Jan M Griffin1, Barry A Borlaug2, Jan Komtebedde3, Sheldon E Litwin4, Sanjiv J Shah5, David M Kaye6, Elke Hoendermis7, Gerd Hasenfuß8, Finn Gustafsson9, Emil Wolsk9, Nir Uriel1, Daniel Burkhoff10. 1. New York Presbyterian Hospital New York NY USA. 2. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine Mayo Clinic Rochester MN USA. 3. Corvia Medical, Inc. Tewksbury MA USA. 4. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston South Carolina. Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center Charleston SC USA. 5. Division of Cardiology Northwestern University Chicago IL USA. 6. Department of Cardiology Alfred Hospital Melbourne Australia. 7. University Medical Center Groningen the Netherlands. 8. Georg-August Universität, Heart Centre Gottingen Germany. 9. Department of Cardiology Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen Denmark. 10. Cardiovascular Research Foundation New York NY USA.
Abstract
Approximately 50% of patients with heart failure have preserved ejection fraction. Although a wide variety of conditions cause or contribute to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, elevated left ventricular filling pressures, particularly during exercise, are common to all causes. Acute elevation in left-sided filling pressures promotes lung congestion and symptoms of dyspnea, while chronic elevations often lead to pulmonary vascular remodeling, right heart failure, and increased risk of mortality. Pharmacologic therapies, including neurohormonal modulation and drugs that modify the nitric oxide/cyclic GMP-protein kinase G pathway have thus far been limited in reducing symptoms or improving outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Hence, alternative means of reducing the detrimental rise in left-sided heart pressures are being explored. One proposed method of achieving this is to create an interatrial shunt, thus unloading the left heart at rest and during exercise. Currently available studies have shown 3- to 5-mm Hg decreases of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure during exercise despite increased workload. The mechanisms underlying the hemodynamic changes are just starting to be understood. In this review we summarize results of recent studies aimed at elucidating the potential mechanisms of improved hemodynamics during exercise tolerance following interatrial shunt implantation and the current interatrial shunt devices under investigation.
Approximately 50% of patients with heart failure have preserved ejection fraction. Although a wide variety of conditions cause or contribute to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, elevated left ventricular filling pressures, particularly during exercise, are common to all causes. Acute elevation in left-sided filling pressures promotes lung congestion and symptoms of dyspnea, while chronic elevations often lead to pulmonary vascular remodeling, right heart failure, and increased risk of mortality. Pharmacologic therapies, including neurohormonal modulation and drugs that modify the nitric oxide/cyclic GMP-protein kinase G pathway have thus far been limited in reducing symptoms or improving outcomes in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. Hence, alternative means of reducing the detrimental rise in left-sided heart pressures are being explored. One proposed method of achieving this is to create an interatrial shunt, thus unloading the left heart at rest and during exercise. Currently available studies have shown 3- to 5-mm Hg decreases of pulmonary capillary wedge pressure during exercise despite increased workload. The mechanisms underlying the hemodynamic changes are just starting to be understood. In this review we summarize results of recent studies aimed at elucidating the potential mechanisms of improved hemodynamics during exercise tolerance following interatrial shunt implantation and the current interatrial shunt devices under investigation.
6-minute walk testcentral venous pressureejection fractionheart failureheart failure with midrange ejection fractionheart failure with preserved ejection fractionheart failure with reduced ejection fractionheart rateinteratrial shunt deviceKansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaireleft atrialleft atrial pressureleft ventricularMeta‐Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart FailureMinnesota Living With Heart FailureNew York Heart Associationpulmonary arterypulmonary artery compliancepulmonary capillary wedge pressurepulmonary vascular resistanceratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flowright atrialright atrial pressureright ventricularpeak oxygen consumptionOver 50% of patients with heart failure (HF) have a left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (EF) >40%. HF with an EF of 40% to 50% has been termed HF with midrange EF (HFmrEF), and in the setting of EF >50% the condition is referred to as HF with preserved EF (HFpEF). These conditions are present in a heterogenous group of patients with a broad spectrum of underlying conditions and disorders. Nevertheless, patients with HFpEF/HFmrEF share common findings of elevated left atrial (LA) and LV filling pressures during exercise, which are associated with acute development of pulmonary congestion and considered to be largely responsible for the hallmark symptom of dyspnea on exertion.
,
Although theoretically attractive, therapies designed to attenuate neurohormonal activation have been met with limited success in this HF subgroup.
,
Therefore, attention has turned to other means of reducing the detrimental rise in left‐sided pressures during exercise. One method of achieving this goal is by creation of an interatrial shunt, which may be particularly effective at reducing pulmonary venous and LA pressures (LAPs) during exercise, even if patients are not overtly volume overloaded or have normal LAP at rest. Several recent clinical studies of interatrial shunt devices (IASDs) have shed new light on the pathophysiology of exercise intolerance and the mechanisms by which IASDs may provide benefit.In this review, we summarize factors contributing to effort intolerance in HFpEF/HFmrEF, the current IASDs under investigation, and the results of studies aimed at elucidating the potential mechanisms of improved exercise tolerance after IASD implantation.
Hemodynamics and Exercise Intolerance in HFmrEF or HFpEF
In healthy patients, cardiac output is augmented by increases in stroke volume, and heart rate (HR) without excessive increases in ventricular filling pressures.
