SCAI CHAP 42 TAVR Flashcards
(54 cards)
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
Age-related calcific aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common form of AS. Approximately ___% of patients over the age of 75 years have severe AS.
The development of the cardinal symptoms of angina, syncope, or heart failure portends a dismal prognosis, so treatment is recommended at the earliest onset of __________ or decline in functional status.
Surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) remained the standard of care for many years after the advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), first performed by Dr. Alain Cribier in _________.
ACC/AHA guidelines currently give a class 1A recommendation for either SAVR or TAVR for patients ___ to ___ years of age and recommend TAVR for those over 80 years.
TAVR volume now far surpasses SAVR volume for the treatment of isolated aortic valve stenosis, accounting for ___% of all such procedures in 2021.
The most rapid increase in application of TAVR has been in patients younger than ___ years.
The explosive growth of TAVR has occurred concomitantly with significant growth in the aging population with severe symptomatic AS, such that the relative proportion of patients not receiving indicated treatment remains __________.
There are also gender, racial, and geographic __________ in access to this intervention.
Answers:
3%
dyspnea
2002
65 to 80
88%
65
significant
disparities
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
There are two dominant transcatheter valve platforms on the US market: SAPIEN by Edwards Lifesciences and __________ by Medtronic ( CoreValve platform )
The current generation SAPIEN 3 Ultra Resilia valve consists of a __________-expandable cobalt chromium frame with bovine pericardial leaflets. It has a polyethylene terephthalate outer sealing skirt to reduce __________.
The current generation Evolut Pro+ valve has a __________-expanding nitinol frame with porcine pericardial leaflets.
Both the SAPIEN 3 UR and Evolut Pro+ valves have an external sealing skirt intended to reduce __________.
The BE ( ballon expandable ) SAPIEN valve is deployed in an __________-annular position, whereas the SE ( self expandable ) Evolut valve has a __________-annular design.
The Evolut Pro+ is also __________ and repositionable.
The SE second-generation Navitor valve recently received FDA approval for patients at high or extreme __________ risk.
The Trilogy valve has completed enrollment in its pivotal trial for high-risk patients with aortic __________.
The ACURATE neo2 valve has an ongoing pivotal trial including patients across all __________ risk levels.
Boston Scientific’s Lotus valve obtained approval for high risk patients and was discontinued after a voluntary recall due to issues with the __________ system.
Answers:
Evolut
balloon, paravalvular leak (PVL)
self
paravalvular leak (PVL)
intra, supra
recapturable
surgical
regurgitation (AR)
surgical
delivery
Show a picture of Evolut and Sapien valve deployment
Show a picture of commercially available TAVR VALVES
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
In the United States, the landmark __________ trial led to FDA approval for TAVR in inoperable!! patients with severe AS.
There were two cohorts in this study: A and B. Cohort B consisted of __________ patients with severe symptomatic AS deemed inoperable by two cardiac surgeons.
In the standard medical therapy arm, __________% of patients underwent balloon aortic valvuloplasty.
The primary endpoint was superiority of TAVR in all-cause __________.
At 1 year, there was __________% all-cause mortality in those undergoing standard therapy as compared to __________% in patients treated with TAVR (P < .001).
TAVR was associated with a higher rate of major strokes at 30 days (__________% vs 1.1%, P = .06).
The FDA approved the use of the __________ valve for inoperable patients with severe symptomatic AS in November 2011.
Answers:
PARTNER
358
83.8%
mortality
50.7%, 30.7%
5.0%
SAPIEN
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
PARTNER cohort A examined the role of TAVR in patients with severe symptomatic AS deemed to have high but not prohibitive risk for surgery, with the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) predicted risk of mortality (PROM) of at least ___%. A total of ___ patients were randomized to TAVR or SAVR.
Of the 348 patients randomized to TAVR, ___ underwent TF-TAVR. The TA-TAVR ( transapical approach ) patients had higher rates of peripheral vascular disease and prior __________.
Unlike PARTNER B, the primary endpoint of PARTNER A was noninferiority in all-cause mortality. At ___ year, there were no significant differences in all-cause mortality between TAVR and SAVR, a finding maintained at ___ years.
