Bernard De Bruyne, MD, PhD Cardiovascular Center Aalst OLV-Clinic Aalst, Belgium

Similar documents
Edwards Transcatheter AVR: Have the Outcomes Changed after CE Approval?

1-YEAR OUTCOMES FROM JOHN WEBB, MD

> 1200 Patients

Australia and New Zealand Source Registry Edwards Sapien Aortic Valve 30 day Outcomes

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

Results of Transapical Valves. A.P. Kappetein Dept Cardio-thoracic surgery

Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) in Inoperable Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The PARTNER Trial

Percutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation. Core-Valve and Cribier-Edwards Update

A new option for the Diagnosis and Management of Valvular Heart Disease. Oregon Comprehensive Valve Center

Multicentre clinical study evaluating a novel resheatable self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve system

Aortic valve implantation using the femoral and apical access: a single center experience.

TAVI After PARTNER-2 : The Hamilton Approach

TRANSAPICAL AORTIC VALVE REPAIR

30-day Outcomes of The CENTERA Trial a New Self-Expanding Transcatheter Heart Valve. Didier Tchétché, MD On Behalf of the CENTERA Investigators

Percutaneous Treatment of Valvular Heart Diseases: Lessons and Perspectives. Bernard Iung Bichat Hospital, Paris

Measuring the risk in valve patients Lessons learnt from the TAVI story? Bernard Iung Bichat Hospital, Paris, France

Establishing a New Path Forward for Patients With Severe Symptomatic Aortic Stenosis THE PARTNER TRIAL CLINICAL RESULTS

Prince Sultan Cardiac Center Experience Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and pre-procedural risk assesment

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

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

TAVR IN INTERMEDIATE-RISK PATIENTS

TAVI- Is Stroke Risk the Achilles Heel of Percutaneous Aortic Valve Repair?

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

Establishing the New Standard of Care for Inoperable Aortic Stenosis THE PARTNER TRIAL COHORT B RESULTS

CIPG Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement- When Is Less, More?

Valvular Intervention

Aortic Stenosis and TAVR TARUN NAGRANI, MD INTERVENTIONAL AND ENDOVASCULAR CARDIOLOGIST, SOMC

An Update on the Edwards TAVR Results. Zvonimir Krajcer, MD Director, Peripheral Intervention Texas Heart Institute at St.

VALVULOPATIE: NUOVE SOLUZIONI.

When Should We Consider TAVI. (Surgeon s Viewpoint)? Pyowon Park Samsung Medical Center Seoul, Korea

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

Masterclass III Advances in cardiac intervention. Percutaneous valvular intervention a novel approach

Euro Heart Survey New Programme Sentinel Registry Transcatheter Valve Treatment (TCVT) Carlo Di Mario, London, UK President EAPCI

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Present Status and Perspectives

2/15/2018 DISCLOSURES OBJECTIVES. Consultant for BioSense Webster, a J&J Co. Aortic stenosis background. Short history of TAVR

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

Surgical AVR: Are there any contraindications? Pyowon Park Samsung Medical Center Seoul, Korea

Heart Team For TAVI Who and How?

RANDOMISED TRIALS TAVI WITH SAVR STEPHAN WINDECKER AORTIC VALVE DISEASE COMPARING

Le TAVI pour tout le monde?

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

Transcatheter Valve Replacement: Current State in 2017

LOW RISK TAVR. WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

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

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

Aortic Stenosis: Interventional Choice for a 70-year old- SAVR, TAVR or BAV? Interventional Choice for a 90-year old- SAVR, TAVR or BAV?

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement TAVR

Percutaneous Mitral Valve Repair

Emergency TAVI: Does It Exist? Is the Risk Higher?

TRANSCATHETER AORTIC VALVE IMPLANTATION: PSCC EXPERIENCE DR HUSSEIN ALAMRI PSCC RIYADH

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) - 5 important lessons learnt from HK experiences Michael KY Lee

Aortic Stenosis Background and Breakthroughs in Treatment: TAVR Update

Outcome of elderly patients with severe but asymptomatic aortic stenosis

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

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Embolic Protection Devices for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Minimalist Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (MA-TAVR)

APOLLO TMVR Trial Update: Case Presentation

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

Valve Replacement without a Scalpel Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TAVR) Charles T. Klodell, M.D.

Management of High-Risk Patients With Aortic Stenosis and Coronary Artery Disease

Paris, August 28 th Gian Paolo Ussia on behalf of the CoreValve Italian Registry Investigators

The Ross Procedure: Outcomes at 20 Years

Alec Vahanian,FESC, FRCP (Edin.) Bichat Hospital University Paris VII, Paris, France

Worldwide experience with the 29-mm Edwards SAPIEN XT TM transcatheter heart valve in patients with large aortic annulus

TAVR in Intermediate Risk Populations /Optimizing Systems for TAVR

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

Percutaneous aortic valve replacement should NOT be preferred therapy for aortic stenosis

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

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

First Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation In Bulgaria - Crossing The Valve With The Device Is Not Always

Aortic Stenosis in the Elderly: Difficulties for the Clinician. Are Symptoms Due to Aortic Stenosis?

