Publications by authors named "Didier Champagnac"

14 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Permanent Pacemaker Implantation Following Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: VIVID Registry.

J Am Coll Cardiol 2021 May;77(18):2263-2273

Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.

Background: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains one of the main drawbacks of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), but scarce data exist on PPI after valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR, particularly with the use of newer-generation transcatheter heart valves (THVs).

Objectives: The goal of this study was to determine the incidence, factors associated with, and clinical impact of PPI in a large series of ViV-TAVR procedures.

Methods: Data were obtained from the multicenter VIVID Registry and included the main baseline and procedural characteristics, in-hospital and late (median follow-up: 13 months [interquartile range: 3 to 41 months]) outcomes analyzed according to the need of periprocedural PPI. All THVs except CoreValve, Cribier-Edwards, Sapien, and Sapien XT were considered to be new-generation THVs.

Results: A total of 1,987 patients without prior PPI undergoing ViV-TAVR from 2007 to 2020 were included. Of these, 128 patients (6.4%) had PPI after TAVR, with a significant decrease in the incidence of PPI with the use of new-generation THVs (4.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.017), mainly related to a reduced PPI rate with the Evolut R/Pro versus CoreValve (3.7% vs. 9.0%; p = 0.002). There were no significant differences in PPI rates between newer-generation balloon- and self-expanding THVs (6.1% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.18). In the multivariable analysis, older age (odds ratio [OR]: 1.05 for each increase of 1 year; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.07; p = 0.001), larger THV size (OR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.20; p = 0.02), and previous right bundle branch block (OR: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.00 to 4.17; p = 0.05) were associated with an increased risk of PPI. There were no differences in 30-day mortality between the PPI (4.7%) and no-PPI (2.7%) groups (p = 0.19), but PPI patients exhibited a trend toward higher mortality risk at follow-up (hazard ratio: 1.39; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.91; p = 0.04; p = 0.08 after adjusting for age differences between groups).

Conclusions: In a contemporary large series of ViV-TAVR patients, the rate of periprocedural PPI was relatively low, and its incidence decreased with the use of new-generation THV systems. PPI following ViV-TAVR was associated with a trend toward increased mortality at follow-up.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2021.03.228DOI Listing
May 2021

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Failed Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses Using a Self-Expanding Device (from the Prospective VIVA Post Market Study).

Am J Cardiol 2021 04 28;144:118-124. Epub 2020 Dec 28.

Groupe CardioVasculaire Interventionnel, Clinique Pasteur, Toulouse, France.

Patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis are often treated with a surgical valve replacement. Surgical bioprosthetic valves degenerate over time and therefore may necessitate a redo surgery. This analysis reports the 2-year clinical outcomes of the Valve-in-Valve study, which evaluated transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the CoreValve and Evolut R devices in patients with degenerated surgical aortic bioprostheses at high risk for surgery. The prospective Valve-in-Valve study enrolled 202 eligible patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses due to stenosis, regurgitation, or a combination of both. The Evolut R bioprosthesis was used in 90.5% of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation cases. Two-year all-cause and cardiovascular mortality rates were 16.5% and 11.1%, respectively. Other clinical events included stroke (7.9%), disabling stroke (1.7%), and new pacemaker implantation (10.1%). The 2-year all-cause mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with discharge mean gradients ≥20 mmHg vs. those with lower mean gradients (21.0% vs 7.6%, p = 0.025). Discharge mean gradients ≥20 mm Hg were associated with smaller surgical bioprostheses (OR, 7.2 [95% CI 2.3 to 22.1]. In patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses, valve-in-valve treatment using a supra-annular self-expanding bioprosthesis provides significant functional improvements with acceptable rates of complications, especially if a postprocedural mean gradient of <20 mmHg can be achieved.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.12.047DOI Listing
April 2021

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement After Surgical Repair or Replacement: Comprehensive Midterm Evaluation of Valve-in-Valve and Valve-in-Ring Implantation From the VIVID Registry.

Circulation 2021 Jan 25;143(2):104-116. Epub 2020 Sep 25.

Escola Paulista de Medicina - Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil (M.Simonato, J.H.P., D.F.G.).

Background: Mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) and valve-in-ring (ViR) are alternatives to surgical reoperation in patients with recurrent mitral valve failure after previous surgical valve repair or replacement. Our aim was to perform a large-scale analysis examining midterm outcomes after mitral ViV and ViR.