An increased risk of major stroke after TAVR persisted, with a rate of ___% in the TAVR group versus ___% in the surgical group at 1 year (P = .07).
In October 2012, the FDA extended its approval of the __________ valve to encompass high-risk patients with severe symptomatic AS.
Answers:
10%, 699
244, coronary bypass surgery
1, 3
5.1%, 2.4%
SAPIEN
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
The PARTNER 2A study randomized 2032 _________ patients ( STS PROM ___%, ___% ) to TAVR with the second-generation SAPIEN XT valve or SAVR.
At 2 years, there were no significant differences in the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or __________ stroke between the groups. Notably, there was no difference in rates of disabling stroke, which was ___% in the TAVR group and 6.4% in the SAVR group (P = .83).
PARTNER 2 S3i was a prospective registry of intermediate-risk patients undergoing TAVR with the third-generation __________ valve. This cohort of 1032 patients was then compared to the surgical cohort in PARTNER 2A.
A propensity-matched analysis showed that SAPIEN 3 TAVR was _____ to SAVR for the conmposite primary endpoint of all-cause mortality, stroke, and ____________.
Surgery resulted in superior outcomes compared to those of patients left with moderate or greater AR after TAVR, highlighting the importance of minimizing PVL ( paraventricaulr leak)
In August 2016, on the basis of the results from PARTNER 2A and PARTNER 2 S3i, the FDA approved the use of the SAPIEN XT and SAPIEN 3 valves for __________-risk patients with severe symptomatic AS.
Answers:
intermediate risk, 4%-8%
disabling, 6.2%
SAPIEN 3
superior, moderate or severe AI ( i think they mean AI as a complication )
intermediate
True or False: The PARTNER 3 trial included 1000 patients at high operative risk, defined as an STS PROM less than 4%, randomized to TAVR or SAVR.
True or False: All patients in the PARTNER 3 trial were required to have adequate vascular access for TF placement of the SAPIEN 3 valve.
True or False: The composite outcome of all-cause death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was higher in the TAVR group than in the SAVR group.
True or False: Based on the results of the PARTNER 3 trial, the FDA extended its approval for the SAPIEN valve to include only patients at high surgical risk.
Answer: False. The FDA extended its approval for the SAPIEN valve to encompass patients across the full spectrum of surgical risk, not just high-risk patients
Answer: False. The PARTNER 3 trial included patients at low operative risk, not high, with an STS PROM less than 4%.
Answer: True. Adequate vascular access was a requirement to accomodate a TF placement of the SAPIEN 3 valve in the trial.
Answer: False. The composite outcome occurred less frequently in the TAVR group (8.5%) compared to the SAVR group (15.1%).
Answer: False. The FDA extended its approval for the SAPIEN valve to encompass patients across the full spectrum of surgical risk, not just high-risk patients.
True or False: The CoreValve US Pivotal Extreme Risk Trial randomized patients to medical therapy or TAVR.
True or False: The CoreValve device was approved by the FDA 3 years after the SAPIEN valve for extreme-risk patients with severe symptomatic AS.
True or False: In the CoreValve US Pivotal High Risk Trial, TAVR was associated with a higher mortality at 1 year compared to SAVR.
True or False: The SURTAVI trial defined intermediate risk as an STS PROM between 3% and 15%.
True or False: In the SURTAVI trial, the rate of new pacemaker implantation was higher in the SAVR group compared to the TAVR group.
True or False: The Evolut Low Risk trial ( below 3%) showed that TAVR met the prespecified criteria for noninferiority compared to SAVR.
True or False: In the Evolut Low Risk trial, rates of major bleeding and new-onset atrial fibrillation were higher in the TAVR group compared to the SAVR group.
True or False: The FDA approved the use of the Evolut R and Evolut Pro valves in low-risk patients in 2019.
Answer: False. The trial did not randomize patients to medical therapy; instead, it enrolled 489 patients who all underwent attempted TAVR with the CoreValve.
Answer: True. The CoreValve entered the market 3 years later than the SAPIEN valve and after meeting specific endpoints, was approved by the FDA in January 2014 for extreme-risk patients.
