1. |
- Simonato, Matheus, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR : A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Academic pediatrics. - : Elsevier. - 1876-2859 .- 1876-2867. ; 22:3, s. 685-697
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.
|
|
2. |
- Simonato, Matheus, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimum Core Data Elements for Evaluation of TAVR : A Scientific Statement by PASSION CV, HVC, and TVT Registry
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. - : Elsevier. - 0003-4975 .- 1552-6259. ; 113:5, s. 1730-1742
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is the standard of care for severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. Real-world TAVR data collection contributes to benefit/risk assessment and safety evidence for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, quality evaluation for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospitals, as well as clinical research and real-world implementation through appropriate use criteria. The essential minimum core dataset for these purposes has not previously been defined but is necessary to promote efficient, reusable real-world data collection supporting quality, regulatory, and clinical applications. The authors performed a systematic review of the published research for high-impact TAVR studies and U.S. multicenter, multidevice registries. Two expert task forces, one from the Predictable and Sustainable Implementation of National Cardiovascular Registries/Heart Valve Collaboratory and another from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry convened separately and then met to reconcile a final list of essential data elements. From 276 unique data elements considered, unanimous consensus agreement was achieved on 132 "core" data elements, with the most common reasons for exclusion from the minimum core dataset being burden or difficulty in accurate assessment (36.9%), duplicative information (33.3%), and low likelihood of affecting outcomes (10.7%). After a systematic review and extensive discussions, a multilateral group of academicians, industry representatives, and regulators established 132 interoperable, reusable essential core data elements essential to supporting more efficient, consistent, and informative TAVR device evidence for regulatory submissions, safety surveillance, best practice, and hospital quality assessments.
|
|
3. |
- Généreux, Philippe, et al.
(författare)
-
Evolution and Prognostic Impact of Cardiac Damage After Aortic Valve Replacement.
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - 1558-3597.
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The impact of aortic valve replacement (AVR) on progression/regression of extra-valvular cardiac damage and its association with subsequent prognosis is unknown.To describe evolution of cardiac damage post-AVR and its association with outcomes.Patients undergoing transcatheter or surgical AVR from the PARTNER 2 and 3 trials were pooled and classified by cardiac damage stage at baseline and 1-year (Stage 0, no damage; Stage 1, left ventricular damage; Stage 2, left atrial or mitral valve damage; Stage 3, pulmonary vasculature or tricuspid valve damage; Stage 4, right ventricular damage). Proportional hazards models determined association between change in cardiac damage post-AVR and 2-year outcomes.Among 1974 patients, 121 (6.1%) were Stage 0, 287 (14.5%) Stage 1, 1014 (51.4%) Stage 2, 412 (20.9%) Stage 3, and 140 (7.1%) Stage 4 pre-AVR. Two-year mortality was associated with extent of cardiac damage at baseline and 1-year. Compared with baseline, cardiac damage improved in ∼15%, remained unchanged in ∼60%, and worsened in ∼25% of patients at 1-year. One-year change in cardiac damage stage was independently associated with mortality (adjHR for improvement=0.49; no change=1.0; worsening=1.95; p=0.023) and composite of death or heart failure hospitalization (adjHR for improvement=0.60; no change=1.0; worsening=2.25; p<0.001) at 2 years.In patients undergoing AVR, extent of extravalvular cardiac damage at baseline and its change at 1-year have important prognostic implications. These findings suggest that earlier detection of AS and intervention prior to development of irreversible cardiac damage may improve global cardiac function and prognosis.
|
|
4. |
- Rizik, David G., et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With the Lotus Valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR : A Secondary Analysis of the REPRISE III Randomized Clinical Trial
- 2022
-
Ingår i: JAMA Network Open. - : American Medical Association (AMA). - 2574-3805. ; 5:10, s. 1-11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Importance: Long-term follow-up after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is of interest given that longitudinal data on mortality and durability of transcatheter heart valves are limited. The REPRISE III (Repositionable Percutaneous Replacement of Stenotic Aortic Valve Through Implantation of Lotus Valve System-Randomized Clinical Evaluation) randomized clinical trial compared the mechanically expanded Lotus valve with the self-expanding CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms. Objective: To describe the final 5-year outcomes of the REPRISE III trial. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prespecified secondary analysis assessed the final 5-year clinical, functional, and echocardiographic outcomes of 912 patients from the REPRISE III trial, which was conducted at 55 centers in North America, Europe, and Australia between September 22, 2014, and December 24, 2015. Patients had high risk for aortic stenosis or severe or symptomatic aortic stenosis. Data were analyzed from September 22, 2014, to May 21, 2021. Intervention: Lotus valve or CoreValve/EvolutR TAVR platforms. Main Outcomes and Measures: Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 end points, hemodynamic measures, functional status, and health status were examined through the 5-year follow-up. Results: A total of 912 patients (mean [SD] age, 82.8 [7.3] years; 463 women [50.8%]) were randomized to either the Lotus valve group (n = 607) or CoreValve/EvolutR group (n = 305), with a baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score of 6.8%. Clinical follow-up data from the REPRISE III trial were available for 581 patients (95.7%) in the Lotus valve group and 285 patients (93.4%) in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. At 5 years, the cumulative event rate for all-cause mortality was 50.9% in the Lotus valve group vs 52.8% in the CoreValve/EvolutR group (P = .59). Disabling stroke was less frequent with the Lotus valve vs CoreValve/EvolutR (cumulative event rates, 8.3% vs 12.2%; P = .04), whereas the cumulative event rates for overall stroke were similar in both groups (14.1% vs 15.3%; P = .38). Insertion of a new permanent pacemaker (38.9% vs 27.3%; P < .001) and detection of prosthetic aortic valve thrombosis (5.8% vs 1.8%; P = .007) were more common in the Lotus valve group than in the CoreValve/EvolutR group. A smaller proportion of patients who received the Lotus valve experienced valve malpositioning (0% vs 2.6%; P < .001) and required the use of a second valve (1.0% vs 3.8%; P < .001) during the procedure compared with those who received the CoreValve/EvolutR. Compared with the Lotus valve group, the CoreValve/EvolutR group had a significantly lower mean (SD) aortic gradient (7.8 [4.2] mm Hg vs 12.6 [6.7] mm Hg; P < .001) and larger valve areas (1.57 [0.56] cm2 vs 1.42 [0.42] cm2; P = .10). After 5 years, the proportion of patients with moderate or greater paravalvular leak was not significantly higher with the CoreValve/EvolutR than with the Lotus valve (1.9% vs 0%; P = .31); however, the proportion of patients with mild paravalvular leak was higher in the CoreValve/EvolutR group compared with the Lotus valve group (23.1% vs 7.8%; P = .006). Long-term, similar improvements in New York Heart Association class and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score were observed in both groups. Conclusions and Relevance: The REPRISE III trial found that, at 5 years, the clinical outcomes of the Lotus valve were comparable to those of the CoreValve/EvolutR and that the Lotus valve was safe and effective. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02202434.
|
|