BACKGROUND: The use of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for treating aortic stenosis (AS) has increased exponentially in recent years. Despite the availability of clinical practice guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease, disparities in quality of care (QoC) for TAVI patients remain widespread across Europe. Tailored QoC measures will help to reduce resource utilization and improve patient outcomes without compromising patient safety. Using a clear set of QoC measures, the BENCHMARK registry aims to document the progress that can be achieved if such tailored QoC measures are implemented. METHODS: The BENCHMARK registry (BENCHMARK) is a non-interventional, multicenter registry in patients with severe symptomatic AS undergoing TAVI with a 1- and 12-months follow-up. BENCHMARK will be conducted at 30 centers across Europe and will enroll a total of 2400 consecutive TAVI patients. Patients suffering from severe symptomatic AS who undergo TAVI with a balloon-expandable transcatheter aortic valve will be included. The registry will comprise four phases: (1) a retrospective baseline evaluation phase; (2) an education phase; (3) an implementation phase; and (4) a prospective effect documentation phase (prospective phase). The registry's primary objectives are to reduce the length of hospital stay and accelerate the post-procedural patient recovery pathway, but without compromising safety. The study started in April 2021 and has an estimated completion date of May 2023. DISCUSSION: BENCHMARK will establish QoC measures to reduce resource utilization, intensive care unit bed occupancy, and overall length of hospitalization with uncompromised patient safety post-TAVI (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04579445).

Cardiology Department Frankfurt University Frankfurt Germany

Cardiology Department James Cook University Hospital Middlesbrough UK

Cardiology Department Royal Victoria Hospital Belfast UK

Center for Heart Valve Innovation St Paul's Hospital University of Vancouver Vancouver British Columbia Canada

Department of Cardiology FHU CARNAVAL Normandie University UNIROUEN Rouen France

Department of Cardiology University of Bologna Bologna Italy

Department of Internal Medicine 3 Kiel Germany

Edwards Lifesciences Nyon Switzerland

Edwards Lifesciences Prague Czech Republic

German Center for Cardiovascular Research partner site Hamburg Kiel Lübeck Kiel Germany

Institute for Pharmacology and Preventive Medicine Cloppenburg Germany

See more in PubMed

Smith CR, Leon MB, Mack MJ, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic‐valve replacement in high‐risk patients. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(23):2187‐2198. PubMed

Singh K, Bhalla AS, Qutub MA, Carson K, Labinaz M. Systematic review and meta‐analysis to compare outcomes between intermediate‐ and high‐risk patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J Qual Care Clin Outcomes. 2017;3(4):289‐295. PubMed

Kolte D, Vlahakes GJ, Palacios IF, et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in low‐risk patients. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;74(12):1532‐1540. PubMed

Bekeredjian R, Szabo G, Balaban Ü, et al. Patients at low surgical risk as defined by the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score undergoing isolated interventional or surgical aortic valve implantation: in‐hospital data and 1‐year results from the German Aortic Valve Registry (GARY). Eur Heart J. 2019;40(17):1323‐1330. PubMed

Baumgartner H, Falk V, Bax JJ, et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS Guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur Heart J. 2017;38(36):2739‐2791. PubMed

Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: first human case description. Circulation. 2002;106(24):3006‐3008. PubMed

Biasco L, Ferrari E, Pedrazzini G, et al. Access sites for TAVI: Patient selection criteria, technical aspects, and outcomes. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2018;5:88. PubMed PMC

Lauck SB, Wood DA, Baumbusch J, et al. Vancouver transcatheter aortic valve replacement clinical pathway: minimalist approach, standardized care, and discharge criteria to reduce length of stay. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016;9(3):312‐321. PubMed

Lauck SB, Wood DA, Achtem L, et al. Risk stratification and clinical pathways to optimize length of stay after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Can J Cardiol. 2014;30(12):1583‐1587. PubMed

Puri R, Iung B, Cohen DJ, Rodés‐Cabau J. TAVI or No TAVI: Identifying patients unlikely to benefit from transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur Heart J. 2016;37(28):2217‐2225. PubMed

Akodad M, Lefèvre T. TAVI: simplification is the ultimate sophistication. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2018;5:96. PubMed PMC

Barbanti M, Gulino S, Costa G, Tamburino C. Optimization and simplification of transcatheter aortic valve implantation therapy. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2018;16(4):287‐296. PubMed

