Boston Scientific Discontinues Lotus Valve and Makes a New Bet

Mechanically-expanding valve Lotus Edge was discontinued worldwide, as recently informed by its manufacturer, Boston Scientific.

Boston Scientific discontinúa la válvula Lotus y hace una nueva apuesta

This is a voluntary recall of all Lotus valve inventory, and the immediate suspension of the program.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Lotus Edge in 2019 for patients with severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. The valve had already received the European CE Mark in 2016.

The design of this special valve was always challenging, specifically its delivery system, which led Boston to discontinue the program. Boston’s attention will now be focused on Acurate neo.

The valve presented undeniable benefits, particularly in terms of paravalvular leak, but its release and recapture were challenging.

The Lotus device had already been recalled in 2016 for issues with the delivery system, and in 2017 for issues with the closure system.


Read also: Transcatheter Bariatric Surgery?


This last and final recall was also due to problems with the delivery system. Given the time and money needed for development and market release, Boston decided to just recall the product.

In its statement, Boston indicates that there is no safety issue for patients who currently have a Lotus valve implanted.

The company will continue its research on Acurate neo, although the SCOPE and SCOPE 2 studies that tested the first-generation Boston valve vs. Sapien 3 and CoreValve Evolut, respectively, did not reach non-inferiority.


Read also: Watch Again New Frontiers in the Cath Lab.


Now, hopes are on the Acurate neo 2, with improvements to decrease paravalvular leak.

Original Title: Boston Scientific announces Lotus Edge aortic valve system voluntary recall and product discontinuation.

Reference: Boston Scientific. Published on: November 2020.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...

TAVR in Young Low-Risk Patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has established itself as an effective strategy for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis across different risk groups. While previous...

TAVR and Atrial Fibrillation: What Anticoagulants Should We Use?

The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in TAVR patients ranges from 15 to 30%, depending on series. This arrhythmia has been associated to higher...

Impact of Iliofemoral Disease on Post TAVR Clinical Outcomes: HOSTILE Score Validation

At present, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been shown safe and effective for treating severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in high-surgical-risk patients. Moreover, its...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...