Methods: Patients undergoing mitral ViV and ViR were enrolled in the Valve-in-Valve International Data Registry. Cases were performed between March 2006 and March 2020. Clinical endpoints are reported according to the Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) definitions. Significant residual mitral stenosis (MS) was defined as mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg and significant residual mitral regurgitation (MR) as ≥ moderate.

Results: A total of 1079 patients (857 ViV, 222 ViR; mean age 73.5±12.5 years; 40.8% male) from 90 centers were included. Median STS-PROM score 8.6%; median clinical follow-up 492 days (interquartile range, 76-996); median echocardiographic follow-up for patients that survived 1 year was 772.5 days (interquartile range, 510-1211.75). Four-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 62.5% in ViV versus 49.5% for ViR (<0.001). Mean gradient across the mitral valve postprocedure was 5.7±2.8 mm Hg (≥5 mm Hg; 61.4% of patients). Significant residual MS occurred in 8.2% of the ViV and 12.0% of the ViR patients (=0.09). Significant residual MR was more common in ViR patients (16.6% versus 3.1%; <0.001) and was associated with lower survival at 4 years (35.1% versus 61.6%; =0.02). The rates of Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success were low for both procedures (39.4% total; 32.0% ViR versus 41.3% ViV; =0.01), mostly related to having postprocedural mean gradient ≥5 mm Hg. Correlates for residual MS were smaller true internal diameter, younger age, and larger body mass index. The only correlate for residual MR was ViR. Significant residual MS (subhazard ratio, 4.67; 95% CI, 1.74-12.56; =0.002) and significant residual MR (subhazard ratio, 7.88; 95% CI, 2.88-21.53; <0.001) were both independently associated with repeat mitral valve replacement.

Conclusions: Significant residual MS and/or MR were not infrequent after mitral ViV and ViR procedures and were both associated with a need for repeat valve replacement. Strategies to improve postprocedural hemodynamics in mitral ViV and ViR should be further explored.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.049088DOI Listing
January 2021

Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves.

Eur Heart J 2020 08;41(29):2731-2742

Dipartimento di Scienze Cardiologiche Toraciche e Vascolari, Università degli Studi di Padova, Via Giustiniani, 2 - 35128 Padova, Italy.

Aims: Due to bioprosthetic valve degeneration, aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures are increasingly performed. There are no data on long-term outcomes after aortic ViV. Our aim was to perform a large-scale assessment of long-term survival and reintervention after aortic ViV.

Methods And Results: A total of 1006 aortic ViV procedures performed more than 5 years ago [mean age 77.7 ± 9.7 years; 58.8% male; median STS-PROM score 7.3% (4.2-12.0)] were included in the analysis. Patients were treated with Medtronic self-expandable valves (CoreValve/Evolut, Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) (n = 523, 52.0%), Edwards balloon-expandable valves (EBEV, SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3, Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) (n = 435, 43.2%), and other devices (n = 48, 4.8%). Survival was lower at 8 years in patients with small-failed bioprostheses [internal diameter (ID) ≤ 20 mm] compared with those with large-failed bioprostheses (ID > 20 mm) (33.2% vs. 40.5%, P = 0.01). Independent correlates for mortality included smaller-failed bioprosthetic valves [hazard ratio (HR) 1.07 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-1.13)], age [HR 1.21 (95% CI 1.01-1.45)], and non-transfemoral access [HR 1.43 (95% CI 1.11-1.84)]. There were 40 reinterventions after ViV. Independent correlates for all-cause reintervention included pre-existing severe prosthesis-patient mismatch [subhazard ratio (SHR) 4.34 (95% CI 1.31-14.39)], device malposition [SHR 3.75 (95% CI 1.36-10.35)], EBEV [SHR 3.34 (95% CI 1.26-8.85)], and age [SHR 0.59 (95% CI 0.44-0.78)].

Conclusions: The size of the original failed valve may influence long-term mortality, and the type of the transcatheter valve may influence the need for reintervention after aortic ViV.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehaa544DOI Listing
August 2020

Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity-Matched Comparison From the FRANCE-TAVI Registry.

Circulation 2020 01 16;141(4):243-259. Epub 2019 Nov 16.

Clinique du Tonkin, Service de Cardiologie, Villeurbanne, France (D.C.).

Background: No randomized study powered to compare balloon expandable (BE) with self expanding (SE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on individual end points after transcatheter aortic valve replacement has been conducted to date.