Are Heart Valve Referral Centers Feasible in Latin America?

Severe left ventricular dysfunction and valvular heart disease: should we operate?

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

Results of Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Indication, Timing, Assessment and Update on TAVI

Prof. Patrizio LANCELLOTTI, MD, PhD Heart Valve Clinic, University of Liège, CHU Sart Tilman, Liège, BELGIUM

AS with reduced LV ejection fraction: Contractile reserve should be systematically assessed: PRO

Severity of AS Degree of AV calcification (? Bicuspid AV), annulus size, & aortic root

German Aortic Valve RegistrY

Valve Disease in Patients With Heart Failure TAVI or Surgery? Miguel Sousa Uva Hospital Cruz Vermelha Lisbon, Portugal

Imaging in TAVI. Jeroen J Bax Dept of Cardiology Leiden Univ Medical Center The Netherlands Davos, feb 2013

TAVI: 10 Years After the First Case Low-Risk and High-Risk Patients What are the Limits? Dr Bernard Prendergast DM FRCP FESC John Radcliffe Hospital

FRANCE 2 : FRench Aor$c Na$onal Corevalve

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis

Incidence And Predictors Of Left Bundle Branch Block After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

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

2/28/2010. Speakers s name: Paul Chiam. I have the following potential conflicts of interest to report: NONE. Antegrade transvenous transseptal route

HOW IMPORTANT ARE THESE ECHO MEASUREMENTS ANYWAY?

Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis

Davos Cerebral Ischemia after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation. Raimund Erbel, H Eggebrecht, P Kahlert for the

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

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI)

Medical Policy An independent licensee of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association

THE PERCUTANEOUS MANAGEMENT OF VALVULAR HEART DISEASE DR JOHN RAWLINS CONSULTANT INTERVENTIONAL CARDIOLOGIST UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL SOUTHAMPTON

Early Experience of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement Results from the Intrepid Global Pilot Study

TAVR SPRING 2017 The evolution of TAVR

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

Transcription:

Medium Term Survival and Functional Status in Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis Treated by Transcatheter Aortic Valvular Implantation in the PARTNER EU Trial Bernard De Bruyne, MD, PhD Cardiovascular Center Aalst OLV-Clinic Aalst, Belgium Room 135 Monday 01:00 PM to 01:14 PM

Disclosure Statement Nothing to disclose

Participating Investigators Participating Investigators Aalst OLV-Clinic IC: B. De Bruyne, Marc Vanderheyden CV: I. Degrieck, F. Casselman, H. Vanermen Essen - University Clinics-West German Heart Center IC: S. Sack, R. Erbel, H. Eggebrecht, P. Kahlert CV: M. Thielmann, D. Wendt, H. Jakob Paris - Hôpital Bichat IC: A. Vahanian, D. Himbert CV: P. Nataf, N. Al-Attar Rotterdam - Erasmus Medical Center IC: P. DeJaegere CV: A.P. Kappetein Frankfurt a.m. - J. W. Goethe University IC: V. Schächinger, S. Fichtlscherer CV: G. Wimmer-Greinecker, M. Doss London - Kings College Hospital IC: M. Thomas, P. MacCarthy CV: A. El-Gamel, O. Wendler Massy - Institut Hospitalier Jacques Cartier IC: T. Lefevre, M-C. Morice CV: P. Donzeau-Gouge, A. Farge, M. Romano Rouen - Charles Nicole Hôpital IC: A. Cribier, H. Eltchaninoff CV: J-P Bessou, Y-P Litzler Vienna - Medical University (AKH) IC: D. Glogar, H. Baumgartner CV: E. Wolner, P. Simon, W. Wisser, M.T. Kasimir Steering Committee: Wimmer-Greinecker, Schächinger, Lefevre, De Bruyne, Nataf, DeJaegere

Trial Overview & Methods Purpose Establish interventional cardiology/ cardiac surgery partnerships to identify, jointly screen and treat adult severe aortic stenosis patients by transfemoral or transapical TAVI Design Prospective, multicenter, non- randomized, observational trial of the Edwards SAPIEN THV Primary Safety Endpoint Freedom from death from the index procedure to 30 days and 6 months Primary Efficacy Endpoint Hemodynamic, QOL and NYHA improvement at 12 months Trial Conduct Enrollment period April 2007 January 2008 initiated in precommercialization period Investigator and Site Training 2 day didactic, simulator training, case observations 2 proctored cases each approach (TF/TA) Follow-up and Monitoring 30 day, 6, 12 and 18 month intervals 100% monitoring in progress Trial Oversite Echo Corelab Columbia University Medical Center, NYC ( Dr. L. Gillam) CEC and DSMB - independent committees to review safety & adjudicate events Administration- European Center for Cardiovascular Research (CERC), Paris 100% event adjudication in progress

