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

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...

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...

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...