Methods: From January 2013 to December 2015, the FRANCE-TAVI nationwide registry (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter) included 12 141 patients undergoing BE-THV (Edwards, n=8038) or SE-THV (Medtronic, n=4103) for treatment of native aortic stenosis. Long term mortality status was available in all patients (median 20 months; interquartile range, 14 to 30). Patients treated with BE-THV (n=3910) were successfully matched 1:1 with 3910 patients treated with SE-THV by using propensity score (25 clinical, anatomical, and procedural variables) and by date of the procedure (within 3 months). The first coprimary outcome was ≥ moderate occurrence of paravalvular regurgitation or in-hospital mortality, or both. The second coprimary outcome was 2-year all-cause mortality.

Results: In propensity-matched analyses, the incidence of the first coprimary outcome was higher with SE-THV (19.8%) compared with BE-THV (11.9%; relative risk, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.46-1.91]; <0.0001). Each component of the outcome was also higher in patients receiving SE-THV: ≥ moderate paravalvular regurgitation (15.5% versus 8.3%; relative risk, 1.90 [95% CI, 1.63-2.22]; <0.0001) and in hospital mortality (5.6% versus 4.2%; relative risk, 1.34 [95% CI, 1.07-1.66]; =0.01). During follow up, all cause mortality occurred in 899 patients treated with SE-THV (2-year mortality, 29.8%) and in 801 patients treated with BE-THV (2-year mortality, 26.6%; hazard ratio, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.06-1.29]; =0.003). Similar results were found using inverse probability of treatment weighting using propensity score analysis.

Conclusion: The present study suggests that use of SE-THV was associated with a higher risk of paravalvular regurgitation and higher in-hospital and 2-year mortality compared with use of BE-THV. These data strongly support the need for a randomized trial sufficiently powered to compare the latest generation of SE-THV and BE-THV.

Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01777828.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.043785DOI Listing
January 2020

TAVR for Failed Surgical Aortic Bioprostheses Using a Self-Expanding Device: 1-Year Results From the Prospective VIVA Postmarket Study.

JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2019 05;12(10):923-932

Department of Cardiology, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tikva, Israel.

Objectives: The VIVA (Valve in Valve) trial was designed to systematically and prospectively collect data regarding the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with failing surgical aortic bioprostheses at high-risk for reoperation.

Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement has been the standard of care in symptomatic patients with aortic valve disease. However, bioprosthetic valves degenerate over time, requiring redo surgery.

Methods: VIVA is an international, observational, single-arm, postmarket study conducted at 23 sites that enrolled 202 patients with symptomatic degeneration of an aortic bioprosthesis eligible for elective treatment with a CoreValve or Evolut R self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve.

Results: Patients were elderly (mean age 79.9 years), 47.5% were men, and they had a mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 6.6%. Although 41.8% of patients had surgical bioprostheses with labeled size ≤21 mm, valve hemodynamic parameters were markedly improved from baseline (mean aortic valve gradient 35.0 ± 16.3 mm Hg) to discharge (17.5 ± 8.6 mm Hg) and were sustained at 1 year (15.5 ± 7.5 mm Hg). At 1 year, total aortic regurgitation greater than mild was measured in 1.1% of patients. Clinical outcomes at 30 days demonstrated low mortality (2.5%), no disabling strokes, a 0.5% rate of acute kidney injury, and an 8.0% rate of new pacemaker implantation. At 1 year, the mortality rate remained low (8.8%), with 1 disabling stroke (0.6%). Five patients (2.5%) experienced coronary artery obstructions, 3 during and 1 immediately after the procedure and 1 several months later.

Conclusions: Degenerated surgical bioprostheses can be safely treated with the CoreValve or Evolut R platform using the catheter-based valve-in-valve procedure. Excellent 1-year clinical and hemodynamic outcomes were achieved in this real-world patient population. (CoreValve VIVA Study Evaluation of the Clinical Outcomes of CoreValve in Degenerative Surgical Aortic Bioprosthesis; NCT02209298).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2019.02.029DOI Listing
May 2019

Multimodality imaging guidance for percutaneous paravalvular leak closure: Insights from the multi-centre FFPP register.

Arch Cardiovasc Dis 2018 Jun - Jul;111(6-7):421-431. Epub 2018 Jun 22.

Faculté de médecine Paris-Sud, hôpital Marie-Lannelongue, université Paris-Sud, Paris-Saclay, 92350 Le Plessis-Robinson, France.

