Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement.

Samir R Kapadia ORCID logo; Raj Makkar; Martin Leon; Mohamed Abdel-Wahab; Thomas Waggoner; Steffen Massberg ORCID logo; Wolfgang Rottbauer; Samuel Horr; Lars Sondergaard; Juhana Karha; +16 more... Robert Gooley; Lowell Satler; Robert C Stoler; Steven R Messé; Suzanne J Baron; Julia Seeger; Susheel Kodali; Amar Krishnaswamy; Vinod H Thourani; Katherine Harrington; Stuart Pocock; Rodrigo Modolo; Dominic J Allocco; Ian T Meredith; Axel Linke; PROTECTED TAVR Investigators; (2022) Cerebral Embolic Protection during Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Replacement. The New England journal of medicine, 387 (14). pp. 1253-1263. ISSN 0028-4793 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2204961
Copy

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) for the treatment of aortic stenosis can lead to embolization of debris. Capture of debris by devices that provide cerebral embolic protection (CEP) may reduce the risk of stroke. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with aortic stenosis in a 1:1 ratio to undergo transfemoral TAVR with CEP (CEP group) or without CEP (control group). The primary end point was stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge (whichever came first) in the intention-to-treat population. Disabling stroke, death, transient ischemic attack, delirium, major or minor vascular complications at the CEP access site, and acute kidney injury were also assessed. A neurology professional examined all the patients at baseline and after TAVR. RESULTS: A total of 3000 patients across North America, Europe, and Australia underwent randomization; 1501 were assigned to the CEP group and 1499 to the control group. A CEP device was successfully deployed in 1406 of the 1489 patients (94.4%) in whom an attempt was made. The incidence of stroke within 72 hours after TAVR or before discharge did not differ significantly between the CEP group and the control group (2.3% vs. 2.9%; difference, -0.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, -1.7 to 0.5; P = 0.30). Disabling stroke occurred in 0.5% of the patients in the CEP group and in 1.3% of those in the control group. There were no substantial differences between the CEP group and the control group in the percentage of patients who died (0.5% vs. 0.3%); had a stroke, a transient ischemic attack, or delirium (3.1% vs. 3.7%); or had acute kidney injury (0.5% vs. 0.5%). One patient (0.1%) had a vascular complication at the CEP access site. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with aortic stenosis undergoing transfemoral TAVR, the use of CEP did not have a significant effect on the incidence of periprocedural stroke, but on the basis of the 95% confidence interval around this outcome, the results may not rule out a benefit of CEP during TAVR. (Funded by Boston Scientific; PROTECTED TAVR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04149535.).


picture_as_pdf
Kapadia-etal-2022-Cerebral-Embolic-Protection-during-Transcatheter-Aortic-Valve-Replacement.pdf
subject
Published Version
copyright
Available under Copyright the publishers

View Download

Atom BibTeX OpenURL ContextObject in Span Multiline CSV OpenURL ContextObject Dublin Core Dublin Core MPEG-21 DIDL EndNote HTML Citation JSON MARC (ASCII) MARC (ISO 2709) METS MODS RDF+N3 RDF+N-Triples RDF+XML RIOXX2 XML Reference Manager Refer Simple Metadata ASCII Citation EP3 XML
Export

Downloads