Key Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria Inclusion Criteria Logistic EuroSCORE 20% and/or STS score 10 Comorbidities if EuroSCORE <20 Porcelain aorta, surgically unmanageable ascending aortic calcification Chest deformities that preclude open chest procedures Senile degenerative symptomatic aortic valve stenosis with a documented AVA < 0.8 cm², mean gradient > 40mmHg and/or jet velocity > 4.0 m/s Exclusion Criteria Evidence of an acute myocardial infarction within 14 days of the intended treatment Any therapeutic invasive cardiac procedure, other than BAV, performed within 30 days of the index procedure Native aortic annulus <16 mm or >25 mm (per baseline ECHO) Life expectancy <12 months due to non-cardiac co-morbid conditions Unprotected left main disease (>70%) Active infection or endocarditis Acute coronary insufficiency

Baseline Demographics ITT Transfemoral n = 61 Mean Age (yrs) 82.3 ± 5.2 (Range: 69.1-92.5) Gender Female: 61% Male: 39% NYHA I: 2% III: 68% II: 15% IV: 16% Mean Aortic Valve Area 0.7 ± 0.2 (Range: 0.3-1.2) Mean Gradient 47.3 ± 19.9 (Range: 10-120) Mean Ejection Fraction 52.7 ± 17.7 (Range: 15.0-86.1) Logistic EuroSCORE 25.7 ± 11.5 (Range: 6.4-65.5) Median = 24.4 STS Score 11.3 ± 6.1 (Range: 3.7-32.7) Transapical n = 69 81.9 ± 5.7 (Range: 67.7-93.3) Female: 51% Male: 49% I: 1% III: 68% II: 13% IV: 17% 0.7 ± 0.4 (Range: 0.3-2.7) 46.7 ± 18.6 (Range: 18-87) 53.0 ± 14.6 (Range: 17.3-77.0) 33.8 ± 14.4 (Range: 5.1-72.1) Median = 29.8 11.8 ± 6.8 (Range: 2-41)

70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% p = ns Coronary Artery Disease Comorbidities p=0.02 TF TA p = <0.0001 p=0.008 p=0.008 Mitral Disease Peripheral vascular Disease Prior CABG Carotid Disease p=0.04 55% 65% 42% 62% 16% 49% 19% 42% 13% 33% 6% 20% Prior Pacemaker N = 130 TA Cohort had greater comorbidities with higher: CAD, Mitral disease, PVD, Prior CABG, Carotid Disease, Prior Pacemaker At least one-third of patients enrolled had underlying: Systemic hypertension (71% TF, 77% TA) Pulmonary disease (48% TF, 35% TA) Chronic kidney disease (37% TF, 46% TA)

Study Flow Chart Signed Informed Consent 131 Screening failure = 1** INTENTION-TO-TREAT (ITT) Attempted Procedure TRANSFEMORAL 61* 130 TRANSAPICAL 69 Aborted Procedure (No valve implant attempted) 6 4 DEVICE IMPLANT PERFORMED Patient followed per protocol as intended (AI) 55 65 * One TF cross-over to TA analyzed is in TF cohort per PARTNER EU Trial Executive Committee ruling ** One screening failure active endocarditis - 131 patients signed informed consents

Cm² mmhg Percent Hemodynamics and Valve Performance 1.8 1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Mean Gradient and AVA 46.9 0.7 1.6 10 10.9 Baseline 30 Day 6 Months 1 Year EOA N= 84 78 51 39 Mean Gradient N= 108 85 65 57 Effective Orifice Area 1.5 1.5 12.2 Mean Gradient 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Valve performs as intended with relief of severe stenosis and return to low gradients 64 62 60 58 56 54 52 50 48 54.2 53.2 LVEF 56.8 62.6 56.2 56.1 Baseline 30 Days 6 Months 1 Year TA N = 50 37 30 23 TF N = 46 37 29 29 Transfemoral Transapical 56.3 55.2

