David L. Brown M.D.

Makkar, R. R., V. H. Thourani, M. J. Mack, S. K. Kodali, S. Kapadia, J. G. Webb, S. H. Yoon, A. Trento, L. G. Svensson, H. C. Herrmann, W. Y. Szeto, D. C. Miller, L. Satler, D. J. Cohen, T. M. Dewey, V. Babaliaros, M. R. Williams, D. J. Kereiakes, A. Zajarias, K. L. Greason, B. K. Whisenant, R. W. Hodson, D. L. Brown, W. F. Fearon, M. J. Russo, P. Pibarot, R. T. Hahn, W. A. Jaber, E. Rogers, K. Xu, J. Wheeler, M. C. Alu, C. R. Smith and M. B. Leon (2020). “Five-Year Outcomes of Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement.” New England Journal of Medicine 382(9): 1-11.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: There are scant data on long-term clinical outcomes and bioprosthetic-valve function after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis and intermediate surgical risk. METHODS: We enrolled 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis at 57 centers. Patients were stratified according to intended transfemoral or transthoracic access (76.3% and 23.7%, respectively) and were randomly assigned to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. Clinical, echocardiographic, and health-status outcomes were followed for 5 years. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke. RESULTS: At 5 years, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death from any cause or disabling stroke between the TAVR group and the surgery group (47.9% and 43.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 to 1.25; P = 0.21). Results were similar for the transfemoral-access cohort (44.5% and 42.0%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.20), but the incidence of death or disabling stroke was higher after TAVR than after surgery in the transthoracic-access cohort (59.3% vs. 48.3%; hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.71). At 5 years, more patients in the TAVR group than in the surgery group had at least mild paravalvular aortic regurgitation (33.3% vs. 6.3%). Repeat hospitalizations were more frequent after TAVR than after surgery (33.3% vs. 25.2%), as were aortic-valve reinterventions (3.2% vs. 0.8%). Improvement in health status at 5 years was similar for TAVR and surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis who were at intermediate surgical risk, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death or disabling stroke at 5 years after TAVR as compared with surgical aortic-valve replacement. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

Tabachnick, D., B. Obokhae, K. Harrington and D. L. Brown (2020). “Assessing the risk of an anomalous circumflex artery using balloon aortic valvuloplasty prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement.” Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Jan 20. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Anomalous origin of the left circumflex coronary artery from the right sinus of Valsalva or proximal right coronary artery (RCA) is a well-known anatomic variation. Although the condition is usually benign, there is risk for compression of the anomalous artery by a prosthetic valve in patients undergoing aortic valve replacement (AVR). In more recent years, balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has been performed prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to serve as a diagnostic tool in the evaluation of symptom relief and procedural risks prior to definitive therapy with TAVR. However, the literature regarding BAV utilization in the assessment of coronary artery anomalies prior to TAVR is scarce. Our case illustrates the importance of performing preoperative BAV to assess the safety of a TAVR procedure in patients with coronary anomalies. Herein, we present a case of a patient who underwent BAV with selective angiography of her anomalous circumflex artery. During balloon inflation, the anomalous circumflex artery was transiently occluded, with complete resolution with balloon deflation. Given these findings, the patient was deemed to be unsuitable for TAVR and offered surgical AVR. This case demonstrates that patients with anomalous coronary circulation may require BAV with selective angiography to fully evaluate risk of coronary occlusion with TAVR.

Mack, M. J., M. B. Leon, V. H. Thourani, R. Makkar, S. K. Kodali, M. Russo, S. R. Kapadia, S. C. Malaisrie, D. J. Cohen, P. Pibarot, J. Leipsic, R. T. Hahn, P. Blanke, M. R. Williams, J. M. McCabe, D. L. Brown, V. Babaliaros, S. Goldman, W. Y. Szeto, P. Genereux, A. Pershad, S. J. Pocock, M. C. Alu, J. G. Webb and C. R. Smith (2019). “Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients.” New England Journal of Medicine 380(18): 1695-1705.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate or high risk for death with surgery, major outcomes are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. There is insufficient evidence regarding the comparison of the two procedures in patients who are at low risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR with transfemoral placement of a balloon-expandable valve or surgery. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year. Both noninferiority testing (with a prespecified margin of 6 percentage points) and superiority testing were performed in the as-treated population. RESULTS: At 71 centers, 1000 patients underwent randomization. The mean age of the patients was 73 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.9% (with scores ranging from 0 to 100% and higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after the procedure). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of the primary composite end point at 1 year was significantly lower in the TAVR group than in the surgery group (8.5% vs. 15.1%; absolute difference, -6.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.8 to -2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P = 0.001 for superiority). At 30 days, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of stroke than surgery (P = 0.02) and in lower rates of death or stroke (P = 0.01) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (P<0.001). TAVR also resulted in a shorter index hospitalization than surgery (P<0.001) and in a lower risk of a poor treatment outcome (death or a low Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) at 30 days (P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in major vascular complications, new permanent pacemaker insertions, or moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with TAVR than with surgery. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675114.).

