BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is significant potential to streamline the clinical pathway for patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of implementing BENCHMARK best practices on the efficiency and safety of TAVI in 28 sites in 7 European countries. METHODS: This was a study of patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI with balloon-expandable valves before and after implementation of BENCHMARK best practices. Principal objectives were to reduce hospital length of stay (LoS) and duration of intensive care stay. Secondary objective was to document patient safety. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and March 2023, 897 patients were documented prior to and 1491 patients after the implementation of BENCHMARK practices. Patient characteristics were consistent with a known older TAVI population and only minor differences. Mean LoS was reduced from 7.7 ± 7.0 to 5.8 ± 5.6 days (median 6 vs. 4 days; P < .001). Duration of intensive care was reduced from 1.8 to 1.3 days (median 1.1 vs. 0.9 days; P < .001). Adoption of peri-procedure best practices led to increased use of local anaesthesia (96.1% vs. 84.3%; P < .001) and decreased procedure (median 47 vs. 60 min; P < .001) and intervention times (85 vs. 95 min; P < .001). Thirty-day patient safety did not appear to be compromised with no differences in all-cause mortality (0.6% in both groups combined), stroke/transient ischaemic attack (1.4%), life-threatening bleeding (1.3%), stage 2/3 acute kidney injury (0.7%), and valve-related readmission (1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Broad implementation of BENCHMARK practices contributes to improving efficiency of TAVI pathway reducing LoS and costs without compromising patient safety.

• Keywords
• Aortic stenosis, Clinical care, Health services, Prospective registry, Quality of care, TAVI, Transcatheter aortic valve implantation,
• MeSH
• Aortic Valve Stenosis * surgery   MeSH
• Benchmarking * MeSH
• Patient Safety MeSH
• Length of Stay * statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Critical Pathways MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Postoperative Complications epidemiology   prevention & control   MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement * methods   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Geographicals
• Europe epidemiology   MeSH

OBJECTIVE: Approximately 3.4% of adults aged >75 years suffer from aortic stenosis (AS). Guideline indications for aortic valve replacement (AVR) distinguish between patients with symptomatic and asymptomatic severe AS. The present analysis aims to assess contemporary practice in the treatment of severe AS across Europe and identify characteristics associated with treatment decisions, namely denial of AVR in symptomatic patients and assignment of asymptomatic patients to AVR. METHODS: Participants of the prospective, multinational IMPULSE database of patients with severe AS were grouped according to AS symptoms, and stratified into subgroups based on assignment to/denial of AVR. RESULTS: Of 1608 symptomatic patients, 23.8% did not undergo AVR and underwent medical treatment. Denial was independently associated with multiple factors, including severe frailty (p=0.024); mitral (p=0.002) or tricuspid (p=0.004) regurgitation grade III/IV, and the presence of renal impairment (p=0.017). Of 392 asymptomatic patients, 86.5% had no prespecified indication for AVR. Regardless, 36.3% were assigned to valve replacement. Those with an indexed aortic valve area (AVA; p=0.045) or left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; p<0.001) below the study median; or with a left ventricular end systolic diameter above the study median (p=0.007) were more likely to be assigned to AVR. CONCLUSIONS: There may be considerable discrepancies between guideline-based recommendations and clinical practice decision-making in the treatment of AS. It appears that guidelines may not fully capture the complete clinical spectrum of patients with AS. Thus, there is a need to find ways to increase their acceptance and the rate of adoption.

• Keywords
• aortic valve stenosis, cardiac surgical procedures, transcatheter aortic valve replacement,
• MeSH
• Aortic Valve Stenosis diagnosis   surgery   MeSH
• Echocardiography MeSH
• Quality of Health Care * MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Disease Management * MeSH
• Follow-Up Studies MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Practice Guidelines as Topic * MeSH
• Severity of Illness Index MeSH
• Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement standards   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH

AIMS: There is an increasing awareness of gender-related differences in patients with severe aortic stenosis and their outcomes after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). METHODS: Data from the IMPULSE registry were analysed. Patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were enrolled between March 2015 and April 2017 and stratified by gender. A subgroup analysis was performed to assess the impact of age. RESULTS: Overall, 2171 patients were enrolled, and 48.0% were female. Women were characterised by a higher rate of renal impairment (31.7 vs 23.3%; p<0.001), were at higher surgical risk (EuroSCORE II: 4.5 vs 3.6%; p=0.001) and more often in a critical preoperative state (7.0vs 4.2%; p=0.003). Men had an increased rate of previous cardiac surgery (9.4 vs 4.7%; p<0.001) and a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (4.9 vs 1.3%; p<0.001). Concomitant mitral and tricuspid valve disease was substantially more common among women. Symptoms were highly prevalent in both women and men (83.6 vs 77.3%; p<0.001). AVR was planned in 1379 cases. Women were more frequently scheduled to undergo TAVI (49.3 vs 41.0%; p<0.001) and less frequently for SAVR (20.3 vs 27.5%; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The present data show that female patients with severe AS have a distinct patient profile and are managed in a different way to males. Gender-based differences in the management of patients with severe AS need to be taken into account more systematically to improve outcomes, especially for women.