Background: Percutaneous paravalvular leak (PVL) closure has emerged as a palliative alternative to surgical management in selected high-risk patients. Percutaneous procedures are challenging, especially for mitral PVL. Accurate imaging of the morphologies of the defects is mandatory, together with precise guidance in the catheterization laboratory to enhance success rates.

Aims: To describe imaging modalities used in clinical practice to guide percutaneous PVL closure and assess the potential of new imaging tools.

Methods: Data from the 'Fermeture de Fuite paraprothétique' (FFPP) register were used. The FFPP register is an international multi-institutional collaborative register started in 2017 with a retrospective and a prospective part. A descriptive analysis of multimodality imaging used to guide PVL closure in clinical practice was performed.

Results: Data from 173 procedures performed in 19 centres from three countries (France, Belgium and Poland) were collected, which included eight cases of PVL following transcatheter valve replacement. Transoesophageal echocardiography was used in 167 cases (96.5%) and 3D echocardiography in 87.4% of cases. In one case, 3D-echocardiography was fused with fluoroscopy images in real time using echonavigator software. Details about multimodality imaging were available from a sample of 31 patients. Cardiac computed tomography (CT) was performed before 10 of the procedures. In one case, fusion between preprocedural cardiac CT angiography data and fluoroscopy data was used. In two cases, a 3D model of the valve with PVL was printed.

Conclusion: Echocardiography, particularly the 3D mode, is the cornerstone of PVL imaging. Other imaging modalities, such as cardiac CT and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, may be of complementary interest. New techniques such as imaging fusion and printing may further facilitate the percutaneous approach of PVLs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.acvd.2018.05.001DOI Listing
October 2018

Incidence, predictors and clinical outcomes of residual stenosis after aortic valve-in-valve.

Heart 2018 05 19;104(10):828-834. Epub 2018 Jan 19.

Clinique du Tonkin, Villeurbanne, France.

Objective: We aimed to analyse the incidence of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) and elevated gradients after aortic valve in valve (ViV), and to evaluate predictors and associations with clinical outcomes of this adverse event.

Methods: A total of 910 aortic ViV patients were investigated. Elevated residual gradients were defined as ≥20 mm Hg. PPM was identified based on the indexed effective orifice area (EOA), measured by echocardiography, and patient body mass index (BMI). Moderate and severe PPM (cases) were defined by European Association of Cardiovascular Imaging (EACVI) criteria and compared with patients without PPM (controls).

Results: Moderate or greater PPM was found in 61% of the patients, and severe in 24.6%. Elevated residual gradients were found in 27.9%. Independent risk factors for the occurrence of lower indexed EOA and therefore severe PPM were higher gradients of the failed bioprosthesis at baseline (unstandardised beta -0.023; 95% CI -0.032 to -0.014; P<0.001), a stented (vs a stentless) surgical bioprosthesis (unstandardised beta -0.11; 95% CI -0.161 to -0.071; P<0.001), higher BMI (unstandardised beta -0.01; 95% CI -0.013 to -0.007; P<0.001) and implantation of a SAPIEN/SAPIEN XT/SAPIEN 3 transcatheter device (unstandardised beta -0.064; 95% CI -0.095 to -0.032; P<0.001). Neither severe PPM nor elevated gradients had an association with VARC II-defined outcomes or 1-year survival (90.9% severe vs 91.5% moderate vs 89.3% none, P=0.44).

Conclusions: Severe PPM and elevated gradients after aortic ViV are very common but were not associated with short-term survival and clinical outcomes. The long-term effect of poor post-ViV haemodynamics on clinical outcomes requires further evaluation.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2017-312422DOI Listing
May 2018

Temporal Trends in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in France: FRANCE 2 to FRANCE TAVI.

J Am Coll Cardiol 2017 Jul;70(1):42-55

Cardiology Service, Saint Martin Private Hospital, Caen, France.

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is standard therapy for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high surgical risk. However, national data regarding procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes over time are limited.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess nationwide performance trends and clinical outcomes of TAVR during a 6-year period.

Methods: TAVRs performed in 48 centers across France between January 2013 and December 2015 were prospectively included in the FRANCE TAVI (French Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry. Findings were further compared with those reported from the FRANCE 2 (French Aortic National CoreValve and Edwards 2) registry, which captured all TAVRs performed from January 2010 to January 2012 across 34 centers.

