Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low risk patients: a review of PARTNER 3 and Evolut low risk trials.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a mainstay in treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are considered high-risk surgical candidates. The use of TAVR in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis is being explored as an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Recent results from the Medtronic Evolut Low Risk trial and the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves (PARTNER) 3 trial shed light on the use of TAVR in low-risk surgical candidates. The Evolut Low Risk trial compared TAVR with a self-expanding supra-annular bioprosthesis to SAVR in 1468 patients with severe aortic stenosis who were low surgical risk. Patients with a mean age of 74 and a mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk score of 1.9% were randomized to either TAVR or SAVR groups. Using the composite end point of death or disabling stroke at 24 months, the study found an incidence of 5.3% in the TAVR arm and 6.7% in the surgical arm. The Evolut Low Risk trial thus concluded that TAVR was statistically noninferior but not superior to SAVR (difference, -1.4 percentage points; 95% Bayesian credible interval for the difference, -4.9 to 2.1; posterior probability of noninferiority, >0.999). The PARTNER 3 trial assigned 1,000 patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to either TAVR with transfemoral placement of balloon expandable valve or SAVR. Patients with a mean age of 73 and a mean STS score of 1.9% were randomized to either TAVR or SAVR groups. With respect to the primary endpoint of composite death from any cause, stroke, or rehospitalization, the study found an occurrence of 8.5% in TAVR and 15.1% in SAVR, confirming both noninferiority and superiority in the TAVR group [absolute difference, -6.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval (CI), -10.8 to -2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P=0.001 for superiority]. Both the Evolut low risk trial and the PARTNER 3 trial provide evidence that the use of TAVR extends beyond the scope of high and intermediate risk surgical patients and is at the very least equivalent to SAVR in the treatment low-risk surgical candidates when using a transfemoral approach in patients without bicuspid aortic valves. In this article we provide an extensive review on the Evolute low risk and PARTNER 3 trials, including a discussion on clinically relevant outcomes.

[1]  B. Prendergast,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve implantation vs. surgical aortic valve replacement for treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: an updated meta-analysis. , 2019, European heart journal.

[2]  L. W. Andersen,et al.  Five-Year Clinical and Echocardiographic Outcomes from the Nordic Aortic Valve Intervention (NOTION) Randomized Clinical Trial in Lower Surgical Risk Patients. , 2019, Circulation.

[3]  J. Leipsic,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic‐Valve Replacement with a Balloon‐Expandable Valve in Low‐Risk Patients , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[4]  Andrew S. Mugglin,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic‐Valve Replacement with a Self‐Expanding Valve in Low‐Risk Patients , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  H. Jneid,et al.  Length of Stay After Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: An Analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[6]  M. Mack,et al.  Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Risk: Results From the PARTNER 2 Trial , 2019, Circulation.

[7]  J. Leipsic,et al.  Imaging for Predicting and Assessing Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch After Aortic Valve Replacement. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

[8]  D. Adams,et al.  5-Year Outcomes of Self-Expanding Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in High-Risk Patients. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[9]  R. Yeh,et al.  Trends in Isolated Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement According to Hospital-Based Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Volumes. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[10]  T. Bilfinger,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients With Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[11]  D. Malenka,et al.  Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: From the STS/ACC TVT Registry. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  W. Rottbauer,et al.  Significant Differences in Debris Captured by the Sentinel Dual-Filter Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Among Different Valve Types. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[13]  J. Piccini,et al.  Incidence, Management, and Associated Clinical Outcomes of New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: An Analysis From the STS/ACC TVT Registry. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[14]  D. Kolte,et al.  Length of Stay and Discharge Disposition After Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in the United States , 2018, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[15]  R. Kobza,et al.  Pacemaker implantation after transcatheter aortic valve: why is this still happening? , 2018, Journal of thoracic disease.

[16]  A. Yoganathan,et al.  Standardized Definition of Structural Valve Degeneration for Surgical and Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves. , 2018, Circulation.