• Keywords
• aortic valve stenosis, endovascular procedures, transcatheter aortic valve replacement,
• MeSH
• Aortic Valve surgery   MeSH
• Aortic Valve Stenosis epidemiology   surgery   MeSH
• Time Factors MeSH
• Risk Assessment methods   MeSH
• Incidence MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Follow-Up Studies MeSH
• Registries * MeSH
• Retrospective Studies MeSH
• Risk Factors MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Sex Factors MeSH
• Heart Valve Prosthesis * MeSH
• Severity of Illness Index MeSH
• Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement methods   MeSH
• Age Factors MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Europe epidemiology   MeSH

Background Despite the availability of guidelines for the performance of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), current treatment pathways vary between countries and institutions, which impact on the mean duration of postprocedure hospitalization. Methods and Results This was a prospective, multicenter registry of 502 patients to validate the appropriateness of discharge timing after transfemoral TAVI, using prespecified risk criteria from FAST-TAVI (Feasibility and Safety of Early Discharge After Transfemoral [TF] Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation), based on hospital events within 1-year after discharge. The end point-a composite of all-cause mortality, vascular access-related complications, permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke, cardiac rehospitalization, kidney failure, and major bleeding-was reached in 27.0% of patients (95% CI, 23.3-31.2) within 1 year after intervention; 7.5% (95% CI, 5.5-10.2) had in-hospital complications before discharge and 19.6% (95% CI, 16.3-23.4) within 1 year after discharge. Overall mortality within 1 year after discharge was 7.3% and rates of cardiac rehospitalization 13.5%, permanent pacemaker implantation 4.2%, any stroke 1.8%, vascular-access-related complications 0.7%, life-threatening bleeding 0.7%, and kidney failure 0.4%. Composite events within 1 year after discharge were observed in 18.8% and 24.3% of patients with low risk of complications/early (≤3 days) discharge and high risk and discharged late (>3 days) (concordant discharge), respectively. Event rate in patients with discordant discharge was 14.3% with low risk but discharged late and increased to 50.0% in patients with high risk but discharged in ≤3 days. Conclusions The FAST-TAVI risk assessment provides a tool for appropriate, risk-based discharge that was validated with the 1-year event rate after transfemoral TAVI. Registration URL: https://www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02404467.

• Keywords
• aortic stenosis, aortic valve implantation, discharge, risk, validation,
• MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Postoperative Complications epidemiology   MeSH
• Patient Discharge * MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Registries * MeSH
• Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement statistics & numerical data   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Observational Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Europe epidemiology   MeSH

BACKGROUND: Contemporary data regarding the impact of comorbidities on the clinical presentation and management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) are scarce. METHODS: Prospective registry of severe patients with AS across 23 centres in nine European countries. RESULTS: Of the 2171 patients, chronic kidney disease (CKD 27.3%), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <50% (22.0%), atrial fibrillation (15.9%) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (11.4%) were the most prevalent comorbidities (49.3% none, 33.9% one and 16.8% ≥2 of these). The decision to perform aortic valve replacement (AVR) was taken in a comparable proportion (67%, 72% and 69%, in patients with 0, 1 and ≥2 comorbidities; p=0.186). However, the decision for TAVI was more common with more comorbidities (35.4%, 54.0% and 57.0% for no, 1 and ≥2; p<0.001), while the decision for surgical AVR (SAVR) was decreased with increasing comorbidity burden (31.9%, 17.4% and 12.3%; p<0.001). The proportion of patients with planned AVRs that were performed within 3 months was significantly higher in patients with 1 or ≥2 comorbidities than in those without (8.7%, 10.0% and 15.7%; p<0.001). Furthermore, the mean time to AVR was significantly shorter in patients with one (30.5 days) or ≥2 comorbidities (30.8 days) than in those without (35.7 days; p=0.012). Patients with reduced LVEF tended to be offered an AVR more frequently and with a shorter delay while patients with CKD were less frequently treated. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities in severe patients with AS affect the presentation and management of patients with severe AS. TAVI was offered more often than SAVR and performed within a shorter time period.

• Keywords
• aortic valve disease, cardiac surgery, prosthetic heart valves,
• MeSH
• Aortic Valve Stenosis epidemiology   physiopathology   surgery   MeSH
• Time-to-Treatment trends   MeSH
• Time Factors MeSH
• Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation trends   MeSH
• Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive epidemiology   MeSH
• Renal Insufficiency, Chronic epidemiology   MeSH
• Atrial Fibrillation epidemiology   MeSH
• Ventricular Function, Left MeSH
• Risk Assessment MeSH
• Clinical Decision-Making MeSH
• Comorbidity MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Prevalence MeSH
• Prospective Studies MeSH
• Registries MeSH
• Risk Factors MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Severity of Illness Index MeSH
• Stroke Volume MeSH
• Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement trends   MeSH
• Treatment Outcome MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Aged, 80 and over MeSH
• Aged MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Multicenter Study MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
• Geographicals
• Europe epidemiology   MeSH