Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: predictors of procedural success—the Siegburg-Bern experience

Aims The purpose of the present analysis was to identify predictors of procedural success of percutaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods and results We prospectively assessed in-hospital outcome of patients undergoing TAVI at two institutions. We analysed clinical, morphological, and procedural parameters using univariate and multivariate regression models. Between 2005 and 2008, a total of 168 consecutive patients with symptomatic aortic valve stenosis underwent TAVI using the self-expanding CoreValve Revalving prosthesis. Patients (93%) were highly symptomatic with a New York Heart Association grade III/IV and a mean aortic valve area of 0.66 ± 0.21 cm2. Acute and in-hospital procedural success rates were 90.5 and 83.9%, respectively, with an in-hospital mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke rate of 11.9, 1.8, and 3.6%, respectively. Predictors of in-hospital procedural success were type of access (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.13-0.82, P = 0.017), prior coronary intervention (OR 5.3, 95% CI 1.20-23.41, P = 0.028) and pre-procedural Karnofsky index using univariate regression. Pre-procedural Karnofsky index emerged as the only independent predictor (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, P = 0.032) in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion Pre-procedural functional performance status predicts the in-hospital outcome after TAVI. Patients with a good functional status are likely to benefit more from TAVI than previously reported high-risk patient

Clinical outcomes of patients with low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis and either preserved or reduced ejection fraction undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Aims Our aim was to evaluate the invasive haemodynamic indices of high-risk symptomatic patients presenting with ‘paradoxical' low-flow, low-gradient, severe aortic stenosis (AS) (PLF-LG) and low-flow, low-gradient severe AS (LEF-LG) and to compare clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) among these challenging AS subgroups. Methods and results Of 534 symptomatic patients undergoing TAVI, 385 had a full pre-procedural right and left heart catheterization. A total of 208 patients had high-gradient severe AS [HGAS; mean gradient (MG) ≥40 mmHg], 85 had PLF-LG [MG ≤ 40 mmHg, indexed aortic valve area [iAVA] ≤0.6 cm2 m−2, stroke volume index ≤35 mL/m2, ejection fraction (EF) ≥50%], and 61 had LEF-LG (MG ≤ 40 mmHg, iAVA ≤0.6 cm2 m−2, EF ≤40%). Compared with HGAS, PLF-LG and LEF-LG had higher systemic vascular resistances (HGAS: 1912 ± 654 vs. PLF-LG: 2006 ± 586 vs. LEF-LG: 2216 ± 765 dyne s m−5, P = 0.007) but lower valvulo-arterial impedances (HGAS: 7.8 ± 2.7 vs. PLF-LG: 6.9 ± 1.9 vs. LEF-LG: 7.7 ± 2.5 mmHg mL−1 m−2, P = 0.027). At 30 days, no differences in cardiac death (6.5 vs. 4.9 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.90) or death (8.4 vs. 6.1 vs. 6.6%, P = 0.88) were observed among HGAS, PLF-LG, and LEF-LG groups, respectively. At 1 year, New York Heart Association functional improvement occurred in most surviving patients (HGAS: 69.2% vs. PLF-LG: 71.7% vs. LEF-LG: 89.3%, P = 0.09) and no significant differences in overall mortality were observed (17.6 vs. 20.5 vs. 24.5%, P = 0.67). Compared with HGAS, LEF-LG had a higher 1 year cardiac mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.45, 95% confidence interval 1.04-5.75, P = 0.04). Conclusion TAVI in PLF-LG or LEF-LG patients is associated with overall mortality rates comparable with HGAS patients and all groups profit symptomatically to a similar exten