Answer: False. CoreValve TAVR was associated with a lower mortality at 1 year compared to SAVR (14.2% vs 19.1%), also numerically lower stroke rates. Need for a permanent pacemaker and significant paravalvular regurgitation occurred more frequently with TAVR. In June 2014, the FDA extended its approval of CoreValve for the treatment of high-risk patients with severe symptomatic AS.
Answer: True. Intermediate risk in the SURTAVI trial was defined as an STS PROM between 3% and 15%. The primary endpoint was death or disabling stroke at 24 months. TAVR was noninferior to SAVR with regard to the primary endpoint
Answer: False. The rate of new pacemaker implantation was higher in the TAVR group (25.9%) compared to the SAVR group (6.6%).
Answer: True. The Evolut Low Risk trial showed that TAVR met the prespecified criteria for noninferiority with respect to the primary endpoint. The primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke occurring in 5.3% of patients undergoing TAVR and 6.7% of patients undergoing SAVR at 2 years
Answer: False. Rates of major bleeding and new-onset atrial fibrillation were higher in the SAVR group, not the TAVR group. Whereas patients receiving TAVR had higher rates of new pacemaker implantation (17.4% vs 6.1%, P < .05) and moderate to severe PVL (3.5% vs 0.5%, P < .05) !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Answer: True. The FDA approved the use of the Evolut R and Evolut Pro valves for low-risk patients in 2019.
Consider a schematic of different bicuspid aortic valve morphologies based on number of rafe.
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
Patients with bicuspid AS were excluded from all pivotal randomized trials, but observational data with early generation TAVR devices demonstrated higher rates of implantation failure, moderate or greater PVL, and __________ implantation compared to cases of TAVR in __________ AS.
Subsequent experiences with later generation devices have been more successful, but several __________ remain. Adding further complexity to their management, these patients tend to present at a __________ age and often have concomitant aortopathy that cannot be addresses transcatheter fashion.
Bicuspid valves display wide variability in __________. The Sievers and Schmidtke classification, based on surgical pathology specimens, relies primarily on the number of __________ present, also the spatial position of the ______raphe.
Since the native valve is not excised during TAVR, a more relevant classification scheme in the modern era would anticipate how TAVR devices may interact with various bicuspid __________.
Using computed tomography (CT) analysis of 1034 patients with bicuspid AS, Yoon et al demonstrated that significant raphe and leaflet ________were associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes, including 30-day mortality, moderate or greater PVL, and __________ injury.
In contrast, patients with bicuspid AS without calcified raphe and excess leaflet calcification had __________ outcomes.
Answers:
pacemaker, tricuspid
challenges, younger
anatomy, raphe, fused
morphologies
calcification, annular
favorable
The annulus tends to be ______ in bicuspid valves, sometimes exceeding the treatment range of currently available TAVR prostheses. It is also more often __________ and __________, which can prove challenging for prosthesis sizing and may contribute to more than mild _________.
Oversizing may account for the slightly increased risk of __________ implantation seen in bicuspid AS patients (9.1% vs 7.5%; P = .03) compared to their propensity-matched tricuspid counterparts in the __________ registry.
The PARTNER 3 bicuspid registry included ______ patients ineligible for enrollment in the randomized trial based on the presence of bicuspid morphology. There were no differences in key clinical outcomes after TAVR in these highly selected bicuspid patients compared to their propensity-matched counterparts with __________ AS.
Notably, almost half the screened patients in PARTNER 3 were excluded, predominantly due to significant __________ calcification. These findings suggest that with widespread use of multidetector CT imaging for preprocedural planning, carefully selected patients with bicuspid morphology can be considered for __________.
Based on the available data, patients with heavily calcified raphe or leaflets warrant careful consideration of the risk of annular injury, moderate or greater PVL, and __________ implant when weighing TAVR against SAVR.
Answers:
larger, elliptical, asymmetric, PVL
pacemaker, STS/ACC TVT
low risk, tricuspid
raphe, TAVR
pacemaker
Define/develop the following concepts within the context of TAVR.