,
Stroke volume has been shown to increase by ≈40% in healthy volunteers during exercise as a result of both an increase in LV end‐diastolic volume and decrease of LV end‐systolic volume, resulting in an ≈15% absolute increase in LVEF, partially resulting from a marked ≈60% reduction in systemic vascular resistance.
The increase in LV end‐diastolic volume requires a compliant ventricle and enhanced early diastolic relaxation to facilitate filling at higher HRs in order to avoid a significant rise in pressure. Diastolic relaxation and enhancements of atrial contractility may also be important for increasing LV end‐diastolic volume at high HRs. In healthy patients, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) at peak supine exercise is generally <20 mm Hg and LV end‐diastolic pressure is generally <25 mm Hg.
,
,In contrast, marked elevations of pulmonary arterial and venous pressures are observed during exercise in patients with HFpEF and these have been considered to significantly contribute to exercise intolerance.
Borlaug et al
showed in patients with HFpEF who had normal resting hemodynamics that increases of HR, decreases of systemic vascular resistance, and increases of cardiac output were all blunted compared with healthy controls during exercise. They also showed that, in comparison to control patients, PCWP and LV end‐diastolic pressure significantly increased in patients with HFpEF simply after raising their legs into the pedals of a supine bicycle and even more dramatically after 1 minute of initiating exercise. Additional increases were found at peak exercise (Figure 1), with PCWP increasing to >25 mm Hg in 88% of patients with HFpEF and on average reaching ≈35 mm Hg.
A more specific link between these increases of PCWP and exercise intolerance was recently demonstrated by its association with the development of pulmonary congestion as evidenced by B‐line artefacts seen on lung ultrasound.
Elevation in PCWP during exercise is associated with reductions in aerobic capacity in patients with HFpEF, even after accounting for other determinants such as cardiac output and peripheral oxygen extraction.
Figure 1
Changes in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) during exercise in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (red squares) vs controls (black circles).
Changes in pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) during exercise in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (red squares) vs controls (black circles).
Relationship between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP).
Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; blue dots), controls (open red circles), and age‐matched controls (red circles with black dots). A, Resting data. B, Data at peak exercise for patients with HFpEF and at submaximal exercise for controls. C, Data at peak exercise for both patients with HFpEF and controls. Bilateral refers to left‐ and right‐sided congestion, Left refers to left‐sided congestion only, and Right refers to right‐sided congestion only. Hypo indicates hypovolemic. Adapted from Wessler et al
.
Relationship between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP).
Patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF; blue dots), controls (open red circles), and age‐matched controls (red circles with black dots). A, Resting data. B, Data at peak exercise for patients with HFpEF and at submaximal exercise for controls. C, Data at peak exercise for both patients with HFpEF and controls. Bilateral refers to left‐ and right‐sided congestion, Left refers to left‐sided congestion only, and Right refers to right‐sided congestion only. Hypo indicates hypovolemic. Adapted from Wessler et al
.Finally, it is noted that atrial fibrillation, which is present in 30% to 50% of patients with HFpEF, has a significant adverse impact on exercise tolerance,
reducing the ability to increase stroke volume by almost 50% compared with patients in sinus rhythm. Aside from loss of atrial kick, 1 additional factor potentially contributing to elevations in PCWP are decreased atrial and pulmonary venous compliances in HFpEF.
Extracardiac Factors Contribute to Exercise Intolerance in HF
A multitude of comorbidities are associated with HFpEF, including advanced age, obesity, diabetes mellitus, kidney dysfunction, sleep‐disordered breathing, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anemia, skeletal muscle dysfunction, and chronotropic incompetence. It is therefore not surprising that noncardiac factors contribute to exercise intolerance.
It has been shown that peak oxygen consumption (VO2) in HFpEF is determined by both cardiac and extracardiac factors, each contributing about 50%.
. To explore this hypothesis in the context of data available from IASD‐treated patients, Wolsk et al
compared baseline characteristics, exercise performance, and exercise hemodynamics of patients with HFpEF/HFmrEF enrolled in 2 IASD studies (Corvia Medical, Inc.) to those of healthy controls in the HemReX trial.
Mean peak workload was markedly lower in the HF group (45 W versus 137 W, P<0.0001). Consistent with the studies noted above, there were significantly blunted increases in HR of patients with HF (29 versus 64 beats per min), cardiac index (1.5 versus 5.8 L/min per m2), and stroke volume index (4 versus 26 mL/m2) at peak exercise. At reasonably matched workloads, these and other characteristics differed between healthy controls and patients with HF (Figure 2). In multiregression analysis, higher PCWPs (47%) and reduced stroke volume (12%) accounted for 59% of the difference in exercise tolerance between groups using ergometer exercise in the supine position. Of all other parameters examined, higher body mass index contributed to 31% of the difference between the groups. Higher body mass index may be a marker for a multitude of other comorbidities (eg, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and sedentary lifestyle) that affect the ability of peripheral vascular, musculature, and metabolic machinery to accommodate increased workloads. In a separate study, exercise PCWP was found to inversely correlate with peak VO2 in patients with HFpEF, whether performed in the supine or upright position. Remarkably, exercise PCWP remained associated with peak VO2 even after accounting for other determinants of oxygen transport including cardiac output and arterial‐venous oxygen content difference,
but the latter variables were also strongly correlated with exercise capacity. Thus, extracardiac factors contribute to exercise intolerance, and it should be recognized that an IASD can only impact the hemodynamic components contributing to exercise intolerance.
