The Sentinel Dual Filter Device Design Features & EU Clinical Trial Results

Similar documents
The Case for and Against Cerebral Embolic Protection During TAVR. Susheel Kodali, MD

TAVI limitations for low risk patients

Strokes After TAVR. Ioannis Iakovou, MD, PhD. Interventional Cardiology Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center

Is TAVI ready for prime time in: - Intermediate risk patients? - Low risk patients?

Role of Embolic Protection during TAVR

TAVR: Review of the Robust Data from Randomized Trials

Strokes After TAVR. Incidence (past and present) Multi-factorial Origin

Complicanze durante TAVI. Brambilla Nedy IRCCS Policlinico San Donato

Update on TAVR. Howard C. Herrmann, MD, FACC, MSCAI

Is Cerebral Embolic Protection Needed for TAVR?

Sentinel Dual Filter Device: Technology Overview and Status of the CLEAN-TAVI Randomized Trial. Martin B. Leon, MD

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Cerebral Protection In Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement The SENTINEL Study. Susheel Kodali, MD Columbia University Medical Center

Strokes After TAVR Reasons for Declining Frequency

CoreValve High Risk Study - Neu

Embolic Protection Devices for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

TAVR in Intermediate Risk Populations /Optimizing Systems for TAVR

Protection Devices for Stroke Prevention Do the Data support their Routine Use?

Is Stroke Frequency Declining?

Igor Palacios, MD Director of Interventional Cardiology Massachusetts General Hospital Professor of Medicine Harvard Medical School

Current Evidence in TAVI patients using ACURATE and LOTUS valves

Le TAVI pour tout le monde?

The SAPIEN 3 TAVI Advantage

How to Prevent Thromboembolic Complications in TAVI

Trans Catheter Aortic Valve Replacement

The Sentinel US Pivotal Clinical Trial Design

Why Cerebral Protection after TAVR Will Become the Standard of Care

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Current and Future Devices: How do They Work, Eligibility, Review of Data

Evolving and Expanding Indications for TAVR

Building the Evidence for CEP in TAVR: A Critical Review of the Clinical Trial Data

Aortic Stenosis: Background

Aortic Stenosis: Open vs TAVR vs Nothing

Neuroprotection During TAVR

Trans Aortic Valve Replacement Update: 2016 & Beyond

SAPIEN 3: Evaluation of a Balloon- Expandable Transcatheter Aortic Valve in High-Risk and Inoperable Patients With Aortic Stenosis One-Year Outcomes

TAVR today: High Risk, Intermediate Risk Population, and Valve in Valve Therapy

transcatheter heart valve: THV TAVI transcatheter aortic valve implantation

The Role of TAVI in high-risk and normal-risk Patients

A Thoughtful Synthesis of the TAVR Landscape: What s New, What s Needed and is There a Best-in-Class?

The Future of Medicine. Who to TAVR? Azeem Latib MD EMO-GVM Centro Cuore Columbus and San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy

Vinod H. Thourani, MD, FACC, FACS

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with a Self-Expanding Prosthesis or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients:

TAVR-Update Andrzej Boguszewski MD, FACC, FSCAI Vice Chairman, Cardiology Mid-Michigan Health Associate Professor Michigan State University, Central

Strokes After TAVR Multi-factorial Origin, Incidence (past and present), and Management Considerations (present and future)

TAVR: Intermediate Risk Patients

e Corrado Tamburino, MD, PhD

Lotus Valve System for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation/Replacement (TAVI/R) Evidence

Incorporating the intermediate risk in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI)

TAVR: Current Valve Types. Patient Selection

Post-TAVI Cerebral Embolisms and Potential Protection Means

L evoluzione nel management della valvulopatia aortica

After PARTNER 2A/S3i and SURTAVI: What is the Role of Surgery in Intermediate-Risk AS Patients?

Accepted Manuscript. Cerebral Embolic Protection During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Disconnect Between Logic and Data?

Current Controversies. Subclinical and clinical valve thrombosis

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation. SSVQ November 23, 2012 Centre Mont-Royal 15:40

State of the Art and Future perspective

Is TAVR Now Indicated in Even Low Risk Aortic Valve Disease Patients

TAVR in 2017 What we know? What to expect?