1- LGAS or low gradient severe AS
2- Classical LGAS
3- Paradoxical LGAS
4- Low Flow State and TAVR mortality
5- Procedural Outcomes
6- Mortality Benefit
7- Stroke Volume
LGAS - Variant of severe AS with low transvalvular gradient due to decreased stroke volume [ SV <35ml/m2, calculated AVA < 1 cm2, mean gradient < 40mmHG and Vmax < 4m/s]
Classical LGAS - Occurs with depressed LV systolic function; ACC/AHA stage D2.
Paradoxical LGAS - Occurs with preserved ejection fraction; ACC/AHA stage D3.
Low Flow State - Strong predictor of increased mortality; about a third of patients died within 3 years after TAVR, in one registry. The predictor is independant of LVF or mean gradient ( yet mortality benefit TAVR or AVR is the same !! don’t be confused ).
Procedural Outcomes - Similar to those in patients with normal stroke volume after TAVR.
Mortality Benefit - Consistent between patients with LGAS and classic high gradient AS ( 11,000 patients randomized to AVR or no AVR, LGAS benefit of valve replacement ).
Stroke Volume - Less than 35 mL/m² in patients with LGAS.
TAVR in LGAS and AI
1- True or False: Contractile reserve assessment with dobutamine stress echocardiography is highly correlated with outcomes after TAVR.
2- True or False: Older surgical data support the use of contractile reserve assessment for predicting perioperative mortality.
3- True or False: A CT-derived calcium score greater than 1300 HU in women is predictive of mortality in AS patients.
4- True or False: A dimensionless index (DI) value ≤0.25 is consistent with severe LGAS. [ LVOT velocity/ AV velocity].
5- True or False: Patients with LGAS have a better overall prognosis compared to those with normal stroke volume.
6- True or False: Patients with LGAS are expected to experience a comparable magnitude of benefit from AVR as those with normal stroke volume.
7- True or False: The Trilogy Heart Valve System for AI relies on annular calcium for valve anchoring.
8- True or False: Aortic regurgitation (AR) is discussed in detail within the scope of this chapter.
9- True or False: Large annular sizes in AR often exceed the recommended treatment ranges of commercially approved prostheses.
10- True or False: The Trilogy Heart Valve System completed enrollment in a pivotal trial for patients at high surgical risk with severe symptomatic AR.
1- False: Contractile reserve assessment with dobutamine stress echocardiography has shown poor correlation with outcomes after TAVR.
2- True: Older surgical data support the use of contractile reserve assessment for predicting perioperative mortality. This does not seem to apply in TAVR ( see 1.)
3- True: A CT-derived calcium score greater than 1300 HU in women is predictive of TAVR mortality in AS patients ( 2000 HU in men ).
4- True: A dimensionless index (DI) value ≤0.25 is consistent with severe LGAS.
5- False: Patients with LGAS have a poorer overall prognosis compared to those with normal stroke volume.
6- True: Patients with LGAS are expected to experience a comparable magnitude of benefit from AVR as those with normal stroke volume.
7- False: The Trilogy Heart Valve System does not rely on annular calcium for valve anchoring, because AI usually has no calcium. It has another novel anchoring mechanism.
8- False: Aortic regurgitation (AR) is not discussed in detail within the scope of this chapter.
9- True: Large annular sizes in AR often exceed the recommended treatment ranges of commercially approved prostheses.
10- True: The Trilogy Heart Valve System completed enrollment in a pivotal trial for patients at high surgical risk with severe symptomatic AR.
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz:
The considerable data amassed over the past 2 decades have led to a paradigm shift in the approach to the patient with AS, particularly those who are __________ and at lower surgical risk.
Patients are increasingly presenting with a preference for __________ over SAVR at the time of their initial evaluation.
While the clinical decision making for an elderly patient is often more straightforward, there are many factors to consider in younger and healthier patients whose life expectancy is likely to extend beyond the lifespan of a single __________ valve.
SAVR is associated with higher risks of postoperative _________ and __________ injury.
TAVR is associated with higher risks of significant __________ and pacemaker implantation.
The key factors framing the discussion in a younger patient include (1) valve durability; (2) feasibility of future __________ procedures; (3) risk of future surgery.