Theoretical Foundation for Hemodynamic Effects of IASDs
Given the lack of evidence‐based medical therapies for the treatment of HFpEF/HFmrEF to date, efforts have turned to directly targeting exercise‐induced elevations of LAP and PCWP with IASDs. By creating a conduit in the interatrial septum, the pressure gradient between the left and right atrium should allow for decompression of the left heart when PCWP is high, as occurs especially during exercise. A detailed theoretical foundation to support this approach was first provided by a previously developed cardiovascular model used to simulate hemodynamic changes typically seen in patients with HFpEF during exercise.
A complete recounting of the equations underlying this simulation is beyond the scope of this review. In brief, the contractile properties of each heart chamber were modeled by time‐varying elastances and the systemic and pulmonary vascular beds were modeled by series of resistance and capacitance elements. Model parameters were adjusted to match, as closely as possible, the average hemodynamic data from 2 published studies involving 39 patients with HFpEF, both at rest and during exercise.
,
Then, an interatrial shunt was introduced into the model by allowing flow between the right and left atria as determined by the equation for flow through a thin orifice (which depends on the area of the shunt and the pressure gradient between the chambers); results were obtained while varying the shunt diameter between 0 to 12 mm to predict the potential effects on resting and exercise hemodynamics. The impact of the interatrial shunt on right atrial (RA) pressure (RAP) and LAP for this average patient are summarized in Figure 3. The pressure gradient between chambers decreases as the interatrial shunt diameter increases, and this effect plateaus at ≈10 mm. There was a relatively steep increase in the pressure gradient with smaller shunt sizes.
Figure 3
Hemodynamic effects of interatrial shunt device (IASD) based on cardiovascular simulation models.
There are currently 12 reports summarizing the results of clinical studies with 5 different devices (Table 1). The first and most widely studied IASD has been developed by Corvia Medical, Inc. This device, the Corvia Atrial Shunt, is composed of a nitinol frame with an 8‐mm central channel (Figure 4A). It is implanted percutaneously via the femoral vein under fluoroscopic and echocardiographic guidance. Deployment is by transseptal puncture into the left atrium and advancement of the system in the left atrium. The LA side is opened then the system is retracted against the septum with subsequent deployment of the RA side to secure the device in place.
Table 1
Summary of Completed Clinical Trials Performed With IASDs
Device
Study
Study Design (Key Inclusion Criteria)
No.
Author
Year Published
Time Frame
Main Efficacy Findings*
Corvia Atrial Shunt
Feasibility
Single arm (EF >45%, NYHA class II–IV, PCWP >15 mm Hg at rest or >25 mm Hg during exercise)
11
Søndergaard et al32
2014
1 mo
PCWP at rest† ↓5 mm Hg
Malek et al33
2015
12 mo
NYHA class ↓0.5; MLWHF ↓29; 6MWT ↑32 m
REDUCE LAP‐HF34
Single arm
(EF >40%, NYHA II–IV, PCWP >15 mm Hg at rest or >25 mm Hg during exercise)
64
Hasenfuß et al35
2016
6 mo
Exercise PCWP*, † ↓3 mm Hg
Qp:Qs 1.27
Peak exercise PCWP/W per kg 15 mm Hg/W per kg
Kaye et al36
2016
12 mo
NYHA median by 1 class; 6MWT ↑32 m; MLWHF questionnaire ↓15; patency confirmed in 98.5%
Kaye et al40
2018
36 mo
Observed mortality was 3.4/100 pt‐y; lower than 10.2/100 pt‐y predicted by baseline MAGGIC score (P=0.02)
REDUCE LAP‐HF I mechanistic study38
Randomized, sham‐controlled, double‐blinded (NYHA III/IV, EF ≥40%, exercise PCWP ≥15 mm Hg)
44
Feldman et al37
2018
1 mo
PCWP at peak exercise† ↓3 mm Hg
Peak exercise PCWP/W per kg 16 mm Hg/W per kg
Shah et al39
2018
12 mo
Yearly HFH rate ↓67% (P=0.06); NYHA median by 1 class; 6MWT no difference; KCCQ no difference. 100% shunt patency
V‐Wave Gen1
Special access pilot (Canada)
Single arm (NYHA III/IV, EF ≤40%, PCWP ≥15 mm Hg)
10
Del Trigo et al47
2016
3 mo
N=8/9 showed improved NYHA; Duke activity status 11; KCCQ 35; 6MWT 74 m; PCWP ↓6 mm Hg
Pilot
Single arm (NYHA III/IV; EF >15%; ≥1 HFHs within 1 y)
38
Rodes‐Cabau et al48
2018
12 mo
NYHA class I or II in 62%; KCCQ 73% improved ≥5‐point improvement; 6MWT ↑28 m; no significant change in PCWP, RAP, or PAP; Qp:Qs 1.1; 14% of valves occluded and 36% stenotic by 12 mo; better hemodynamic responses in patients with patent shunt
V‐Wave
Gen2
Pilot
Single arm (NYHA III or IV)
6
Guimaraes et al49
2020
12 mo
NYHA class I or II in 83%; Duke activity status ↑15; KCCQ ↑32; 6MWT ↑64 m; Qp:Qs 1.16.