30-Day Outcomes Following Implantation of a Repositionable Self-Expanding Aortic Bioprosthesis: First Report From the FORWARD Study

The Lotus Valve, The Latest Developments and Future Aspects. Professor Jan Harnek MD PhD FESC Lund University Sweden

Appropriate Use of TAVR - now and in the future. A Surgeon s Perspective. Neil Moat Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK

Aortic Valve Controversies Beyond risk assessment: TAVI for Everybody

Subclinical Thrombosis of Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves: Is It Clinically Relevant? Tarun Chakravarty, MD

Federico M Asch MD, FASE MedStar Heart and Vascular Institute Georgetown University Washington, DC

TAVR for Complex Aortic Valvular Conditions

Eberhard Grube MD, FACC, FSCAI

Severe Aortic Valve Disease: TAVR in Four Ages and Four Etiologies Age 25 y/o Congenital, 50 y/o Bicuspid, 75 y/o Rheumatic, 100 y/o Degenerative

Prosthesis-Patient Mismatch in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis in a Randomized Trial of a Self-Expanding Prosthesis

Strokes After TAVR: Perspectives from the US CoreValve Trials

3 years after introduction of TAVI in QEH. Michael KY Lee On Behalf of QEH TAVI Heart Team Queen Elizabeth Hospital Hong Kong

Antithrombotic. DAPT or OAC?

Progress In Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Transcatheter heart valve thrombosis

TAVR for low-risk patients in 2017: not so fast.

Debate: SAVR for Low-Risk Patients in 2017 is Obsolete AVR vs TAVI

TAVR 2018: TAVR has high clinical efficacy according to baseline patient risk! ii. Con

Mild paravalvular regurgitation is not an independent predictor of mortality following TAVI

1-YEAR OUTCOMES FROM JOHN WEBB, MD

DO WE NEED TO DO BETTER?

TAVR in 2020: What is Next!!!!

Paravalvular Regurgitation is a Risk Factor Following TAVI

TAVI: The Real Deal? Marc Pelletier, MD Head, Department of Cardiac Surgery New Brunswick Heart Centre

TAVI and TAVR: Radical and Revolutionary: The Newest Insights for the CV Community and a Panel Discussion

Transcatheter Valve Replacement: Current State in 2017

TAVR IN INTERMEDIATE-RISK PATIENTS

Ian T. Meredith AM. MBBS, PhD, FRACP, FCSANZ, FACC, FAPSIC. Monash HEART, Monash Health & Monash University Melbourne, Australia

TAVI Technology and Procedural Changes

Results of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

TAVI After PARTNER-2 : The Hamilton Approach

ANTICOAGULATION IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS: BIOLOGICAL HEART VALVES, TAVI

Emerging Transcatheter Aortic Valve Technologies

Extension to medium and low risk patients? Friedrich Eckstein University Hospital Basel

LOW RISK TAVR. WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

Cerebral Embolic Protection In Patients Undergoing Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR)

TAVR or SAVR A glimpse into the future

The TAVI Journey: Update on Evidence And Future trials

For the SURTAVI Investigators

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate and low risk patients-clinical evidence

Outcomes in the Commercial Use of Self-expanding Prostheses in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Comparison of the Medtronic CoreValve and

Predictors, incidence and outcomes of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation complicated by stroke

Transcription:

The Sentinel Dual Filter Device Design Features & EU Clinical Trial Results Nicolas M. Van Mieghem, MD, PhD, FESC Director of Interventional Cardiology Thoraxcenter, Erasmus MC Rotterdam

Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest Within the past 12 months, I or my spouse/partner have had a financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with the organization(s) listed below. Affiliation/Financial Relationship Grant/Research Support Consulting Fees/Honoraria Company Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Boston Scientific; Claret Medical Claret Medical All TVT 2016 faculty disclosures are listed online and on the app.

