Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Subspecialties, University of Catania, Italy (C.T., D.C.).
Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery (S.B.), Heart and Diabetes Center Northrhein-Westfalia, Bad Oeynhausen, Germany.
Circulation. 2020 Dec 22;142(25):2431-2442. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.051547. Epub 2020 Oct 15.
Few randomized trials have compared bioprostheses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement, and no trials have compared bioprostheses with supra-annular design. The SCOPE 2 trial (Safety and Efficacy Comparison of Two TAVI Systems in a Prospective Randomized Evaluation 2) was designed to compare the clinical outcomes of the ACURATE neo and CoreValve Evolut bioprostheses for transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
SCOPE 2 was a randomized trial performed at 23 centers in 6 countries between April 2017 and April 2019. Patients ≥75 years old with an indication for transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement as agreed by the heart team were randomly assigned to receive treatment with either the ACURATE neo (n=398) or the CoreValve Evolut bioprostheses (n=398). The primary end point, powered for noninferiority of the ACURATE neo bioprosthesis, was all-cause death or stroke at 1 year. The key secondary end point, powered for superiority of the ACURATE neo bioprosthesis, was new permanent pacemaker implantation at 30 days.
Among 796 randomized patients (mean age, 83.2±4.3 years; mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, 4.6±2.9%), clinical follow-up information was available for 778 (98%) patients. Within 1 year, the primary end point occurred in 15.8% of patients in the ACURATE neo group and in 13.9% of patients in the CoreValve Evolut group (absolute risk difference, 1.8%, upper 1-sided 95% confidence limit, 6.1%; =0.0549 for noninferiority). The 30-day rates of new permanent pacemaker implantation were 10.5% in the ACURATE neo group and 18.0% in the CoreValve Evolut group (absolute risk difference, -7.5% [95% CI, -12.4 to -2.60]; =0.0027). No significant differences were observed in the components of the primary end point. Cardiac death at 30 days (2.8% versus 0.8%; =0.03) and 1 year (8.4% versus 3.9%; =0.01), and moderate or severe aortic regurgitation at 30 days (10% versus 3%; =0.002) were significantly increased in the ACURATE neo group.
Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the self-expanding ACURATE neo did not meet noninferiority compared with the self-expanding CoreValve Evolut in terms of all-cause death or stroke at 1 year, and it was associated with a lower incidence of new permanent pacemaker implantation. In secondary analyses, the ACURATE neo was associated with more moderate or severe aortic regurgitation at 30 days and cardiac death at 30 days and 1 year. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03192813.
很少有随机试验比较经导管主动脉瓣置换术的生物假体,也没有试验比较带瓣环上设计的生物假体。SCOPE 2 试验(两种经导管主动脉瓣置换系统的前瞻性随机评估 2 安全性和疗效比较)旨在比较 ACURATE neo 和 CoreValve Evolut 生物假体在经导管主动脉瓣置换中的临床结局。
SCOPE 2 是一项于 2017 年 4 月至 2019 年 4 月在 6 个国家的 23 个中心进行的随机试验。经心脏团队同意有经股动脉经导管主动脉瓣置换适应证的≥75 岁患者被随机分配接受 ACURATE neo(n=398)或 CoreValve Evolut 生物假体治疗(n=398)。主要终点为 ACURATE neo 生物假体非劣效性的复合终点,即 1 年时全因死亡或卒中。主要次要终点为 ACURATE neo 生物假体优越性的复合终点,即 30 天时新植入永久起搏器。
在 796 名随机患者(平均年龄 83.2±4.3 岁;平均胸外科医生协会预测死亡率 4.6±2.9%)中,778 名(98%)患者有临床随访信息。在 1 年内,ACURATE neo 组中有 15.8%的患者发生主要终点事件,CoreValve Evolut 组中有 13.9%的患者发生主要终点事件(绝对风险差异 1.8%,上 1 侧 95%置信区间 6.1%;=0.0549 表示非劣效性)。ACURATE neo 组和 CoreValve Evolut 组 30 天新植入永久起搏器的发生率分别为 10.5%和 18.0%(绝对风险差异-7.5%[95%CI-12.4 至-2.60];=0.0027)。主要终点的各个组成部分均无显著差异。ACURATE neo 组 30 天(2.8%对 0.8%;=0.03)和 1 年(8.4%对 3.9%;=0.01)时的心脏死亡,以及 30 天(10%对 3%;=0.002)时的中度或重度主动脉瓣反流发生率均显著高于 CoreValve Evolut 组。
经股动脉经导管主动脉瓣置换术使用自扩张型 ACURATE neo 与自扩张型 CoreValve Evolut 相比,1 年时全因死亡或卒中未达到非劣效性,且与较低的新植入永久起搏器发生率相关。在次要分析中,ACURATE neo 与 30 天时更严重的中度或重度主动脉瓣反流以及 30 天和 1 年时的心脏死亡相关。注册:网址:https://www.clinicaltrials.gov;唯一标识符:NCT03192813。