Occlutech AFR
AFR‐PRELIEVE
Single arm (NYHA III or IV; EF ≥15%)
36
Paitazoglou et al51
2019
3 mo
In HFrEF/HFpEF: NYHA class ‐1.4/‐1.1; KCCQ ↑16/↑20; 6MWT 30/↑26 m; PCWP ↓2/↓5 mm Hg; Qp:Qs 1.3/1.1
NoYa
Pilot
Single arm (EF >35%)
10
Lotan53
2019
1–3 mo
Shunt diameter 3‐4 mm; 6MWT 56 m; BNP 1878 pg/mL
6MWT indicates 6‐minute walk test; AFR, atrial flow regulator; BNP, B‐type natriuretic peptide; EF, ejection fraction; HFH, heart failure hospitalization; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IASD, interatrial shunt device; KCCQ, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; MAGGIC, Meta‐Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure; MLWHF, Minnesota Living With Heart Failure; NYHA, New York Heart Association; PAP, pulmonary artery pressure; PCWP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; PRELIEVE, Pilot Study to Assess Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Atrial Flow Regulator (AFR) in Heart Failure Patients; REDUCE LAP‐HF, Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure; Qp:Qs, ratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flow; RAP, right atrial pressure; and W, watts.
For single‐arm studies, values are changes relative to patients’ baseline values; for randomized studies, changes are relative to the control group.
Indicates primary end point when one was declared prospectively.
Figure 4
Interatrial shunt devices (IASDs).
A, IASD II system (Corvia Medical, Inc.); B, V‐Wave device (V‐Wave Ltd.); C, Atrial flow regulator (AFR) Occlutech; D, Edwards Lifesciences Corporation transcatheter atrial shunt system; and E, NoYA adjustable interatrial shunt system (NoYA Global). LA indicates left atrial; and RA, right atrial.
Interatrial shunt devices (IASDs).
A, IASD II system (Corvia Medical, Inc.); B, V‐Wave device (V‐Wave Ltd.); C, Atrial flow regulator (AFR) Occlutech; D, Edwards Lifesciences Corporation transcatheter atrial shunt system; and E, NoYA adjustable interatrial shunt system (NoYA Global). LA indicates left atrial; and RA, right atrial.In an initial safety and feasibility study of the Corvia Atrial Shunt in an open‐label pilot study of patients with an EF >45%, Søndergaard et al
showed that PCWP decreased from a mean baseline (rest) value of 19 to 14 mm Hg in 10 of the 11 patients at 30 days following implantation. Compared with baseline preimplantation values, 30‐meter improvements in median 6‐minute walk test (6MWT) and a 29‐point improvement in median Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) questionnaire score were reported at 1‐year of follow‐up.That pilot study with the Corvia Atrial Shunt was followed by the REDUCE LAP‐HF (Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure) trial,
an open‐label study in which 64 patients with EF ≥40% received an IASD following exercise hemodynamic evaluation. Qp:Qs at rest averaged 1.27 at the 6‐month follow‐up. Compared with baseline, at peak exercise 6 months following implantation, there was an average ≈3 mm Hg reduction in PCWP (from 35 to 31 mm Hg) and a 2‐mm Hg increase in RAP (from 9 to 11 mm Hg), resulting in an average 5‐mm Hg reduction in the average gradient between PCWP to RAP (from 17 to 12 mm Hg).Concomitantly, patients exercised ≈1 minute more, achieving 6.5 W more at 6 months compared with baseline (discussed further below). At 1 year, PCWP reductions and Qp:Qs values were sustained, and RAP was stable compared with that at 6 months.Wessler et al
stratified these patients into 4 groups based on values of CVP and PCWP (Figure 5): both parameters normal (euvolemic); elevated CVP/normal PCWP (right‐sided congestion); normal CVP/elevated PCWP (left‐sided congestion); and elevated CVP and PCWP (bilateral congestion). At baseline (pre‐IASD) during exercise, a majority of patients (59%) fell into the elevated CVP/PCWP group and 33% into the elevated PCWP/normal CVP group, while only 8% had normal CVP and PCWP (Figure 5A). At 6 months post‐lASD during exercise (Figure 5B), 17% of patients were in the normal hemodynamic group and only 22% were in the elevated PCWP/normal CVP group, with similar percentages of patients in the other groups. Overall, the relationship between PCWP and CVP shifted downward by ≈4 mm Hg. It was also demonstrated that the larger the pressure gradient between the left and right atria at baseline, the greater the shunt flow, which correlated with a greater reduction in peak exercise PCWP (Figure 6A).