Answers:
younger
TAVR
bioprosthetic
atrial fibrillation, kidney
PVL (paravalvular leak)
valve-in-valve (ViV)
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz for valve durability:
When TAVR was still a relatively new technology, there was concern that rates of structural valve degeneration (SVD) leading to __________ valve failure (BVF) may be __________ than with surgical __________ valves.
The earliest trials enrolled highly comorbid and sick patients with high __________ rates, limiting the ability to accrue __________-term data.
The intermediate risk trials (PARTNER 2 and SURTAVI) have reported follow-up at 5 years demonstrating similar __________ rates between __________ and __________.
Rehospitalization and repeat valve intervention were more common in patients receiving a __________ valve than in those undergoing __________ in PARTNER 2. Outcomes of SURTAVI were similar at 5 years, with higher __________ rates in the __________ cohort .
Answers:
bioprosthetic, higher, bioprosthetic
mortality, long
mortality, SAVR, TAVR
BE (balloon-expandable), SAVR
reintervention, TAVR
Fill-in-the-Blank Quiz for valve durability:
The NOTION trial was the first randomized trial of low-risk patients comparing outcomes of __________ and __________ with a first-generation CoreValve prosthesis.
At 8 years of follow-up, there was no significant difference in the composite outcome of __________, __________, or myocardial infarction.
By the time the NOTION trial was conducted, the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) had established standardized definitions of the causes of BVF including __________, __________, endocarditis, PVL, or patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM).
SVD ( degeneration ) was defined by the presence of one of the following criteria: increase of mean gradient ≥10 mm Hg resulting in a mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg, decrease in aortic valve area (AVA) by ≥0.3 cm² or 20%, decrease in DI ( dimensionless index) by ≥0.1 or 20%, or ≥moderate __________.
BVF ( failure ) was defined as either severe SVD [ increase of mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg resulting in a mean gradient ≥30 mm Hg, decrease in AVA by ≥0.6 cm² or 50%, decrease in DI ( dimensionless index ) by ≥0.2 or 40%, or severe AR] , or SVD resulting in clinical __________, valve __________, or valve-related __________.
Answers:
SAVR, TAVR, death, stroke
SVD ( structural valve degeneration ) , thrombosis
AR (aortic regurgitation)
heart failure, reintervention, death
In the NOTION trial, investigators found that the TAVR group had _____ effective orifice area (EOA) and _______ mean gradients at each yearly echocardiogram compared to their counterparts who underwent SAVR. While this correlated with lower rates of __________ , rates of __________ were similar between groups.
In contrast, AVALON was a multicenter all-comers registry comparing low-risk patients undergoing elective and isolated SAVR and TAVR. In a propensity score-matched analysis, there was no difference in mortality at 2 years, but SAVR was associated with a 30% reduction in mortality beyond __________ years !! One explanation for these findings is _________ , with healthier, more robust patients being selected for __________. Additionally, different surgical bioprostheses have widely disparate rates of __________.
Mitroflow (Sorin Group Italia S.r.l., Saluggia, VC, IT) and Trifecta (Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL, USA) valves were used more frequently in __________ than in AVALON and have both been associated with earlier SVD.
Long-term follow-up from the randomized studies of low-risk patients will be necessary to address the critical question of whether the method of __________, and consequent implications for valve construction, are key factors impacting their __________.
Answers:
higher, lower, SVD, BVF
SAVR, TAVR, 5, selection bias, SAVR, SVD
NOTION
implantation, durability
please solve the following problem:
You have a patient whose valve mean gradient was measured at 50 mm Hg before implantation and increased to 80 mm Hg after implantation, few years after. The valve area was 1 cm² before and increased slightly to 1.1 cm² after. Additionally, the patient has mild aortic regurgitation (AR). Does the patient have SVD?
According to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria, structural valve degeneration (SVD) is indicated by an increase in mean gradient of at least 10 mm Hg resulting in a mean gradient of at least 20 mm Hg, a decrease in aortic valve area (AVA) by at least 0.3 cm² or 20%, or moderate or greater AR.