Mack, M. J., M. B. Leon, V. H. Thourani, R. Makkar, S. K. Kodali, M. Russo, S. R. Kapadia, S. C. Malaisrie, D. J. Cohen, P. Pibarot, J. Leipsic, R. T. Hahn, P. Blanke, M. R. Williams, J. M. McCabe, D. L. Brown, V. Babaliaros, S. Goldman, W. Y. Szeto, P. Genereux, A. Pershad, S. J. Pocock, M. C. Alu, J. G. Webb and C. R. Smith (2019). “Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement with a Balloon-Expandable Valve in Low-Risk Patients.” N Engl J Med Mar 17. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with aortic stenosis who are at intermediate or high risk for death with surgery, major outcomes are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. There is insufficient evidence regarding the comparison of the two procedures in patients who are at low risk. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk to undergo either TAVR with transfemoral placement of a balloon-expandable valve or surgery. The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year. Both noninferiority testing (with a prespecified margin of 6 percentage points) and superiority testing were performed in the as-treated population. RESULTS: At 71 centers, 1000 patients underwent randomization. The mean age of the patients was 73 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.9% (with scores ranging from 0 to 100% and higher scores indicating a greater risk of death within 30 days after the procedure). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of the primary composite end point at 1 year was significantly lower in the TAVR group than in the surgery group (8.5% vs. 15.1%; absolute difference, -6.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.8 to -2.5; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.79; P = 0.001 for superiority). At 30 days, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of stroke than surgery (P = 0.02) and in lower rates of death or stroke (P = 0.01) and new-onset atrial fibrillation (P<0.001). TAVR also resulted in a shorter index hospitalization than surgery (P<0.001) and in a lower risk of a poor treatment outcome (death or a low Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score) at 30 days (P<0.001). There were no significant between-group differences in major vascular complications, new permanent pacemaker insertions, or moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low surgical risk, the rate of the composite of death, stroke, or rehospitalization at 1 year was significantly lower with TAVR than with surgery. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02675114.).

Baron, S. J., K. Wang, J. A. House, E. A. Magnuson, M. R. Reynolds, R. Makkar, H. C. Herrmann, S. Kodali, V. H. Thourani, S. Kapadia, L. Svensson, M. J. Mack, D. L. Brown, M. J. Russo, C. R. Smith, J. Webb, C. Miller, M. B. Leon and D. J. Cohen (2019). “Cost-Effectiveness of Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis at Intermediate Risk.” Circulation 139(7): 877-888.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: In patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) at intermediate surgical risk, treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) results in similar rates of death or stroke at 2 years. Whether TAVR is cost-effective compared with SAVR for intermediate-risk patients remains uncertain. METHODS: Between 2011 and 2014, 3110 intermediate-risk AS patients were treated with TAVR or SAVR in the PARTNER 2 trial (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves 2). A total of 2032 patients were randomized to receive TAVR using the SAPIEN XT valve (XT-TAVR) or SAVR in the PARTNER 2A trial, whereas the PARTNER S3i registry included an additional 1078 patients treated with TAVR using the SAPIEN 3 valve (S3-TAVR), which offers a lower delivery profile and sealing skirt designed to reduce paravalvular regurgitation compared with XT-TAVR. Procedural costs were estimated using measured resource utilization. Other in-trial costs were assessed by linkage of trial data with Medicare claims (n=2333) or by linear regression models for unlinked patients (n=682). Health utilities were estimated using the EQ-5D at baseline and 1, 12, and 24 months. Using a Markov model informed by in-trial costs, utilities, and survival data, lifetime cost-effectiveness from the perspective of the US healthcare system was estimated in terms of cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained. RESULTS: Although procedural costs were approximately $20 000 higher with TAVR than SAVR, total cost differences for the index hospitalization were only $2888 higher with XT-TAVR ( P=0.014) and were $4155 lower with S3-TAVR ( P<0.001) owing to reductions in length of stay with TAVR. Follow-up costs were significantly lower with XT-TAVR (Delta=-$9304; P<0.001) and S3-TAVR (Delta=-$11 377; P<0.001) than with SAVR. Over a lifetime horizon, TAVR was projected to lower total costs by $8000 to $10 000 and to increase quality-adjusted survival by 0.15 to 0.27 years. XT-TAVR and S3-TAVR were found to be economically dominant compared with SAVR in 84% and 97% of bootstrap replicates, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among intermediate-risk AS patients, TAVR is projected to be economically dominant from the perspective of the US healthcare system by providing both greater quality-adjusted life expectancy and lower long-term costs than SAVR. If long-term data demonstrate comparable late mortality with TAVR and SAVR, these findings suggest that TAVR might be the preferred treatment strategy for intermediate-risk AS patients based on both clinical and economic considerations. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01314313.