Results: A total of 12,804 patients from FRANCE TAVI and 4,165 patients from FRANCE 2 were included in this analysis. The median age of patients was 84.6 years, and 49.7% were men. FRANCE TAVI participants were older but at lower surgical risk (median logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation [EuroSCORE]: 15.0% vs. 18.4%; p < 0.001). More than 80% of patients in FRANCE TAVI underwent transfemoral TAVR. Transesophageal echocardiography guidance decreased from 60.7% to 32.3% of cases, whereas more recent procedures were increasingly performed in hybrid operating rooms (15.8% vs. 35.7%). Rates of Valve Academic Research Consortium-defined device success increased from 95.3% in FRANCE 2 to 96.8% in FRANCE TAVI (p < 0.001). In-hospital and 30-day mortality rates were 4.4% and 5.4%, respectively, in FRANCE TAVI compared with 8.2% and 10.1%, respectively, in FRANCE 2 (p < 0.001 for both). Stroke and potentially life-threatening complications, such as annulus rupture or aortic dissection, remained stable over time, whereas rates of cardiac tamponade and pacemaker implantation significantly increased.

Conclusions: The FRANCE TAVI registry provided reassuring data regarding trends in TAVR performance in an all-comers population on a national scale. Nonetheless, given that TAVR indications are likely to expand to patients at lower surgical risk, concerns remain regarding potentially life-threatening complications and pacemaker implantation. (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter [FRANCE TAVI]; NCT01777828).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.04.053DOI Listing
July 2017

6- Versus 24-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients Nonresistant to Aspirin: Final Results of the ITALIC Trial (Is There a Life for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel).

JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017 06;10(12):1202-1210

Poly de St. Laurent, Rennes, France.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is noninferior to 24-month DAPT in aspirin-sensitive patients.

Background: The ITALIC (Is There a Life for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel) trial showed that rates of bleeding and thrombotic events at 1 year were much the same with 6 versus 12 months of DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stents. In this report, 2-year follow-up is presented.

Methods: In a multicenter randomized study, patients with confirmed nonresistance to aspirin undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation were allocated to 6 or 24 months of DAPT. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding at 12 months post-percutaneous coronary intervention. The secondary endpoints comprised the same composite endpoint at 24 months and each individual component.

Results: Overall, 2,031 patients from 70 centers were screened; 926 were randomized to 6-month and 924 to 24-month DAPT. Noninferiority was demonstrated for 6- versus 12-month DAPT, with an absolute risk difference of 0.11% (95% confidence interval: -1.04% to 1.26%; p = 0.0002). At 2 years, the composite endpoint was unchanged, at 3.5% for 6 months and 3.7% for 24 months (p = 0.79), and rates of myocardial infarction (1.3% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.51), stroke (0.6% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.77), and target vessel revascularization (1.0% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.09) were likewise similar. There was a trend toward higher mortality with longer DAPT (2.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.11). Four patients (0.4%) in the 24-month group and none in the 6-month group had major bleeding.

Conclusions: Two-year outcomes in the ITALIC trial confirmed the 1-year results and showed that patients receiving 6-month DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent have similar outcomes to those receiving 24-month DAPT.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2017.03.049DOI Listing
June 2017

Rapid pacing using the left ventricular guidewire: Reviving an old technique to simplify BAV and TAVI procedures.

Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2016 Nov 11;88(6):988-993. Epub 2016 Aug 11.

Groupe Hospitalier Mutualiste, Institut Cardio-Vasculaire de Grenoble, Grenoble, France.

Objectives: We sought to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of rapid left ventricular (LV) pacing through the guidewire during balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) and Transaortic valve implantation (TAVI).

Background: Right ventricular temporary pacing during TAVI and BAV is time-consuming and associated with vascular and pericardial complications.

Methods: Rapid left ventricular pacing was provided via the back-up 0.035″ guidewire. The cathode of an external pacemaker was placed on the tip of the 0.035″ wire and the anode on a needle inserted into the groin. Insulation was ensured by the balloon or TAVI catheter.

