Experience with the ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves in Spain. The PRECISA (PRospective Evaluation Complementing Investigation with ACURATE devices) registry

Other authors

Institut Català de la Salut

[Tébar D] Servicio de Cardiología, Hospital Universitario La Paz, IdiPAZ, Spain. [Carrillo X] Hospital German Trias i Pujol, Badalona, Spain. [García del Blanco B] Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. CIBERCV, Madrid, Spain. [Gómez‐Hospital JA] CIBERCV, Madrid, Spain. Hospital de Bellvitge, Barcelona, Spain. [Nombela L] Hospital Clinico San Carlos, Madrid, Spain. [Molina E] Hospital Virgen de las Nievees, Granada, Spain. [Serra‐García V, Calabuig‐Goena Á] Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain

Vall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus

Publication date

2024-05-06T08:57:06Z

2024-05-06T08:57:06Z

2024-05



Abstract

Transcatheter aortic valves; Spain


Vàlvules aòrtiques transcatèter; Espanya


Válvulas aórticas transcatéter; España


Background Previous studies have documented a high rate of implantation success with the ACURATE neo2 valve, as well as a reduction in paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to its predecessor, the ACURATE neo. However, there are no studies that have reviewed and compared the long-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes of these patients. Aims This study aimed to evaluate the results of the ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve in a real-world context, and to compare the results of the outcomes of both generations of this device (ACURATE neo and ACURATE neo2), with a specific focus on procedural success, safety, and long-term effectiveness. Methods A prospective study including all consecutive patients treated with the ACURATE neo device in seven hospitals was conducted (Clinical Trials Identification Number: NCT03846557). The primary endpoint consisted of a composite of adverse events, including mortality, aortic insufficiency, and other procedural complications. As the second-generation device (ACURATE neo2) replaced the ACURATE neo during the study period, hemodynamic and clinical results before admission, at 30 days, and at 1 year of follow-up were compared between the two generations. Results A total of 296 patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the ACURATE device, with 178 patients receiving the ACURATE neo and 118 patients receiving the ACURATE neo2. In the overall population, the absence of device success occurred in 14.5%. The primary reason for the absence of device success was the presence of para-valvular regurgitation ≥ 2. There were no instances of coronary occlusions, valve embolization, annulus rupture, or procedural deaths. ACURATE neo2 was associated with a significantly higher device success rate (91.7% vs. 82%, p = 0.04), primarily due to a significantly lower rate of para-valvular regurgitation, which remained significant at 1 year. Conclusion The use of ACURATE neo and neo2 transcatheter aortic valves is associated with satisfactory clinical results and an extremely low rate of complications. The ACURATE neo2 enables a significantly higher device success rate, primarily attributed to a significant reduction in the rate of PVL.

Document Type

Article


Published version

Language

English

Publisher

Wiley

Related items

Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions;103(6)

https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.31032

Recommended citation

This citation was generated automatically.

Rights

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

This item appears in the following Collection(s)