Corresponding to these hemodynamic changes, peak exercise tolerance increased at 6 months post‐IASD, from 42.5 W to 49.0 W (P=0.002), exercise duration increased by 12.5% from 7.3 to 8.2 minutes (P=0.03), and work‐normalized PCWP decreased significantly from 89.1 to 70.5 mm Hg/W per kg. Importantly, the study showed that systemic blood flow quantified by Fick principle was not decreased at rest (4.8 versus 5.1 L/min). Finally, there were statistically significant improvements at 6 and 12 months following IASD implantation in New York Heart Association (NYHA) class (from a median NYHA class III at baseline to II at 6 and 12 months), quality of life (MLWHF score decreased by 13 points at 6 months and 15 points at 12 months), and 6MWT (increasing by 32 meters at both 6 and 12 months).
,
An independent echocardiography core laboratory documented patency at 1 year in all but 1 patient and at 1 year and beyond in several patients.
Figure 5
Relationship between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction at peak exercise (A) at baseline and (B) at 6 months following interatrial shunt device implantation.
Relationship between central venous pressure (CVP) and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction at peak exercise (A) at baseline and (B) at 6 months following interatrial shunt device implantation.
Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) at different stages of exercise in (A) patients who underwent sham procedure (control group) and (B) patients who received an interatrial shunt device (IASD).
Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) at different stages of exercise in (A) patients who underwent sham procedure (control group) and (B) patients who received an interatrial shunt device (IASD).
Pulmonary Factors Contributing To Improved Exercise Tolerance by an IASD
The studies noted above have shown improvement in exercise capacity after implantation of the Corvia Atrial Shunt associated with reductions in PCWP and workload‐corrected PCWP. Additional analyses of the data from these studies have explored correlations between hemodynamic effects and other factors potentially influencing functional capacity and quality of life. It has previously been shown that in patients with HFpEF, but not controls, there is an inverse relationship between PA oxygen content and PVR, suggesting a possible role for hypoxic vasoconstriction as a contributor to pulmonary hypertension in this cohort. Recently, Obokata et al
hypothesized that the presence of the IASD may impact PA function at rest and during exercise by increasing the delivery of more richly oxygenated blood to the lungs without impacting systemic blood flow or oxygen delivery. Using data from the REDUCE LAP‐HF and REDUCE LAP‐HF I studies they found, before IASD implantation, blunted exercise‐induced reductions in PVR and effective pulmonary arterial elastance in addition to reduced pulmonary arterial compliance (PAC), in keeping with findings from prior studies.
,After implantation of the IASD and establishment of an average Qp:Qs of 1.3, there were reductions in PCWP and the PCWP‐RAP gradient and a small increase in RAP. Notably, there was a 17% reduction in PVR, a 12% reduction in effective pulmonary arterial elastance, and a 24% increase in PAC (Figure 8A). Both the changes in PA elastance and compliance were directly correlated with the increase in pulmonary flow. Furthermore, patients who had a higher PA oxygen content had a lower PVR (Figure 8B). Patients whose PAC increased following IASD had better improvements in exercise duration compared with those in whom PAC did not increase. When exercise hemodynamics were evaluated post‐IASD, a 14% increase in exercise duration (7.4 to 8.4 minutes, P=0.006) and 12% increase in workload (43 to 48 W, P=0.003) were achieved. Importantly, despite the left‐to‐right shunt during exercise, systemic blood flow and oxygen delivery was higher when compared with baseline with septum intact. Similar to at rest, pulmonary compliance was higher and effective pulmonary arterial elastance was lower during exercise; although PVR trended lower by the same percentage, this was not statistically significant.
Figure 8
Impact of interatrial shunt on pulmonary vascular properties.
Characteristics of Patients Who May Benefit From an IASD
In view of the limited clinical outcome data, criteria for optimal patient selection for IASD therapy are unknown. Available data have thus far shown only weak correlations between hemodynamic effects and changes in exercise tolerance.
Nevertheless, hemodynamic factors would appear to be at the foundation of any clinical effects that can be provided by IASDs. Specifically, a left‐to‐right pressure gradient is required for the device to exert its hemodynamic effects. Accordingly, patients with a small gradient may benefit less.
Indeed, it has been shown that the greater the pressure gradient during exercise at baseline the greater the decrease in PCWP during exercise following IASD implantation (Figure 6B). Accordingly, this leads to the hypothesis that requiring a certain pressure gradient may increase the likelihood of the clinical effectiveness of the IASD.Regarding other factors investigated thus far, data indicate that patients with HFmrEF (40 to 49%) appear to benefit similarly to those with HFpEF (>50%), at least as it relates to the hemodynamic effects of the Corvia Atrial Shyunt.
Other ongoing studies noted below are including patients with reduced LV function (NCT03499236), and further study is required to evaluate the potential role in patients with valvular heart disease.Several other factors that may identify ideal candidates for IASD therapy have not yet been investigated. First, since IASDs increase right‐sided blood flow, patients with existing RV dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension (PVR >4 Wood units) have thus far been excluded from Corvia Atrial Shunt studies. In addition, patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy and restrictive and amyloid cardiomyopathies have also not been studied.
Addressing Potential Long‐Term Concerns
There are several theoretical safety concerns that need to be considered following IASD implantation. First, the development of right HF as a result of left‐to‐right shunting is a consideration. While small increases in RV size have been noted at 6 months, without further increase at 1 year, there has not been any indication of deterioration of RV function or clinical signs of right HF in Corvia Atrial Shunt studies.