Results: 38 BAV and 87 TAVI procedures were performed in 113 consecutive patients in three centers with one for one pacing (160-200 bpm) in all patients. A significant reduction in blood pressure was achieved with a mean systolic pressure of 44 mm Hg during stimulation. Mean procedural time was 49.7 ± 31 min for BAV and 68.7 ± 30.9 for TAVI. A temporary venous pacemaker was required in 12 patients; only 12% of TAVI patients had a femoral central venous catheter. Femoral venous puncture was not performed in BAV patients. No venous vascular complications were observed. One case of successfully treated tamponade (0.8%) occurred 8 hr post procedure. In-hospital mortality rates were 4.6% and 2.6% in the TAVI and BAV groups, respectively.

Conclusions: Use of the LV guidewire for rapid pacing during BAV and TAVI was shown to be simple, reproducible, and prevented complications associated with RV temporary leads thus potentially simplifying TAVI and enhancing its safety. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ccd.26666DOI Listing
November 2016

Transcatheter Replacement of Failed Bioprosthetic Valves: Large Multicenter Assessment of the Effect of Implantation Depth on Hemodynamics After Aortic Valve-in-Valve.

Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016 06;9(6)

From the Centre for Heart Valve Innovation, Department of Cardiology, St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, Canada (M.S., J.W., D.D.); Division of Cardiovascular Surgery, Escola Paulista de Medicina-UNIFESP, São Paulo, Brazil (M.S., J.H.P.); Interventional Cardiology Institute, Cardiology Department, Rabin Medical Center, Petah Tivka, Israel (R.K.); Cardiology Department, Hôpital Bichat-Claude Bernard, Paris, France (A.V.); Department of Cardiology, Asklepios Klinik, Hamburg, Germany (C. Frerker); Department of Cardiology, Odense University Hospital, Denmark (H.N.); Department of Cardiovascular Surgery, Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Munich, Germany (S. Bleiziffer); Echocardiography Service, Royal Brompton and Harefield, London, United Kingdom (A.D.); Québec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, Québec City, Canada (J.R.-C.); Cardiovascular Imaging Core Laboratory, Case Western Research University, Cleveland, OH (G.F.A.); Peter Munk Cardiac Centre, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Canada (E.H.); Cardiologia Interventistica ed Emodinamica, Ospedale San Raffaele, Milan, Italy (A.L.); Kardiologie, Angiologie und Pneumologie, Zentrum für Innere Medizin, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Germany (R.B.); Division of Cardiology, Ospedale Ferrarotto, Catania, Italy (M.B.); Institut Cardiovasculaire Paris Sud, Hôpital Jacques Cartier, Massy, France (T.L.); Fondazione Toscana Gabriele Monasterio, L'Ospedale del Cuore G. Pasquinucci, Massa, Italy (A.C.); Unidad de Hemodinámica y Cardiologia Intervencionista, Hospital Universitario Virgen de la Victoria, Malaga, Spain (J.M.H.); Dipartimento Cardiotoracovascolare, Ospedale Niguarda Ca' Granda, Milan, Italy (G.B.); Transcatheter Heart Valve Department, Hygeia Hospital, Athens, Greece (K.S.); UOC Emodinamica-Dipartimento Cardio Toracico, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Senese, Siena, Italy (A.I.); Cardiac Catheterisation Laboratories, St. George's Hospital, London, United Kingdom (S. Brecker); Cardiac Ca

Background: Transcatheter valve implantation inside failed bioprosthetic surgical valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) may offer an advantage over reoperation. Supra-annular transcatheter valve position may be advantageous in achieving better hemodynamics after ViV. Our objective was to define targets for implantation that would improve hemodynamics after ViV.

Methods And Results: Cases from the Valve-in-Valve International Data (VIVID) registry were analyzed using centralized core laboratory assessment blinded to clinical events. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of elevated postprocedural gradients (mean ≥20 mm Hg). Optimal implantation depths were defined by receiver operating characteristic curve. A total of 292 consecutive patients (age, 78.9±8.7 years; 60.3% male; 157 CoreValve Evolut and 135 Sapien XT) were evaluated. High implantation was associated with significantly lower rates of elevated gradients in comparison with low implantation (CoreValve Evolut, 15% versus 34.2%; P=0.03 and Sapien XT, 18.5% versus 43.5%; P=0.03, respectively). Optimal implantation depths were defined: CoreValve Evolut, 0 to 5 mm; Sapien XT, 0 to 2 mm (0-10% frame height); sensitivities, 91.3% and 88.5%, respectively. The strongest independent correlate for elevated gradients after ViV was device position (high: odds ratio, 0.22; confidence interval, 0.1-0.52; P=0.001), in addition to type of device used (CoreValve Evolut: odds ratio, 0.5; confidence interval, 0.28-0.88; P=0.02) and surgical valve mechanism of failure (stenosis/mixed baseline failure: odds ratio, 3.12; confidence interval, 1.51-6.45; P=0.002).

