Balloon vs. Self Expanding Transcatheter Valve for Degenerated Bioprosthesis

Summary

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) serves a growing spectrum of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS). Approximately 80% of surgical aortic valve replacements is performed using a bioprosthesis1. Durability of surgical bioprostheses varies based on the patient's age at the moment of implantation, type and size etc2. TAVI has become the preferred treatment for degenerated aortic bioprostheses in elderly patients3. The median time since index surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and for bioprosthetic valve degeneration is typically 8 - 10 years4-6. TAVI in this setting has proven to have equally favorable results as in native aortic valves7. Balloon expandable8 and self-expanding9 transcatheter heart valves (THV) can be used in a degenerated bioprosthesis and each have specific assets and limitations. TAVI in a failed bioprosthesis can cause coronary obstruction, THV migration, paravalvular leakage and prosthesis patient mismatch. The SAPIEN-3 / Ultra and EVOLUT R/Pro are the 2 most commonly used THV platforms in contemporary clinical practice including treatment of failing surgical aortic bioprostheses.

Objective: To compare TAVI with EVOLUT R/Pro vs. SAPIEN-3 / Ultra in terms of device success.

Study design: International multi-center randomized study with 1:1 randomization to TAVI with SAPIEN-3 / Ultra or Evolut R/Pro.

Study population: 440 patients with a failing surgical aortic bioprosthesis (aortic stenosis with or without aortic regurgitation) and selected for transfemoral TAVI by heart-team consensus.

Investigational intervention: Transfemoral TAVI with SAPIEN-3 / Ultra or Evolut R/PRO

Main study parameters/endpoints:

1. Primary endpoint is device success at 30 days

Defined by
* Absence of procedural mortality AND
* Correct positioning of a single prosthetic heart valve into the proper anatomical location AND
* Intended performance of the prosthetic heart valve (no severe prosthesis- patient mismatch and mean aortic valve gradient \< 20 mmHg or peak velocity \< 3 m/s, AND no moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation). Severe prosthesis patient mismatch is defined by effective orifice area (EOAi) ≤0.65 cm2/m2
2. Safety endpoint at 1 year defined by the composite of all-cause death, disabling stroke, rehospitalization for heart failure or valve related problems.

Conditions

• Valve Heart Disease

Interventions

DEVICE

Evolut R/PRO bioprosthesis

To compare Evolut R/PRO versus Sapien S3/Ultra in failing surgical bioprostheses

DEVICE

Edwards Sapien S3/Ultra bioprosthesis

Edwards Sapien S3/Ultra bioprosthesis

Sponsors & Collaborators

• Erasmus Medical Center

  lead OTHER

Principal Investigators

• Nicolas Van Mieghem, MD, PhD · Erasmus Medical Centre

• Rutger-Jan Nuis, MD, PhD · Erasmus Medical Centre

Study Design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Model

PARALLEL

Eligibility

Min Age

65 Years

Sex

ALL

Healthy Volunteers

No

Timeline & Regulatory

Start

2021-05-01

Primary Completion

2026-05-01

Completion

2026-05-01

FDA Device

Yes

Countries

• United States
• Austria
• Canada
• Denmark
• France
• Germany
• Greece
• Italy
• Netherlands
• Portugal
• Switzerland
• United Kingdom

Study Locations