus self-expandable Evolut R Transcatheter valve: a case-matched study. Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2018;71:735-742.