Recent Trials and any stroke @ 30 days % Patients with Strke at 30 Days 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 4.0% 3.9% 5.5% 6.8% 7.0% 3.3% 4.1% 2.5% 4.9% 4.3% 1.5% 2.7% 5.5% 1% 0% CoreValve Extreme Risk N=489 Extreme Risk LOTUS RESPOND N=500 Portico CE Study N=103 LOTUS REPRISE II + Ext N=249 Direct Flow DISCOVER N=75 Extreme/High Risk 0.0% Evolut R CE Study N=60 Evolut R IDE N= 241* SAPIEN PARTNER IIB N=276 SAPIEN TVT HR N=12182 CoreValve High Risk N=390 High Risk SAPIEN XT PARTNER IIB N=284 SAPIEN 3 SAPIEN 3 PARTNER IIPARTNER II HR S3i N=583 N=1078 SAPIEN XT PARTNER IIA N=1011 Intermediate Risk * Disabling Stroke Meredith, et al., presented at PCR London Valves 2014; Adams, et al., N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 1790-8; Leon, et. al. presented at ACC 2013; Lefevre et al., J Am Coll Cardiol 2016; 1:; Popma, et al., J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 63: 1972-81; Linke, et. al. presented at London Valves 2015; Van Mieghem, et al., presented at EuroPCR 2015; Kodali, et al., presented at ACC 2015; Holmes, et al., JAMA 2015; 313: 1019-28; Meredith, et al., presented at ACC 2015, 1 Williams, et. al. presented at ACC 2016; Thourani, et al, presented at ACC 2016

Next Gen TAVR & Major Stroke Meta-analysis of ~20 non-randomized, mostly FIM, valve-company sponsored studies 2.4% major stroke at 30-days Athappan, et al. A systematic review on the safety of second-generation transcatheter aortic valves. EuroIntervention 2016; 11:1034-1043

Stroke Timing post TAVI Timing of Cerebrovascular Events (CVE) in FRANCE-2 Registry (n=3,191) CVE most frequently occur day 0-1 >50% are major strokes Median time to major stroke is 1 day D. Tchetche et al. JACC CV Int. 2014;7:1138-1145 Multi-center cohort of 1,061 TAVI patients CVE most frequently occur day 0-1 >50% are major strokes >95% of strokes are ischemic Nombela-Franco et al., Circulation 2012;126:3041-53

Sentinel EU Trials CLEAN TAVI SENTINEL - H MISTRAL - C

CLEAN TAVI A. Linke, MD, PhD - Presented @ TCT 2014

CLEAN TAVI Endpoints A. Linke, MD, PhD - Presented @ TCT 2014

MRI Findings Total Lesion Volume Lesion Number A. Linke, MD, PhD - Presented @ TCT 2014

MISTRAL-C Design: multi-center double-blind randomized trial enrolling patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and 1:1 randomization to TAVI with or without Sentinel EPD Aim: does Sentinel EPD affect new brain lesions & neurocognitive performance after TAVI Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

MISTRAL-C From January 2013 August 2015 65 patients were enrolled TAVI Procedure Day 0 TAVI 1 Day Randomization Sentinel vs. Control Transcranial Doppler Pathology TAVI + 5 Days Consent for TAVI & MISTRAL-C study 3T Neuro-MRi Neurocognitive testing 3T Neuro-MRi Neurocognitive testing Clinical neurological exam Clinical neurological exam Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

Brain MRI n=37 Lesions @ baseline MRI: 11% Median number of days to MRI: 5 (IQR 5-5) No FU MRI: 43% Perspective Other 14% Dead / Unstable 18% Reason for MRI dropout Delirium 11% Patient refused 21% Pacemaker 36% N=28 Dropout in other studies DEFLECT-I 24% DEFLECT-II 21% DEFLECT-III 41% PROTAVI-C 33% CLEAN TAVI @D2 7% CLEAN TAVI @D30 22% Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

Lesion Volume Overall 600 Lesion volume in mm3 500 400 300 200 100 95 P=0,171 197 0 Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) 600 Anterior 600 Posterior Lesion volume in mm3 500 400 300 200 100 0 0 Sentinel (n=22) P=0,057 76 No Sentinel (n=15) Lesion volume in mm3 500 400 300 200 100 0 56 Sentinel (n=22) P=0,571 76 No Sentinel (n=15) Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

