Safety and performance of the Vienna self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve system: 6-month results of the VIVA first-in-human feasibility study

The novel Vienna TAVI system is repositionable and retrievable, already pre-mounted on the delivery system, eliminating the need for assembly and crimping of the device prior to valve implantation.The purpose of this first-in-human feasibility study was to determine the safety, feasibility, clinical and hemodynamic performance of the Vienna TAVI system at 6-month follow-up. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04861805).This is a prospective, non-randomized, single-arm, single-center, first-stage FIH feasibility study, which is followed by a second-stage pivotal, multicenter, multinational study in symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (SAS). The first-stage FIH study evaluated the safety and feasibility, clinical and hemodynamic performance of the device in 10 patients with SAS based on recommendations by the VARC-2.All patients were alive at 3-month follow-up. 1 non-cardiovascular mortality was reported 5 months after implantation. There were no new cerebrovascular events, life-threatening bleeding or conduction disturbances observed at 6-month follow-up. The mean AV gradient significantly decreased from 48.7 ± 10.8 to 7.32 ± 2.0 mmHg and mean AVA increased from 0.75 ± 0.18 to 2.16 ± 0.42 cm2 (p < 0.00001). There was no incidence of moderate or severe total AR observed. In the QoL questionnaires, the patients reported a significant improvement from the baseline 12-KCCQ mean score 58 ± 15 to 76 ± 20. NYHA functional class improved in two patients, remained unchanged in one patient. There was an increase in mean 6-min-walk distance from baseline 285 ± 97 to 347 ± 57 m.This study demonstrates that using Vienna TAVI system has favourable and sustained 6-month safety and performance outcomes in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis.

[1]  M. Enriquez-Sarano,et al.  Deformation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Prostheses: Implications for Hypoattenuating Leaflet Thickening and Clinical Outcomes , 2022, Circulation.

[2]  J. Rodés‐Cabau,et al.  Evolving Indications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement—Where Are We Now, and Where Are We Going , 2022, Journal of clinical medicine.

[3]  C. Di Mario,et al.  Advancements in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Focused Update , 2021, Medicina.

[4]  D. Shahian,et al.  STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database: 2021 Update on Outcomes, Quality, and Research. , 2021, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[5]  L. Roever,et al.  Asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis, bicuspid aortic valves and moderate aortic stenosis in heart failure: new indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. , 2020, Trends in cardiovascular medicine.

[6]  R. Geertsma,et al.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement: clinical safety and performance data , 2019, Expert review of medical devices.

[7]  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.

[8]  M. Jinzaki,et al.  Early and Late Leaflet Thrombosis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Multicenter Initiative From the OCEAN-TAVI Registry , 2019, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[9]  P. Leprince,et al.  Impact of Direct Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Without Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty on Procedural and Clinical Outcomes: Insights From the FRANCE TAVI Registry. , 2018, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[10]  J. Tijssen,et al.  Guideline-defined futility or patient-reported outcomes to assess treatment success after TAVI: what to use? Results from a prospective cohort study with long-term follow-up , 2018, Open Heart.

[11]  V. Falk,et al.  Safety and efficacy of a repositionable and fully retrievable aortic valve used in routine clinical practice: the RESPOND Study , 2017, European heart journal.

[12]  S. Windecker,et al.  Clinical Outcomes With a Repositionable Self-Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Prosthesis: The International FORWARD Study. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[13]  Wen Cheng,et al.  Subclinical leaflet thrombosis in surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves: an observational study , 2017, The Lancet.

[14]  R. Bonow,et al.  Quality of Life After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. , 2017, JAMA cardiology.

[15]  D. Berman,et al.  Systematic CT Methodology for the Evaluation of Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular imaging.

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

[17]  J. Spertus,et al.  Development and Validation of a Short Version of the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire , 2015, Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes.

[18]  E. Tuzcu,et al.  Influence of transcatheter aortic valve replacement strategy and valve design on stroke after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a meta-analysis and systematic review of literature. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  O. Alfieri,et al.  New devices for TAVI: technologies and initial clinical experiences , 2014, Nature Reviews Cardiology.

[20]  Robert E. Michler,et al.  A Review of Most Relevant Complications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation , 2013, ISRN cardiology.

[21]  Susheel Kodali,et al.  Clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement using valve academic research consortium definitions: a weighted meta-analysis of 3,519 patients from 16 studies. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[22]  Scott Lim,et al.  Two-year outcomes after transcatheter or surgical aortic-valve replacement. , 2012, The New England journal of medicine.

[23]  Ronen Gurvitch,et al.  Aortic annulus diameter determination by multidetector computed tomography: reproducibility, applicability, and implications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. , 2011, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

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

[25]  J. Casillas,et al.  DETERMINING THE MINIMAL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT 1 DIFFERENCE FOR THE SIX-MINUTE WALK TEST AND THE 2002 METER FAST WALK TEST DURING CARDIAC REHABILITATION 3 PROGRAM IN CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE PATIENTS AFTER 4 ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME , 2017 .

[26]  Nico Mollet,et al.  Geometry and degree of apposition of the CoreValve ReValving system with multislice computed tomography after implantation in patients with aortic stenosis. , 2009, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[27]  Assaf Bash,et al.  Early experience with percutaneous transcatheter implantation of heart valve prosthesis for the treatment of end-stage inoperable patients with calcific aortic stenosis. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[28]  M. Mack,et al.  Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. , 2012, European heart journal.