Total Aortic Insufficiency Total Aortic Insufficiency Transfemoral Aortic Insufficiency Transapical 2% 2% 0% 0% +4 Severe +4 Severe 0% 2% 0% 0% 6% 15% 6% 0 % +3 Moderate +3 Moderate 2% 16 % 0% 0% 46% 41% 28% 33 % +2 Mild +2 Mild 38% 27% 37% 13% 40% 32% 44% 29% 45% +1 Trace +1 Trace 35% 30% 40% 57% 6% 10% 22% 21% 0 (None) 0 (None) 25% 25% 23% 30% F-U Visit Discharge n=52 30 Day n=41 6 Month n=36 1 Year n=33 At one year post implant: 66%: 0 or 1+ Follow-up Visit Discharge n=48 30 Day n=44 6 Month n=30 1 Year n=23 At one year post implant: 87%: 0 or 1+

Functional Status

% of Patients Edwards SAPIEN TM THV - PARTNER EU: Functional Status and Medium Term Survival 1-Year NYHA Classification 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% NYHA I NYHA II NYHA III NYHA IV N =120 20% 10% 0% N = 120 Baseline 30 Days 6 Months 89% of surviving patients in NYHA Class 1 or 2 1 Year Death Unknown

Nr of patients Edwards SAPIEN TM THV - PARTNER EU: Functional Status and Medium Term Survival 1-Year NYHA Classification 70 60 62 60 60 30 Days 6 months 50 46 1 year 40 34 30 20 10 19 11 9 3 0 3 17 19 15 2 0 Improved NYHA Unchanged NYHA Worsened NYHA Death Not reported N = 120 81% had improved NYHA class at 12 months

Quality of Life Overall Summary Score 90 80 70 67.6 78.3 72.1 60 50 48.3 50.3 49.2 40 30 20 10 0 N = 30 22 52 30 22 52 Baseline 1 Year Transfemoral Transapical Combined Linear (Combined) At 1 year post implantation, a large treatment effect is noted by a 22.9 point improvement

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Quality of Life EQ-5D % Patients Reporting Problems 77 69 51 54 48 50 47 34 33 28 N = 51 51 51 50 51 50 50 50 51 49 Mobility Self-Care Usual Activities Pain/Discomfort Anxiety/Depression Baseline 1 Year At 1 year post implantation, a meaningful improvement in most activities of daily living is noted

Probabilty (event free) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 18 Months - Arrhythmias Requiring Pacemaker N = 130 Transfemoral Freedom from Pacemaker = 98% Transapical Freedom from Pacemaker = 90% TF 30D: 0.98 6M: 0.98 1Y: 0.98 18M: 0.98 SE: 0.02 SE: 0.02 SE: 0.02 SE: 0.02 Nrisk: 52 Nrisk: 51 Nrisk: 45 Nrisk: 27 TA 30 D: 0.96 6M: 0.93 1Y: 0.93 18M: 0.9 SE: 0.03 SE: 0.04 SE: 0.04 SE: 0.05 Nrisk: 44 Nrisk: 30 Nrisk: 24 Nrisk; 14 1 6 Time (months) 12 18 30 day pacemaker in conventional AVR = 3.2% 8.5% ¹ 1. Dawkins et al. Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After Isolated AVR, Ann Thorac Surg, 2008, 85:108-12.

Survival at 18 months

Probabilty (event free) Edwards SAPIEN TM THV - PARTNER EU: Functional Status and Medium Term Survival Transfemoral Survival to 18 Months 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 30D: 0.92 SE: 0.04 Nrisk: 56 6M: 0.9 SE: 0.04 Nrisk: 55 1Y: 0.79 SE: 0.05 Nrisk: 47 Late Deaths (>30 days) (n = 12) 18 Month Survival = 71 ± 6% 18M: 0.71 SE: 0.06 Nrisk: 28 1 6 12 18 Time (months) Data Extract 07 August 09

Probabilty (event free) 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Transapical Survival to 18 Months 18M: 0.43 SE: 0.06 (n = 26) Nrisk: 19 Late Deaths (>30 days) 18 Month Survival = 43±6 % 30D: 0.81 SE: 0.05 Nrisk: 56 6M: 0.58 SE: 0.06 Nrisk: 40 1Y: 0.49 SE: 0.06 Nrisk: 33 1 6 Time (months) 12 18 Data Extract 07 August 09

Survival KM Survival Estimate Between 6 and 18 months 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 Transapical Transfemoral 0 6 9 12 15 18 Only patients alive at 6 months TF n = 55, TA n = 40 Months post Procedure

Conclusions The PARTNER EU Trial is the first TAVI trial where implant approach (TF or TA) was determined jointly by interventional cardiologists and cardiac surgeons. Comparison of survival between TF and TA is problematic due to variability in baseline co morbidity. The Edwards SAPIEN TM THV valve shows excellent hemodynamic performance (AR 0 or 1 in the majority of patients), which translates into a marked improvement in functional status and physical and mental wellbeing. The Kaplan-Meier survival estimates between 6 to 18 months after implantation are very favorable with no signs of valve deterioration.