[17]  M. Buchbinder,et al.  Effect of Mechanically Expanded vs Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement on Mortality and Major Adverse Clinical Events in High-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis: The REPRISE III Randomized Clinical Trial , 2018, JAMA.

[18]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. , 2017, European heart journal.

[19]  P. Pibarot,et al.  The Present and FutureReview Topic of the WeekAortic Bioprosthetic Valve Durability: Incidence, Mechanisms, Predictors, and Management of Surgical and Transcatheter Valve Degeneration , 2017 .

[20]  J. Harnek,et al.  Predictors of Paravalvular Regurgitation After Implantation of the Fully Repositionable and Retrievable Lotus Transcatheter Aortic Valve (from the REPRISE II Trial Extended Cohort). , 2017, The American journal of cardiology.

[21]  L. Fleisher,et al.  2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  A. Carro,et al.  Vascular approaches for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. , 2017, Journal of thoracic disease.

[23]  Andrew S. Mugglin,et al.  Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic‐Valve Replacement in Intermediate‐Risk Patients , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Incidence, risk factors, clinical impact, and management of bioprosthesis structural valve degeneration , 2017, Current opinion in cardiology.

[25]  R. Virmani,et al.  Protection Against Cerebral Embolism During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[26]  L. Søndergaard,et al.  Antithrombotic Management After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: More Questions Than Answers. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[27]  J. Leipsic,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus surgical valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients: a propensity score analysis , 2016, The Lancet.

[28]  M. Mack,et al.  Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Impact of Prosthesis‐Patient Mismatch on Left Ventricular Myocardial Mechanics After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , 2016, Journal of the American Heart Association.

[30]  M. Mack,et al.  A Randomized Evaluation of the SAPIEN XT Transcatheter Heart Valve System in Patients With Aortic Stenosis Who Are Not Candidates for Surgery. , 2015, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[31]  A. Colombo,et al.  5-Year Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With CoreValve Prosthesis. , 2015, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[32]  M. Mack,et al.  5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with standard treatment for patients with inoperable aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[33]  M. Mack,et al.  5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve replacement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): a randomised controlled trial , 2015, The Lancet.

[34]  J. Coselli,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement using a self-expanding bioprosthesis in patients with severe aortic stenosis at extreme risk for surgery. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[35]  Maurice Buchbinder,et al.  Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a self-expanding prosthesis. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[36]  L. Lipsitz,et al.  Functional Status and Quality of Life After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement , 2014, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[37]  P. Jüni,et al.  Clinical outcomes of patients with estimated low or intermediate surgical risk undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. , 2013, European heart journal.

[38]  F. Dagenais,et al.  Impact of residual regurgitation after aortic valve replacement. , 2012, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[39]  M. Deutsch,et al.  Improvements in transcatheter aortic valve implantation outcomes in lower surgical risk patients: a glimpse into the future. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[40]  Stuart J Pocock,et al.  Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[41]  B. Carabello Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery , 2011, Current cardiology reports.

[42]  M. Herregods,et al.  Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch Predicts Structural Valve Degeneration in Bioprosthetic Heart Valves , 2010, Circulation.

[43]  M. Forsting,et al.  Silent and Apparent Cerebral Ischemia After Percutaneous Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation: A Diffusion-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study , 2010, Circulation.

[44]  Jeroen J. Bax,et al.  The effects of right ventricular apical pacing on ventricular function and dyssynchrony implications for therapy. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[45]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Prosthesis-patient mismatch: definition, clinical impact, and prevention , 2005, Heart.

[46]  Assaf Bash,et al.  Percutaneous Transcatheter Implantation of an Aortic Valve Prosthesis for Calcific Aortic Stenosis: First Human Case Description , 2002, Circulation.

[47]  D. Shahian,et al.  The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database: 2018 Update on Outcomes and Quality. , 2018, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[48]  Sean M. O'Brien,et al.  Contemporary real-world outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in 141,905 low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk patients. , 2015, The Annals of thoracic surgery.