REPRISE III: Lotus and CoreValve Compared in High-Risk or Inoperable Patients

REPRISE III: Lotus and CoreValve Compared in High-Risk or Inoperable PatientsThe efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been well-established. However, its limitations include suboptimal deployment and paravalvular leak. The Lotus system is a fully repositionable and retrievable device with controlled mechanical expansion. It features an adaptive seal to minimize paravalvular leak, it does not require early pacing during deployment, and, given its early functioning, the procedure is very stable, hemodynamically speaking.

 

This was a prospective noninferiority multicenter (United States, Canada, Germany, France, Australia, and Netherlands) study that randomized patients 2:1 to Lotus vs. CoreValve. Subjects had severe aortic stenosis, and presented high surgical risk or were inoperable.

 

The primary safety endpoint was a composite of death, stroke, major bleeding, renal insufficiency, and major vascular complications at 30 days. The primary efficacy endpoint was a composite of death, disabling stroke, and moderate or greater paravalvular leak at 1 year.

 

The study included 912 pacientes (CoreValve: 305; Lotus: 607) in 55 centers in the aforementioned countries, between 2014 and 2015.

 

The Lotus valve was noninferior as regards the primary safety endpoint at 30 days (Lotus, 19%, vs. CoreValve, 16%; p = 0.001 for noninferiority). Lotus was associated with a higher need for new pacemaker implantation (29.1 vs. 15.8; p < 0.001).

 

At 1 year, the curves for the primary safety endpoint were yuxtaposed (Lotus, 30.7%, vs. CoreValve, 30.2%; p = 0,83).

 

The Lotus device was also noninferior for the primary efficacy endpoint (Lotus, 16.7%, vs. CoreValve, 29%; p < 0.001 for noninferiority).

 

Both valves presented similar mortality rates (CoreValve, 13.7%, vs. Lotus, 11.9%; p = 0.48). However, CoreValve presented a higher rate of moderate to greater paravalvular leak (11.1% vs. 2.0%; p < 0.001) and a higher rate of disabling stroke (CoreValve, 7.3%, vs. Lotus, 3.6%; p = 0.02).

 

Conclusion

The Lotus valve turned out to be safe and effective when compared to the self-expanding device commercially available at the time of this study, CoreValve.

 

Dr. Ted Feldman
Dr. Ted Feldman

Original title: A Prospective, Randomised Investigation of a Novel Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation System: The REPRISE III Trial.

Presenter: Ted E. Feldman.

 

 

FeldmanTed


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...

Cardiac Remodeling After Percutaneous ASD Closure: Should It Be Immediate or Progressive?

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is a common congenital heart disease that generates a left-to-right shunt, leading to right-side chamber overload and a risk of...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...