Relevant to this concern, congenital heart disease guidelines suggest that a small shunt is not typically associated with deterioration of RV function and need only be closed in the presence of impaired functional capacity or RA and/or RV enlargement with a Qp:Qs >1.5;
the Corvia Atrial Shunt typically has an average clinically assessed Qp:Qs of ≈1.3.Second, resting CVP tends to increase, albeit minimally (≈1 to 2 mm Hg), 6 months post‐IASD implantation,
without further increase at 1 year. However, the long‐term effects on liver and renal function should be evaluated.Third, there was initial concern that there could be a significant reduction in systemic blood flow and delivery of oxygen following IASD implantation. However, as noted above, this is not the case as has been shown by measurements obtained 1, 6, and 12 months following implantation in Corvia studies.
,
,
We have speculated that rapid reflex‐mediated homeostatic mechanisms adjust systemic properties such that systemic flow is maintained. Acute reductions in PVR via the mechanisms described above may also be contributory.Last, peripheral venous emboli may cross to the left side in the presence of an atrial septal defect. As such, creation of a shunt may increase the risk of paradoxical stroke, which is the cause of ischemic stroke in 25% to 40% of cases. One study showed that 14% of patients who underwent atrial septal defect closure presented with a paradoxical embolus and those patients tended to have a mean left‐to‐right shunt (Qp:Qs) of 1.4.
Nevertheless, despite simulation results and echocardiographic Doppler measurements showing continuous left‐to‐right shunting at rest and during exercise, right‐to‐left flow could be expected during certain maneuvers, such as Valsalva strain. Accordingly, longer‐term follow‐up in a larger number of patients is required to allay concerns regarding the risk of stroke.
Other IASD Devices
The data summarized above were obtained from studies of the Corvia Atrial Shunt. There are several other interatrial shunts currently under development and investigation. The V‐Wave device (V‐Wave Ltd.) initially introduced an hourglass‐shaped nitinol frame that is partially covered with expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (Figure 3B). The inner diameter of this device is 5 mm. The first generation of the device contained a porcine trileaflet pericardial valve, designed to avoid flow reversal through the shunt.
Following a preclinical study,
a first‐in‐human study reported on 38 patients with successful implantation of the device (30 with HFrEF and 8 with HFpEF). At 3 and 12 months of follow‐up there were improvements in NYHA class, quality of life, and 6MWT distance. However, at 12 months, 5 of 36 (14%) shunts occluded and 13 (36%) were stenotic. Patients with patent shunts showed encouraging clinical results in addition to a reduction in PCWP (23.3 to 18 mm Hg, P=0.011).
,
A second‐generation device has been developed by removing the 1‐way bioprosthetic valve to overcome pannus thickening, which was reportedly associated with device occlusion. This has been shown to remain patent at 6 months of follow‐up.
A 400‐patient randomized trial, the RELIEVE‐HF (Reducing Lung Congestion Symptoms in Advanced Heart Failure, NCT03499236), is currently enrolling in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Israel. Notably, this trial includes patients with HF across the EF spectrum (including HFrEF) and does not require invasive hemodynamic exercise testing for enrollment into the trial.Another device, the Atrial Flow Regulator has been developed by Occlutech. Composed of a nitinol mesh, it has 2 flat discs connected by a 1‐ to 2‐mm neck with a central fenestration allowing communication between the atria. It is produced in 3 different fenestration sizes (6, 8, and 10 mm). This has been implanted in 12 patients with severe pulmonary arterial hypertension, all of whom had relief of syncope and improvement in 6MWT distance in addition to increase in cardiac index (2.36 to 2.89 L/min per m2) and systemic oxygen transport (367.5 to 428.0 mL/min per m2).
An open‐label nonrandomized clinical trial (PRELIEVE [Pilot Study to Assess Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Atrial Flow Regulator (AFR) in Heart FailurePatients], NCT03030274) is currently recruiting patients with symptomatic HFpEF or HFrEF and an HF admission in the past 12 months. A recent report of results from 36 patients (16 with EF <40% and 20 with EF ≥40%) followed for 3 months showed statistically nonsignificant 1‐ to 2‐mm Hg increases in RAP and 2‐ to 5‐mm Hg decreases in PCWP; resting cardiac output did not change.
Statistically nonsignificant improvements in NYHA, quality of life, and 6MWT have also been reported.Another device currently under study is the coronary sinus to LA shunt (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation, Figure 3D). The coronary sinus is accessed via the right internal jugular vein; a puncture is then created between the coronary sinus and the left atrium with subsequent deployment of the shunt device. The shunt flow is alongside the natural coronary sinus flow, which preserves the interatrial septum and coronary sinus for the possibility of future interventions. In a first‐in‐human study, 11 patients with NYHA III or IV despite maximal tolerated HF therapy were included.
At rest, PCWP was reported to decrease by 10 mm Hg at 30‐day follow‐up from a baseline value of 21 mm Hg, with no significant change in RAP. Improvements in NYHA functional class were also reported.The NoYA Global adjustable shunting system (Figure 4E) differs from the devices described above in that it consists of a radioablation catheter to create a persistent hole in the interatrial septum and has no device implant.