Durand E, Borz B, Godin M, et al. Transfemoral aortic valve replacement with the Edwards SAPIEN and Edwards SAPIEN XT prosthesis using exclusively local anesthesia and fluoroscopic guidance: feasibility and 30‐day outcomes. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(5):461‐467. PubMed

Serletis‐Bizios A, Durand E, Cellier G, et al. A prospective analysis of early discharge after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2016;118(6):866‐872. PubMed

Saia F, Palmerini T, Marcelli C, et al. Routine minimalist transcatheter aortic valve implantation with local anesthesia only. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2020;21(10):805‐811. PubMed

Spence MS, Baan J, Iacovelli F, et al. Prespecified risk criteria facilitate adequate discharge and long‐term outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation. J Am Heart Assoc. 2020;9(15):e016990. PubMed PMC

Wood DA, Lauck SB, Cairns JA, et al. The Vancouver 3M (multidisciplinary, multimodality, but minimalist) clinical pathway facilitates safe next‐day discharge home at low‐, medium‐, and high‐volume transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement centers: the 3M TAVR study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(5):459‐469. PubMed

van Rosendael PJ, Delgado V, Bax JJ. Pacemaker implantation rate after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with early and new‐generation devices: a systematic review. Eur Heart J. 2018;39(21):2003‐2013. PubMed

Lauck S, Forman J, Borregaard B, et al. Facilitating transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the era of COVID‐19: Recommendations for programmes. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020;19(6):537‐544. PubMed PMC

Lauck S, Sathananthan J, Achtem L, Humphries K, Webb J, Wood D. Nurse‐led post‐procedure protocol to facilitate safe next‐day discharge home: Findings of the 3M TAVR study. Can J Cardiol. 2019;35(10):S204.

Barbanti M, Baan J, Spence MS, et al. Feasibility and safety of early discharge after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation—rationale and design of the FAST‐TAVI registry. BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017;17(1):259. PubMed PMC

Barbanti M, van Mourik MS, Spence MS, et al. Optimising patient discharge management after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the multicentre European FAST‐TAVI trial. EuroIntervention. 2019;15(2):147‐154. PubMed

Lauck SB, Arnold SV, Borregaard B, et al. Very early changes in quality of life after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: results from the 3M TAVR trial. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020;21(12):1573‐1578. PubMed

Sathananthan J, Webb JG, Lauck SB, et al. Impact of local anesthesia only versus procedural sedation using the vancouver clinical pathway for TAVR: insights from the 3M TAVR study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;12(10):1000‐1001. PubMed

Lauck SB, Sathananthan J, Park J, et al. Post‐procedure protocol to facilitate next‐day discharge: results of the multidisciplinary, multimodality but minimalist TAVR study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2020;96(2):450‐458. PubMed

Wood DA, Sathananthan J. “Minimalist” transcatheter aortic valve implantation during the COVID‐19 pandemic: previously optional but now a necessity. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(6):e451‐e452. PubMed

Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium‐2 consensus document (VARC‐2). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2012;42(5):S45‐S60. PubMed

Asgar AW, Lauck S, Ko D, et al. Quality of care for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: development of canadian cardiovascular society quality indicators. Can J Cardiol. 2016;32(8):1038 e1‐4. PubMed

De Ronde‐Tillmans M, Goudzwaard JA, El Faquir N, et al. TAVI Care and Cure, the Rotterdam multidisciplinary program for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: design and rationale. Int J Cardiol. 2020;302:36‐41. PubMed

Frey N, Steeds RP, Serra A, et al. Quality of care assessment and improvement in aortic stenosis—rationale and design of a multicentre registry (IMPULSE). BMC Cardiovasc Disord. 2017;17(1):5. PubMed PMC

Rudolph TK, Messika‐Zeitoun D, Frey N, et al. Caseload management and outcome of patients with aortic stenosis in primary/secondary versus tertiary care settings‐design of the IMPULSE enhanced registry. Open Heart. 2019;6(2):e001019. PubMed PMC

The implementation of a streamlined TAVI patient pathway across five European countries: BENCHMARK registry

A streamlined pathway for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the BENCHMARK study

The COORDINATE Pilot Study: Impact of a Transcatheter Aortic Valve Coordinator Program on Hospital and Patient Outcomes

See more in PubMed

ClinicalTrials.gov
NCT04579445