Julien Ternacle1,2,3, Leonardo Guimaraes1, Flavien Vincent1,4, Nancy Côté1, Mélanie Côté1, Dominique Lachance1, Marie-Annick Clavel1, Amr E Abbas5,6, Philippe Pibarot1, Josep Rodés-Cabau1. 1. Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec- Université Laval/Québec Heart and Lung Institute, Laval University, 2725 Chemin Sainte-Foy, Québec city, Québec G1V-4G5, Canada. 2. Cardiology Department, Expert Valve Center, Henri Mondor ho spital, 51 avenue du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, 94000, Créteil, France. 3. INSERM Unit U955, Team 8, Paris-Est Creteil University, Val-de-Marne, 8 rue du Général Sarrail, 94010, Créteil, France. 4. Département de cardiologie, CHU de Lille, Institut Cœur Poumon, Université de Lille, INSERM U1011, Institut Pasteur de Lille, EGID, Boulevard du Professeur Jules Leclercq, 59000 Lille,, France. 5. Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine, Auburn Hills, 586 Pioneer Dr, Rochester, MI 48309, USA. 6. Beaumont Health, 3601 W 13 Mile Rd, Royal Oak, MI 48073, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: The objective was to compare the incidence and impact on outcomes of measured (PPMM) vs. predicted (PPMP) prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutives patients who underwent TAVR between 2007 and 2018 were included. Effective orifice area (EOA) was measured by Doppler-echocardiography using the continuity equation and predicted according to the normal reference for each model and size of valve. PPM was defined using EOA indexed (EOAi) to body surface area as moderate if ≤0.85 cm2/m2 and severe if ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2 (respectively, ≤ 0.70 and ≤ 0.55 cm2/m2 if body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2). The outcome endpoints were high residual gradient (≥20 mmHg) and the composite of cardiovascular mortality and hospital readmission for heart failure at 1 year. Overall, 1088 patients underwent a TAVR (55% male, age 79.1 ± 8.4 years, and STS score 6.6 ± 4.7%); balloon-expandable device was used in 83%. Incidence of moderate (10% vs. 27%) and severe (1% vs. 17%) PPM was markedly lower when defined by predicted vs. measured EOAi (P < 0.001). Balloon-expandable device implantation (OR: 1.90, P = 0.029) and valve-in-valve procedure (n = 118; OR: 3.21, P < 0.001) were the main factors associated with PPM occurrence. Compared with measured PPM, predicted PPM showed stronger association with high residual gradient. Severe measured or predicted PPM was not associated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The utilization of the predicted EOAi reclassifies the majority of patients with PPM to no PPM following TAVR. Compared with measured PPM, predicted PPM had stronger association with haemodynamic outcomes, while both methods were not associated with clinical outcomes. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: The objective was to compare the incidence and impact on outcomes of measured (PPMM) vs. predicted (PPMP) prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS AND RESULTS: All consecutives patients who underwent TAVR between 2007 and 2018 were included. Effective orifice area (EOA) was measured by Doppler-echocardiography using the continuity equation and predicted according to the normal reference for each model and size of valve. PPM was defined using EOA indexed (EOAi) to body surface area as moderate if ≤0.85 cm2/m2 and severe if ≤ 0.65 cm2/m2 (respectively, ≤ 0.70 and ≤ 0.55 cm2/m2 if body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2). The outcome endpoints were high residual gradient (≥20 mmHg) and the composite of cardiovascular mortality and hospital readmission for heart failure at 1 year. Overall, 1088 patients underwent a TAVR (55% male, age 79.1 ± 8.4 years, and STS score 6.6 ± 4.7%); balloon-expandable device was used in 83%. Incidence of moderate (10% vs. 27%) and severe (1% vs. 17%) PPM was markedly lower when defined by predicted vs. measured EOAi (P < 0.001). Balloon-expandable device implantation (OR: 1.90, P = 0.029) and valve-in-valve procedure (n = 118; OR: 3.21, P < 0.001) were the main factors associated with PPM occurrence. Compared with measured PPM, predicted PPM showed stronger association with high residual gradient. Severe measured or predicted PPM was not associated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The utilization of the predicted EOAi reclassifies the majority of patients with PPM to no PPM following TAVR. Compared with measured PPM, predicted PPM had stronger association with haemodynamic outcomes, while both methods were not associated with clinical outcomes. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Jerome Ferrara; Alexis Theron; Alizee Porto; Pierre Morera; Paul Luporsi; Nicolas Jaussaud; Vlad Gariboldi; Frederic Collart; Thomas Cuisset; Pierre Deharo Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-01 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Luca Testa; Matteo Casenghi; Enrico Criscione; Nicolas M Van Mieghem; Didier Tchétché; Anita W Asgar; Ole De Backer; Azeem Latib; Bernhard Reimers; Giulio Stefanini; Carlo Trani; Francesco Giannini; Antonio Bartorelli; Wojtek Wojakowski; Maciej Dabrowski; Dariusz Jagielak; Adrian P Banning; Rajesh Kharbanda; Raul Moreno; Joachim Schofer; Christina Brinkmann; Niels van Royen; Duane Pinto; Antoni Serra; Amit Segev; Arturo Giordano; Nedy Brambilla; Mauro Agnifili; Antonio Popolo Rubbio; Mattia Squillace; Jacopo Oreglia; Rudolph Tanja; James M McCabe; Alexander Abizaid; Michiel Voskuil; Rui Teles; Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai; Lars Sondergaard; Francesco Bedogni Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2022-07-29
Authors: Pier Pasquale Leone; Fabio Fazzari; Francesco Cannata; Jorge Sanz-Sanchez; Antonio Mangieri; Lorenzo Monti; Ottavia Cozzi; Giulio Giuseppe Stefanini; Renato Bragato; Antonio Colombo; Bernhard Reimers; Damiano Regazzoli Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med Date: 2021-06-04