Solution:
Initial mean gradient: 50 mm Hg
Post-implantation mean gradient: 80 mm Hg
Increase in mean gradient: (80 - 50 = 30) mm Hg
Initial valve area: 1 cm²
Post-implantation valve area: 1.1 cm²
Change in valve area: Increase by 0.1 cm²
Aortic regurgitation: Mild
According to the criteria, the increase in mean gradient is greater than 10 mm Hg, and the resulting mean gradient is greater than 20 mm Hg. The valve area has increased, not decreased, and the AR is mild, not moderate or greater.
Answer: Yes, the valve has become degenerative due to the increase in mean gradient.
does the same patient above has BVF ?
Criteria for BVF: severe SVD ( see below criteria ) or SVD resulting in clinical heart failure, valve reintervention, or valve-related death.
Severe SVD:
Increase in mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg resulting in a mean gradient ≥30 mm Hg.
Decrease in aortic valve area (AVA) by ≥0.6 cm² or 50%.
Moderate or greater aortic regurgitation (AR).
Patient Data:
Mean Gradient: Increased from 50 mm Hg to 80 mm Hg (increase of 30 mm Hg).
Valve Area: Increased from 1 cm² to 1.1 cm² (no decrease).
Aortic Regurgitation: Mild.
Analysis:
Mean Gradient: The increase of 30 mm Hg meets the criteria for severe SVD.
Valve Area: The valve area increased, which does not meet the criteria for a decrease.
Aortic Regurgitation: Mild AR does not meet the criteria for moderate or greater AR.
Conclusion: The patient does not meet all the criteria for BVF, as the valve area did not decrease and the AR is mild. However, the significant increase in mean gradient suggests severe SVD, which is a component of BVF. Therefore, based on the increase in mean gradient alone, the patient could be considered to have BVF due to severe SVD.
Answer: Yes, the patient has BVF due to the severe increase in mean gradient, indicating severe SVD.
A patient undergoes valve replacement, and the following data is recorded:
Mean gradient before implantation: 50 mm Hg
Mean gradient 4 years after implantation: 40 mm Hg
Valve area before implantation: 0.6 cm²
Valve area 4 years after implantation: 0.5 cm²
Based on the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria, determine whether the patient has structural valve degeneration (SVD) or bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF).
Options:
A. The patient has SVD but not BVF.
B. The patient has BVF but not SVD.
C. The patient has both SVD and BVF.
D. The patient has neither SVD nor BVF.
Criteria for SVD:
- Increase in Mean Gradient: The mean gradient should increase by at least 10 mm Hg.
- Decrease in Aortic Valve Area (AVA): The AVA should decrease by at least 0.3 cm² or 20%.
- Moderate or Greater Aortic Regurgitation (AR): Not applicable here as no AR data is provided.
Criteria for BVF:
- Severe SVD:
Increase in mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg resulting in a mean gradient ≥30 mm Hg.
Decrease in AVA by ≥0.6 cm² or 50%.
Moderate or greater AR. - SVD Resulting in Clinical Heart Failure, Valve Reintervention, or Valve-Related Death: Not applicable here as no such data is provided.
Analysis:
The mean gradient decreased, which does not indicate SVD.
The valve area decreased by 0.1 cm², which does not meet the criteria for a decrease of 0.3 cm² or 20% (0.12 cm² decrease or a 20% decrease from 0.6 cm², so it needs to be 0.48 cm2 or below).
No information on AR or clinical outcomes is provided.
Conclusion:
SVD: The patient does not meet the criteria for SVD as the mean gradient decreased and the valve area did not decrease sufficiently.
BVF: The patient does not meet the criteria for BVF as there is no severe SVD or other criteria met.
Answer is D ( No, the patient does not have SVD or BVF based on the provided data ).
True or False quiz :
1- True or False: An ascending aortic aneurysm is a common coexisting condition in patients undergoing evaluation for aortic valve replacement.
2- True or False: For younger, lower-risk patients with bicuspid AS and an ascending aortic aneurysm, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the best approach.
3- True or False: In the Evolut Low Risk Trial, moderate comorbid CAD with a SYNTAX score greater than 22 was an exclusion criterion.
4- True or False: Severe CAD with a SYNTAX score greater than 33 was an exclusion criterion in the PARTNER 3 trial.