The diameter of the hole can, in principle, be adjusted between 4 and 12 mm. The catheter is removed after the procedure so that after creation of the atrial septal defect, no foreign body remains and there is no requirement for anticoagulation after the procedure. A pilot study including 10 patients reported orifice sizes of 5 mm at baseline, which decreased to 4 mm by 30‐day follow‐up, and neither LAP (21.9 versus 20.3, P=0.36) nor RAP (11.9 versus 13.0, P=0.13) changed significantly. In contrast, N‐terminal pro‐B‐type natriuretic peptide and 6MWT distance were each reported to improve significantly.Finally, Alleviant Medical, Inc. is currently developing a transcatheter system that creates a left‐to‐right interatrial shunt without a permanent implant by cutting and removing septal tissue. The technology has been evaluated in animal studies and may enter human clinical trials in 2020.
Summary and Future Directions
Clinical studies support the notion that the abnormal, rapid, and marked increases of PCWP experienced by patients with HF is a therapeutic target for improving their exercise tolerance, quality of life, and clinical outcomes. Significant effort is being invested into the development and clinical evaluation of IASDs for this purpose. Current understanding of the effects of IASDs and the main studies that have contributed to this understanding are summarized in Figure 9. Much has already been learned regarding the hemodynamic effects of the 8‐mm Corvia Atrial Shunt and the relationship between hemodynamics and exercise tolerance. PCWP reductions amounting to ≈4 mm Hg during exercise have been identified in 2 Corvia Atrial Shunt clinical trials that employed a blinded hemodynamic core laboratory. These PCWP reductions have been associated with increases in exercise duration and Watts, which emphasizes the need to account for workload when interpreting the findings and comparing different IASDs.
The finding of beneficial effects on the pulmonary vasculature postulated to be mediated by increased flow and oxygen tension of blood perfusing the lung represents an additional effect that may also contribute to improved exercise tolerance and clinical outcomes. Additional unforeseen secondary factors may be identified (be they beneficial or detrimental) as more information is collected. Although currently limited in number of patients and duration of follow‐up, the midterm safety profile of IASDs appears to be acceptable.
Figure 9
Summary of the current understanding of the mechanisms of interatrial shunts and the studies that generated data to support these findings.AFR indicates atrial flow regulator; HF, heart failure; LA, left atrial; O2, oxygen; PA, pulmonary artery; PCWP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; PVR, pulmonary vascular resistance; REDUCE LAP‐HF, Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure; Qp:Qs, ratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flow; RAP, right atrial; and RELIEVE‐HF, Reducing Lung Congestion Symptoms in Advanced Heart Failure. Refer to Table 1 for study details and references.
Summary of the current understanding of the mechanisms of interatrial shunts and the studies that generated data to support these findings.AFR indicates atrial flow regulator; HF, heart failure; LA, left atrial; O2, oxygen; PA, pulmonary artery; PCWP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; PVR, pulmonary vascular resistance; REDUCE LAP‐HF, Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure; Qp:Qs, ratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flow; RAP, right atrial; and RELIEVE‐HF, Reducing Lung Congestion Symptoms in Advanced Heart Failure. Refer to Table 1 for study details and references.Summary of Completed Clinical Trials Performed With IASDsSingle arm(EF >40%, NYHA II–IV, PCWP >15 mm Hg at rest or >25 mm Hg during exercise)Exercise PCWP*,
↓3 mm HgQp:Qs 1.27Peak exercise PCWP/W per kg 15 mm Hg/W per kgPCWP at peak exercise
↓3 mm HgPeak exercise PCWP/W per kg 16 mm Hg/W per kgV‐WaveGen26MWT indicates 6‐minute walk test; AFR, atrial flow regulator; BNP, B‐type natriuretic peptide; EF, ejection fraction; HFH, heart failure hospitalization; HFpEF, heart failure with preserved ejection fraction; HFrEF, heart failure with reduced ejection fraction; IASD, interatrial shunt device; KCCQ, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire; MAGGIC, Meta‐Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure; MLWHF, Minnesota Living With Heart Failure; NYHA, New York Heart Association; PAP, pulmonary artery pressure; PCWP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; PRELIEVE, Pilot Study to Assess Safety and Efficacy of a Novel Atrial Flow Regulator (AFR) in Heart FailurePatients; REDUCE LAP‐HF, Reduce Elevated Left Atrial Pressure in Patients With Heart Failure; Qp:Qs, ratio of pulmonary to systemic blood flow; RAP, right atrial pressure; and W, watts.For single‐arm studies, values are changes relative to patients’ baseline values; for randomized studies, changes are relative to the control group.Indicates primary end point when one was declared prospectively.Several important questions remain to be addressed, including:Is the PCWP‐RAP pressure gradient an important determinant of IASD clinical effectiveness?Are results of invasive exercise hemodynamics at baseline beneficial in selecting patients more likely to respond to IASDs?Should the size of the IASD be optimized for individual patients, and, if so, what factors are critical for such a determination?Are there upper or lower bounds of RVEF and LVEF where this form of therapy provides clinical benefits?Does atrial fibrillation or LA or RA myopathy impact the effectiveness of IASDs?Aside from hemodynamic factors, what other clinical characteristics are important for identifying patients most likely to benefit from IASDs?Will IASDs serve as a viable treatment option for patients with HFrEF or valvular heart disease?Will any safety issues arise during long‐term follow‐up (eg, impact on RV and RA size and function, impact on pulmonary vasculature, right‐to‐left shunting with paradoxical stroke,and atrial arrhythmias)?