Conclusions: High implantation inside failed bioprosthetic valves is a strong independent correlate of lower postprocedural gradients in both self- and balloon-expandable transcatheter valves. These clinical evaluations support specific implantation targets to optimize hemodynamics after ViV.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003651DOI Listing
June 2016

6- versus 24-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents in patients nonresistant to aspirin: the randomized, multicenter ITALIC trial.

J Am Coll Cardiol 2015 Mar 16;65(8):777-786. Epub 2014 Nov 16.

Hôpital de la Croix Rousse, Lyon France.

Background: The currently recommended duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in drug-eluting stent (DES) recipients is 12 months to reduce the risk of late stent thrombosis, particularly in those with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Objectives: This study hypothesized that antiplatelet treatment with DAPT for 6 months may be noninferior to 24-month DAPT in aspirin-sensitive patients.

Methods: A multicenter, randomized study assigned patients undergoing implantation of everolimus-eluting stents with confirmed nonresistance to aspirin to receive 6- or 24-month DAPT. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding at 12 months post-stenting.

Results: A total of 2,031 patients were enrolled in 70 European and Middle Eastern centers. The trial was prematurely terminated due to recruitment problems, leaving 941 patients randomized to 24-month DAPT and 953 to 6-month DAPT. The 2 treatment groups had similar baseline and procedural characteristics. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint (24-month: 1.5% vs. 6-month: 1.6%; p = 0.85). Noninferiority was demonstrated for 6- versus 24-month DAPT, with an absolute risk difference of 0.11% (95% confidence interval: -1.04% to 1.26%; p for noninferiority = 0.0002). There were no significant differences in stent thrombosis or bleeding complications. In the 792 (44%) high-risk patients with ACS, primary and secondary endpoints did not significantly differ (hazard ratio: 1.7 [95% confidence interval: 0.519 to 6.057; p = 0.361]).

Conclusions: Rates of bleeding and thrombotic events were not significantly different according to 6- versus 24-month DAPT after PCI with new-generation DES in good aspirin responders. (Is There A LIfe for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel [ITALICplus]; NCT01476020).
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2014.11.008DOI Listing
March 2015

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for pure severe native aortic valve regurgitation.

J Am Coll Cardiol 2013 Apr 20;61(15):1577-84. Epub 2013 Feb 20.

Department of Cardiology and Cardiothoracic Surgery, St. George's Hospital, London, United Kingdom.

Objectives: This study sought to collect data and evaluate the anecdotal use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in pure native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) for patients who were deemed surgically inoperable

Background: Data and experience with TAVI in the treatment of patients with pure severe NAVR are limited.

Methods: Data on baseline patient characteristics, device and procedure parameters, echocardiographic parameters, and outcomes up to July 2012 were collected retrospectively from 14 centers that have performed TAVI for NAVR.

Results: A total of 43 patients underwent TAVI with the CoreValve prosthesis (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) at 14 centers (mean age, 75.3 ± 8.8 years; 53% female; mean logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation), 26.9 ± 17.9%; and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score, 10.2 ± 5.3%). All patients had severe NAVR on echocardiography without aortic stenosis and 17 patients (39.5%) had the degree of aortic valvular calcification documented on CT or echocardiography. Vascular access was transfemoral (n = 35), subclavian (n = 4), direct aortic (n = 3), and carotid (n = 1). Implantation of a TAVI was performed in 42 patients (97.7%), and 8 patients (18.6%) required a second valve during the index procedure for residual aortic regurgitation. In all patients requiring second valves, valvular calcification was absent (p = 0.014). Post-procedure aortic regurgitation grade I or lower was present in 34 patients (79.1%). At 30 days, the major stroke incidence was 4.7%, and the all-cause mortality rate was 9.3%. At 12 months, the all-cause mortality rate was 21.4% (6 of 28 patients).

Conclusions: This registry analysis demonstrates the feasibility and potential procedure difficulties when using TAVI for severe NAVR. Acceptable results may be achieved in carefully selected patients who are deemed too high risk for conventional surgery, but the possibility of requiring 2 valves and leaving residual aortic regurgitation remain important considerations.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2013.01.018DOI Listing
April 2013