Number o lesions 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 Number of Lesions Overall P=0,274 2 0 Anterior 2 2 Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) Posterior Number of lesions (median) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 0 Sentinel (n=22) P=0,065 1 No Sentinel (n=15) Number of lesions (median) 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 P=0,586 1 1 Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

100% No new lesions Overall Proportion of patients (%) 50% 0% p=0,312 27% 13% Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) Anterior Posterior Proportion of patients (%) 100% 50% 0% p=0,065 50% 20% Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) Proportion of patients (%) 100% 50% 0% p=0,850 36% 33% Sentinel (n=22) No Sentinel (n=15) Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

Deterioration in neurocognitive status ITT 100% 90% Claret (n=28) No Claret (22) Proportion of patients (%) 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% p=0,017 p=0,248 p=0,105 p=0,272 27% 26% 25% 13% 8% 4% 5% 0% MMSE worsening MoCA worsening CES-D worsening NIHSS worsening Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

Histopathology of Retrieved Filters (n=31) Van Mieghem NM et al. EuroIntervention 2016 In Press July Issue

SENTINEL H Study Prevalence and etiopathology of thromboembolic debris during transcatheter interventional aortic valve replacement C.J. Jensen 1, A. Wolf 1, T. Schmitz 1, T. Schmidt 2, C. Frerker 2, T. Thielsen 2, U. Schäfer 3, N. Schofer 3, F. Deuschl 3, P. Frambach 4, D. Wagner 4, C. Kaiser 5, R. Jeger 5, E.J. Parker 6, M. Romero 7, E. Ladich 7, R. Virmani 7, C.K. Naber 1 1 Contilia heart and vascular center, department of cardiology and angiology, Elisabeth hospital, Essen, Germany; 2 AK St. Georg, Hamburg, Germany; 3 UKE Hamburg, Germany; 4 INCCI LUXEMBURG, Luxemburg; 5 Universitätsspital BASEL, Switzerland; 6 Haukeland clinic Bergen, Norway; 7 CV Path Institute, Inc., Gaithersburg, USA Jensen CJ et al. Presented @ EuroPCR 2016

SENTINEL-H Prospective, multi-center, international all-comer study TAVI + Sentinel CPS Germany Luxemburg Suisse Norway Multiple TAVR designs SAPIEN S3 88 Sapien XT 8 Edwards Centera 1 BSC Lotus 37 Direct Flow 42 STJ Portico 10 Medtronic CV 9 Medtronic EvolutR 16 Symetis 1 Jena Valve 1 Histopathology by independent core lab CVPath (Gaithersburg, USA) Jensen CJ et al. Presented @ EuroPCR 2016

Van Mieghem NM et al. Circulation 2013;176:2194-2201 Van Mieghem NM et al. JACC CV Int. 2015;8:718-24

Results N = 217 patients, mean age 83.7 years 98% transfemoral TAVI Procedural success (defined as both filters successfully deployed and retrieved) was 211/217 = 97% Remaining 6 patients all had the BCC Filter deployed In 98% of cases, there was no or insignificant interference with the TAVR device There were no cases of a dislocation of the Sentinel Device by the TAVI delivery catheter The median time to place Sentinel: 4 minutes Average contrast media to place Sentinel: 15±5 ml Jensen CJ et al. Presented @ EuroPCR 2016

Debris Presence

Histopathology Proximal & Distal Filter

Debris per THV Design Overall BE SE ME BE (96) = Sapien 3 (88) + Sapien XT (8) SE (38) = EvolutR (16) + CoreValve Classic (9) + Portico (10) + Symetis (1) + Jenavalve (1) + Centera (1) ME (79) = Lotus (37) + Direct Flow (42) *The error bars represent 95% confidence intervals (+/- 1.96 x SE)

In Conclusion Filter based cerebral protection with Sentinel during TAVR will capture debris en route to the brain in virtually all patients Debris etiology is diverse (thrombus and tissue) Small randomized trials hint towards reductions in new brain lesions by MRI neurocognitive preservation less brain insults SENTINEL US IDE Trial results are eagerly awaited