Literature DB >> 25990342

A prospective randomized evaluation of the TriGuard™ HDH embolic DEFLECTion device during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: results from the DEFLECT III trial.

Alexandra J Lansky1, Joachim Schofer2, Didier Tchetche3, Pieter Stella4, Cody G Pietras5, Helen Parise5, Kevin Abrams6, John K Forrest7, Michael Cleman7, Jochen Reinöhl8, Thomas Cuisset9, Daniel Blackman10, Gil Bolotin11, Stefan Spitzer12, Utz Kappert13, Martine Gilard14, Thomas Modine15, David Hildick-Smith16, Michael Haude16, Pauliina Margolis17, Adam M Brickman18, Szilard Voros19, Andreas Baumbach20.   

Abstract

AIMS: To evaluate the safety, efficacy, and performance of the TriGuard™ HDH Embolic Deflection Device (TriGuard) compared with no cerebral protection in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS AND
RESULTS: From February 2014 to March 2015, 85 subjects undergoing TAVI at 13 centres in Europe and Israel were randomized to TriGuard protection vs. no protection. Subjects underwent neurologic and cognitive evaluation at baseline, pre-discharge and 30 days; cerebral diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging was performed at 4 ± 2 days post-procedure and at 30 days. Technical success, which included complete 3-vessel cerebral coverage, was achieved in 88.9% (40/45) of cases. The primary in-hospital procedural safety endpoint (death, stroke, life-threatening or disabling bleeding, stage 2 or 3 acute kidney injury, or major vascular complications) occurred in 21.7% of TriGuard and 30.8% of control subjects (P = 0.34). In the Per Treatment population (subjects with complete three-vessel cerebral coverage), TriGuard use was associated with greater freedom from new ischaemic brain lesions (26.9 vs. 11.5%), fewer new neurologic deficits detected by the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (3.1 vs. 15.4%), improved Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores, better performance on a delayed memory task (P = 0.028) at discharge, and a >2-fold increase in recovery of normal cognitive function (MoCA score >26) at 30 days.
CONCLUSION: TriGuard cerebral protection during TAVI is safe and complete cerebral vessel coverage was achieved in 89% of subjects. In this exploratory study, subjects undergoing protected TAVI had more freedom from ischaemic brain lesions, fewer neurologic deficits, and improved cognitive function in some domains at discharge and 30 days compared with controls. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
© The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cerebral ischaemia; Diffusion-weighted imaging; Neuroprotection; Stroke prevention; Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Year:  2015        PMID: 25990342     DOI: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv191

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Heart J        ISSN: 0195-668X            Impact factor:   29.983


  41 in total

Review 1.  Cerebral embolic protection devices during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: clinical versus silent embolism.

Authors:  Luis Nombela-Franco; German Armijo; Gabriela Tirado-Conte
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Interventional treatment of the aortic valve : Current evidence.

Authors:  F Jansen; N Werner
Journal:  Herz       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 1.443

3.  Safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate risk patients sets the stage for contemporary trials in lower risk groups.

Authors:  Shikhar Agarwal; Samir Kapadia; E Murat Tuzcu; Amar Krishnaswamy
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2016-10

4.  Proposed Standardized Neurological Endpoints for Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: An Academic Research Consortium Initiative.

Authors:  Alexandra J Lansky; Steven R Messé; Adam M Brickman; Michael Dwyer; H Bart van der Worp; Ronald M Lazar; Cody G Pietras; Kevin J Abrams; Eugene McFadden; Nils H Petersen; Jeffrey Browndyke; Bernard Prendergast; Vivian G Ng; Donald E Cutlip; Samir Kapadia; Mitchell W Krucoff; Axel Linke; Claudia Scala Moy; Joachim Schofer; Gerrit-Anne van Es; Renu Virmani; Jeffrey Popma; Michael K Parides; Susheel Kodali; Michel Bilello; Robert Zivadinov; Joseph Akar; Karen L Furie; Daryl Gress; Szilard Voros; Jeffrey Moses; David Greer; John K Forrest; David Holmes; Arie P Kappetein; Michael Mack; Andreas Baumbach
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 29.983

5.  The current status of antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Authors:  Wieneke Vlastra; Jan J Piek; Ronak Delewi
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.895

6.  Understanding Neurologic Complications Following TAVR.

Authors:  Ghare Mohammed Imran; Lansky Alexandra
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2018-01

Review 7.  Cerebral protection devices for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Authors:  Hector Cubero-Gallego; Isaac Pascual; José Rozado; Ana Ayesta; Daniel Hernandez-Vaquero; Rocio Diaz; Alberto Alperi; Pablo Avanzas; Cesar Moris
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-10

Review 8.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Outcomes, Indications, Complications, and Innovations.

Authors:  Michael N Young; Ignacio Inglessis
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2017-09-22

9.  Need for Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: An Interventionalist's Perspective on Histopathology Findings.

Authors:  Herbert G Kroon; Nicolas Mda Van Mieghem
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2017-05

10.  A Glimpse into the Future: In 2020, Which Patients will Undergo TAVI or SAVR?

Authors:  Crochan J O'Sullivan; Peter Wenaweser
Journal:  Interv Cardiol       Date:  2017-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.