Conclusions
Several randomized pivotal clinical outcome studies are currently underway that will provide critical information regarding several of these questions. Primarily, however, such studies aim to generate definitive proof that IASDs provide meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes and quality of life.
Sources of Funding
Studies reported on in this article have been supported by Corvia Medical, Inc.
Disclosures
D.B. reports hemodynamic core laboratory fees from Corvia Medical, Inc. J.K. is an employee of Corvia Medical. Inc. F.G. reports consulting fees from Carmat, Abbott, Pfizer, and Boehringer‐Ingelheim, and speakers’ fees from Astra‐Zeneca, Orion Pharma. and Novartis. S.J.S. reports receiving grants from the National Institutes of Health (R01 HL140731, R01 HL120728, R01 HL107577, and R01 HL149423), the American Heart Association (#16SFRN28780016 and #15CVGPSD27260148), Actelion, AstraZeneca, Corvia, and Novartis; and has received consulting fees from Actelion, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer‐Ingelheim, Cardiora, Eisai, Ionis, Ironwood, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, and United Therapeutics. The remaining authors have no disclosures to report.
Authors: Josep Rodés-Cabau; Mathieu Bernier; Ignacio J Amat-Santos; Tuvia Ben Gal; Luis Nombela-Franco; Bruno García Del Blanco; Arthur Kerner; Sebastien Bergeron; Maria Del Trigo; Philippe Pibarot; Sergio Shkurovich; Neal Eigler; William T Abraham Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2018-11-01 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Jeffrey Wessler; David Kaye; Finn Gustafsson; Mark C Petrie; Gerd Hasenfuβ; Carolyn S P Lam; Barry A Borlaug; Jan Komtebedde; Ted Feldman; Sanjiv J Shah; Daniel Burkhoff Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Wilfried Mullens; Zuheir Abrahams; Gary S Francis; George Sokos; David O Taylor; Randall C Starling; James B Young; W H Wilson Tang Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-02-17 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Sanjiv J Shah; Ted Feldman; Mark J Ricciardi; Rami Kahwash; Scott Lilly; Sheldon Litwin; Chris D Nielsen; Pim van der Harst; Elke Hoendermis; Martin Penicka; Jozef Bartunek; Peter S Fail; David M Kaye; Anthony Walton; Mark C Petrie; Niki Walker; Anupam Basuray; Steven Yakubov; Scott L Hummel; Stanley Chetcuti; Rhondalyn Forde-McLean; Howard C Herrmann; Daniel Burkhoff; Joseph M Massaro; John G F Cleland; Laura Mauri Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Thomas C Hanff; David M Kaye; Christopher S Hayward; Martijn C Post; Filip Malek; Gerd Hasenfuβ; Finn Gustafsson; Daniel Burkhoff; Sanjiv J Shah; Sheldon E Litwin; Rami Kahwash; Scott L Hummel; Barry A Borlaug; Scott D Solomon; Carolyn S P Lam; Jan Komtebedde; Frank E Silvestry Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Barry A Borlaug; John Blair; Martin W Bergmann; Heiko Bugger; Dan Burkhoff; Leonhard Bruch; David S Celermajer; Brian Claggett; John G F Cleland; Donald E Cutlip; Ira Dauber; Jean-Christophe Eicher; Qi Gao; Thomas M Gorter; Finn Gustafsson; Chris Hayward; Jan van der Heyden; Gerd Hasenfuß; Scott L Hummel; David M Kaye; Jan Komtebedde; Joseph M Massaro; Jeremy A Mazurek; Scott McKenzie; Shamir R Mehta; Mark C Petrie; Marco C Post; Ajith Nair; Andreas Rieth; Frank E Silvestry; Scott D Solomon; Jean-Noël Trochu; Dirk J Van Veldhuisen; Ralf Westenfeld; Martin B Leon; Sanjiv J Shah Journal: Circulation Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 39.918
Authors: Shelby D Reed; Jui-Chen Yang; Timothy Rickert; F Reed Johnson; Juan Marcos Gonzalez; Robert J Mentz; Mitchell W Krucoff; Sreekanth Vemulapalli; Philip B Adamson; David J Gebben; Liliana Rincon-Gonzalez; Anindita Saha; Daniel Schaber; Kenneth M Stein; Michelle E Tarver; Dean Bruhn-Ding Journal: Circ Heart Fail Date: 2021-12-23 Impact factor: 8.790
Authors: Marcus Granegger; Christoph Gross; David Siemer; Andreas Escher; Sigrid Sandner; Martin Schweiger; Günther Laufer; Daniel Zimpfer Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-04-06 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Jan M Griffin; Barry A Borlaug; Jan Komtebedde; Sheldon E Litwin; Sanjiv J Shah; David M Kaye; Elke Hoendermis; Gerd Hasenfuß; Finn Gustafsson; Emil Wolsk; Nir Uriel; Daniel Burkhoff Journal: J Am Heart Assoc Date: 2020-08-15 Impact factor: 5.501