Prospective analysis of 30-day safety and performance of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation with Edwards SAPIEN XT versus SAPIEN prostheses.

Department of Cardiology, Hospital Charles-Nicolle, University Hospital of Rouen, Rouen cedex, France.
Archives of cardiovascular diseases (Impact Factor: 0.66). 03/2012; 105(3):132-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.acvd.2012.02.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A new generation of balloon-expandable valves (e.g. Edwards SAPIEN XT) enables the use of a decreased sheath size using the NovaFlex™ delivery system for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). However, there are few data analysing the efficacy and safety of this new prosthesis.
To evaluate periprocedural and 30-day clinical outcomes using the Edwards SAPIEN XT compared with the first-generation Edwards SAPIEN prosthesis.
Between May 2006 and October 2011, consecutive high-risk or non-operable patients with severe aortic stenosis had TAVI using an Edwards SAPIEN or SAPIEN XT prosthesis. Valve Academic Research Consortium endpoints were used.
Of 250 patients who underwent TAVI, 190 were performed transfemorally (78 SAPIEN and 112 SAPIEN XT). Transfemoral access was possible more often using SAPIEN XT (112/123 [91.1%] vs 78/127 [61.4%]; P<0.001). Mean logistic EuroSCORE was significantly lower in the SAPIEN XT group (18.1±11.0% vs 27.3±11.1%; P<0.0001), and the iliofemoral artery minimal lumen diameter was smaller (6.7±1.2 vs 8.5±1.3mm; P<0.0001). Device success was similar in both groups (95.5% for SAPIEN XT and 93.6% for SAPIEN), as was the 30-day combined safety endpoint (15.2% and 17.9%, respectively). At 30days, prosthesis performance was similar in both groups.
Short-term safety and performance analysis of the latest generation of balloon-expandable valve, the SAPIEN XT, seem similar to the previous generation. However, transfemoral implantation is more often possible, related to sheath size reduction.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aims: It is currently unknown whether the expandable sheath (e-sheath) for transfemoral Edwards transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) has a lower rate of access complications than the fixed size sheath (f-sheath). Our aim was to compare the incidence of procedural complications when using f-sheath versus e-sheath during TAVR.Methods: We included 162 consecutive patients, implanted with the Edwards SAPIEN XT valve in our center. Access closure was obtained with the Prostar system in all cases. E-sheath was used in 80 patients (49%). Results: Minimal iliofemoral diameter was comparable in e-sheath and f-sheath groups: 6.7 (6.1-7.7) vs. 7 (6.2-8) mm, p = 0.25, as was the frequency of peripheral artery disease: 12.5% vs. 13.4%, p = 1.0. VARC major vascular complications rate was similar in the 2 groups: e-sheath 7 (8.8%) vs. f-sheath 6 (7.3%), p = 0.74, as was the incidence of minor vascular complications: 8 (10%) vs. 14 (17.1%), p = 0.19, life-threatening bleeding: 6 (7.5%) vs. 6 (7.3%), p = 0.96, major and minor bleeding and use of covered vascular stents: 9 (11%) vs. 6 (7.5%), p = 0.59. Conclusions: The e-sheath for TAVR with the Edwards valve did not show an advantage over the f-sheath in reducing vascular and bleeding complications. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 01/2014; · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Few data is available comparing Edwards SAPIEN XT - SXT (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) with Medtronic CoreValve - CoV (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).
    American journal of cardiovascular disease. 01/2014; 4(2):87-99.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Live case demonstration as an educational tool is widely used to rapidly and effectively disseminate information on surgical and interventional techniques. The risks and benefits of live case transmission for investigational devices, however, are in question. Transcatheter Aortic Valve Intervention-Live Transmission (VERITAS) is a case-control study of 60 patients from 5 centers who were treated with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) during live- or recorded transmission; of which 42 have matched Control subjects from five sites. Case and Control subjects were matched by valve type, access strategy (Edwards SAPIEN transfemoral, Edwards SAPIEN transapical, CoreValve transfemoral), Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score, date of TAVR procedure, and primary operator. The Case and Control groups' baseline characteristics were similar, with average ages of 84 and 82 years, and STS scores of 6.54±3.22 and 6.46±3.20, respectively. The number of operators, fluoroscopy time, contrast volume and length of hospital stay were also similar between groups. Overall, 91.7% of the cases had TAVR via a transfemoral approach; 72% of these patients received a closure device. The final valve position was adequate in 91.2% of the Case patients and in 97% of the Control patients, with no cases of valve migration or coronary obstruction. The Case patients had longer procedure times (130.2±50.6 versus 100.6±43.7min; p=0.006). The Valve Academic Research Consortium in-hospital complications were similar between groups. Four Case patients and 1 Control patient required additional valve implantation. Data support the notion that live transmission of TAVR procedures, when performed by experienced operators, can be done safely with similar outcomes when compared to non-transmitted cases.
    Cardiovascular revascularization medicine: including molecular interventions 03/2014; 15(2):63-8.

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jun 2, 2014