» Articles » PMID: 32518532

Insights on Embolic Protection, Repositioning, and Stroke: A Subanalysis of the RESPOND Study

Overview
Publisher Wiley
Date 2020 Jun 11
PMID 32518532
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

RESPOND is a prospective, single-arm study enrolling 1014 transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients. The objective of this analysis is to assess the impact of cerebral embolic protection (CEP) devices and prosthetic valve repositioning on the risk of neurologic complications in patients treated with the fully repositionable Lotus Valve in the RESPOND postmarket study. Valve repositioning and CEP use were at the operators' discretion. Stroke events were adjudicated by an independent medical reviewer. This analysis assessed the baseline differences among patients according to CEP use and valve repositioning and evaluated the neurological complications at 72 hours after TAVR, hospital discharge, and 30-day follow-up. A multivariate analysis was performed to identify the potential predictors of stroke. Of the 996 patients implanted with the Lotus Valve (mean age: 80.8 years, 50.8% female, STS score 6.0 ± 6.9), 92 cases (9.2%) used CEP. The overall rate of acute stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA) was 3.0% at 72 hours after TAVR. The 72-hour stroke/TIA rate was 1.1% in patients who had CEP and 3.2% in those who did not. Use of CEP was associated with a 2.1% absolute reduction in the risk of acute neurological events (relative risk reduction: 65.6%), although the difference was not statistically significant (=0.51). Repositioning of the Lotus Valve occurred in 313/996 procedures (31.4%). The 72-hour rate of stroke/TIA was similar in patients who had valve repositioning (2.9%) compared with those who did not (3.1%; =0.86). The selective use of a CEP device in the RESPOND study was associated with a nonsignificantly lower risk for stroke within 72 hours. The use of the repositioning feature of the Lotus Valve did not increase the stroke risk.

Citing Articles

Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection in transcatheter aortic valve implantation: an updated meta-analysis.

Tan N, Fei G, Amanullah M, Lim S, Abdul Aziz Z, Govindasamy S AsiaIntervention. 2024; 10(1):51-59.

PMID: 38425806 PMC: 10900717. DOI: 10.4244/AIJ-D-23-00022.


Safety and efficacy of cerebral embolic protection devices for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement: An updated meta-analysis.

Shrestha D, Shtembari J, Lamichhane S, Baniya A, Shahi M, Dhungel S Health Sci Rep. 2023; 6(7):e1391.

PMID: 37404451 PMC: 10314975. DOI: 10.1002/hsr2.1391.


Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With and Without Resheathing and Repositioning: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Moroni F, Azzalini L, Sondergaard L, Attizzani G, Garcia S, Jneid H J Am Heart Assoc. 2022; 11(12):e024707.

PMID: 35699176 PMC: 9238664. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.024707.


Cerebral Protection in TAVR-Can We Do Without? A Real-World All-Comer Intention-to-Treat Study-Impact on Stroke Rate, Length of Hospital Stay, and Twelve-Month Mortality.

Dona C, Koschutnik M, Nitsche C, Winter M, Seidl V, Siller-Matula J J Pers Med. 2022; 12(2).

PMID: 35207808 PMC: 8878932. DOI: 10.3390/jpm12020320.

References
1.
Meredith Am I, Walters D, Dumonteil N, Worthley S, Tchetche D, Manoharan G . Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis using a repositionable valve system: 30-day primary endpoint results from the REPRISE II study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 64(13):1339-48. DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.05.067. View

2.
Mack M, Brennan J, Brindis R, Carroll J, Edwards F, Grover F . Outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States. JAMA. 2013; 310(19):2069-77. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.282043. View

3.
Gooley R, Lockwood S, Antonis P, Meredith I . The SADRA Lotus Valve System: a fully repositionable, retrievable prosthesis. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2013; 61(1):45-52. View

4.
Rashid H, Gooley R, McCormick L, Zaman S, Ramkumar S, Jackson D . Safety and efficacy of valve repositioning during transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the Lotus Valve System. J Cardiol. 2016; 70(1):55-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.jjcc.2016.11.002. View

5.
Meredith I, Dumonteil N, Blackman D, Tchetche D, Walters D, Hildick-Smith D . Repositionable percutaneous aortic valve implantation with the LOTUS valve: 30-day and 1-year outcomes in 250 high-risk surgical patients. EuroIntervention. 2017; 13(7):788-795. DOI: 10.4244/EIJ-D-16-01024. View