February 2021 | Issue 60
Featured in this issue:
www.cardiovascularnews.com
8
New section
Cardiovascular surgery
Rhian Davies
Competency in high risk coronary cases
TAVI overtakes open surgery in US valve registry
2011-2013
13,273 2014
16,312 2015
25,085
With 2021 set to mark the ten-year milestone since the approval of the first device for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the USA, fresh data show that the transcatheter technique has overtaken open surgery for the first time in the USA as the predominant approach to aortic valve replacement.
2016
38,035 2017
51,002
L
atest data from the Transcatheter Valve Therapy (TVT) registry, a collaboration between the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) and American College of Cardiology (ACC), confirms that since 2011 TAVI procedures have increased year-on-year in US centres. The TVT report on TAVI and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) trends, which includes findings up to and including 2019, was published in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology (JACC) and The Annals of Thoracic Surgery in late 2020. The report also documented that 30-day mortality and stroke rates associated with TAVI have decreased over this time period, while pacemaker need has remained largely unchanged. According to the data, which were taken from hospitals in 49 US states, the annual volume of TAVI procedures in the USA carried out in 2019 totalled 72,991, exceeding all forms of SAVR, for the first time since data were collected. “The STS/ACC TVT registry allows us to see major trends occurring in the real-world TAVI patient population, including a rapid growth in both the number of hospital sites performing TAVI and case volume as we treat a broader spectrum of patients. We have also seen TAVI become the leading choice for aortic valve replacement compared to the open surgical approach,” says John Carroll, professor of cardiology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and director of interventional cardiology at the University of Colorado Hospital, Denver, USA, chair of the TVT Registry Steering Committee, and the lead author on the report. “Furthermore, the data on outcomes after TAVI document a substantial improvement in quality of care in the last nine years.” The TVT data show that the number of TAVI procedures performed per site varies, reflecting an increase in the total annual volume of procedures as the number of sites performing TAVI has increased. In 2019, sites each performed 84 TAVI procedures on average with 161 sites performing fewer than 50 cases—the recommended minimum annual threshold for sites performing TAVI by stakeholders including STS and ACC. Data also show the median age of patients undergoing TAVI has decreased from early TAVI experience, as well
page 9-10
2018
58,168 2019
72,991 TAVI volume
as skewing more toward males (56%), representing a shift away from the early TAVI period when there was a nearly equal male/female distribution of patients undergoing the procedure. From 2011 through to 2018, extreme and high-risk patients remained the largest cohort undergoing TAVI, but in 2019 intermediate-risk was the largest cohort. In 2019, the first year TAVI was FDA-approved for low-risk patients, this population made up 11.5% of all TAVI patients and had a median age of 75. With understanding and clinical data around the longer-term outcomes of TAVI continuing to develop, recent debate has centred on the decisionmaking process guiding the choice between transcatheter or surgical approaches to aortic stenosis. During a discussion at the PCR Valves 2020 e-course (22–24 November, virtual) cardiothoracic thoracic surgeon Michael Mack (Baylor Scott & White Health, Plano, USA) questioned what evidence is needed for TAVI to become the “gold standard” in aortic stenosis patients. “In some ways I think you can say that TAVI already Data show how transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has grown year-on-year in the USA
has become the gold standard,” he comments, pointing to the TVT registry data. However, Mack says that there are several evidence gaps that must be filled in order for TAVI to become more predominant. These include, he details, outcomes in patients under 65 years of age, long-term follow-up data on valve durability, outcomes in aortic regurgitation, treatment of concomitant coronary artery disease and bicuspid valve disease, and further evidence on the role of anticoagulation. He noted that there are a number of trials being carried out to seek to fill this evidence gap—listing among them: EARLY TAVR, COMPLETE TAVR, REPEAT TAVR, WATCH TAVR, and TAVR
John Carroll
Furthermore, the data on outcomes after TAVI document a substantial improvement in quality of care in the last nine years.” Continued on page 4
Profile Stephan Achenbach page 12
Pandemic highlights need for “enhanced protection” in cath labs The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the personal healthcare risk to cath lab teams and should trigger an “enhanced emphasis” on health protection for those working in interventional cardiology, according to Adrian Banning (John Radcliffe Hospital, Oxford, UK) and colleagues, writing in the European Heart Journal. REFLECTING ON THE initial months of the COVID-19 pandemic and looking in particular at the impact upon patients, staff, and future percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practices, Banning et al write that there is a need for clear, specific advice about limiting in-hospital transmission. Additionally, they call for the provision of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for cath lab teams that can be worn “without compromising practice”, writing that treatment of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction has been made more complex due to the need for enhanced PPE. Banning and colleagues note: “Wearing an extra gown and a visor together with lead coat protection resulted in inevitable perspiration with subsequent clouding of glasses and/or visors. This made viewing the angiographic screens difficult and consequently operators chose to try and complete emergency cases as quickly and safely as possible.” Furthermore, they add: “It is particularly noteworthy that this pandemic has highlighted the personal healthcare risks that cath lab teams take. The risks of radiation exposure have probably been chronically under-emphasised and the risk of blood-borne viruses has almost been completely forgotten in many labs. An enhanced emphasis on protection of the cath lab team is apparent and overdue.” Banning et al suggest that in the future this may provide an opportunity for the increasing use of robotic or enhanced protective computer technologies within cath labs. Elsewhere in the article, they highlight changes to methods of patient follow-up instigated by many hospitals in response to the pandemic, including the use of Continued on page 2