5- True or False: The optimal method of revascularization should be determined independently of the preferred method of treating aortic stenosis (AS).
6- True or False: A younger patient with disease in the left main or proximal left anterior descending artery is best treated with TAVR.
7- True or False: The durability of a left internal mammary artery graft is a consideration for younger patients with concomitant coronary artery disease.
8- True or False: The presence of an ascending aortic aneurysm does not influence the choice between surgical and transcatheter approaches in younger patients.
9- True or False: The Evolut Low Risk Trial and PARTNER 3 trial both had exclusion criteria based on the severity of coronary artery disease.
1- True: An ascending aortic aneurysm is a common coexisting condition in patients undergoing evaluation for aortic valve replacement.
2- False: For younger, lower-risk patients with bicuspid AS and an ascending aortic aneurysm, surgery is the best approach.
3- True: In the Evolut Low Risk Trial, moderate comorbid CAD with a SYNTAX score greater than 22 was an exclusion criterion.
4- True: Severe CAD with a SYNTAX score greater than 33 was an exclusion criterion in the PARTNER 3 trial.
5- True: The optimal method of revascularization should be determined independently of the preferred method of treating aortic stenosis (AS).
6- False: A younger patient with disease in the left main or proximal left anterior descending artery is best treated with surgery ( bypass and SAVR ).
7- True: The durability of a left internal mammary artery graft is a consideration for younger patients with concomitant coronary artery disease.
8- False: The presence of an ascending aortic aneurysm does influence the choice between surgical and transcatheter approaches in younger patients.
9- True: The Evolut Low Risk Trial and PARTNER 3 trial both had exclusion criteria based on the severity of coronary artery disease.
Rapid fire questions:
1- What are the two management options for failing bioprosthetic valves?
2- What conditions can lead to early valve failure requiring urgent or emergent procedures?
3- What factors must be considered in the management strategies for failing bioprosthetic valves?
4- What are some factors contributing to structural valve degeneration (SVD)?
5- What are the key considerations for late bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF)?
1- Answer: Surgical explantation or transcatheter valve-in-valve (ViV) interventions.
2- Answer: Early valve failure can occur in the setting of endocarditis or moderate or worse paravalvular leak (PVL).
3- Answer: Management strategies must consider the risk profile of the patient and the mechanism of valve failure.
4- Answer: Factors contributing to SVD include smaller prosthesis size and patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM).
5- Answer: Key considerations include risk factors for PPM, strategies to mitigate PPM and coronary obstruction, and the relevant risk of reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) compared to ViV transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
Rapid fire questions :
1- What does PPM stand for, and how is it broadly defined?
2- What are the primary risk factors for PPM ?
3- According to the VARC-3 Writing Committee in 2021, how is severe PPM defined?
4- Why should the hemodynamics of the valve shortly after implant be considered when evaluating PPM?
5- What factors are there disagreements over incorporating when evaluating PPM?
6- What does the preponderance of data suggest about the impact of PPM after SAVR or TAVR?
7- How does PPM impact procedural outcomes and future interventions?
8- Why is attention to minimizing PPM particularly important in younger patients?
1- Answer: PPM stands for patient-prosthesis mismatch, and it is broadly defined as an effective orifice area (EOA) that is too small in relation to the patient’s body size.
2- Answer: The primary risk factors for PPM include obesity, female gender, small annulus size, and valve-in-valve (ViV) status.
3- Answer: Severe PPM is defined as an indexed effective orifice area (EOAi) ≤0.65 cm²/m².
4- Answer: It should be considered to limit the impact of structural valve degeneration (SVD) on the calculated valve area.
5- Answer: There is disagreement over incorporating factors such as obesity, underlying flow state, and the measured or predicted orifice area of specific prostheses.
6- Answer: The preponderance of data suggests that PPM after SAVR or TAVR increases the likelihood of SVD, heart failure, and mortality.
7- Answer: PPM impacts short- and midterm procedural outcomes and has significant implications for future interventions, particularly in younger patients who may need multiple valve interventions.
8- Answer: It is important because younger patients may need a second or even third valve intervention during their lifespan, and minimizing PPM can improve their long-term outcomes.