RHEIA (Randomized researcH in womEn All Comers With Aortic Stenosis)

NCT ID: NCT04160130

Last Updated: 2023-06-01

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

432 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2019-11-29

Study Completion Date

2024-06-30

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Purpose of this prospective, randomized, controlled, multi-center study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) as compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in female patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either TAVI or SAVR aortic valve replacement. For TAVI procedure, Edwards SAPIEN 3 THV system Model 9600 TFX (20, 23, 26 and 29 mm) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra THV system Model 9750 TFX (20, 23, 26) with the associated transfemoral delivery systems will be sued, for SAVR any commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valve. Patients will undergo the following visits: Screening, Procedure, Post Procedure, Discharge, 30 day, 6 months (telephone contact) and 1 year.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Recent large meta-analyses and a large retrospective study from the STS/ACC TVT Registry demonstrated improved survival in female versus male aortic sclerosis patients undergoing TAVI despite their advanced age and increased rates of major peri-procedural vascular complications, bleeding events and strokes. These gender-related patient profile differences have also been present in multicentre cohorts across the world. A recent meta-analysis by Siontis et al. showed that TAVI, when compared with SAVR, was associated with a significant 13% relative risk reduction in 2-year mortality, a benefit more pronounced amongst females and patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI.

In a recent meta-analysis, the female-specific survival advantage from TAVI over SAVR was explored. Amongst females, TAVI recipients had a significantly lower mortality than SAVR recipients, at 1 year (OR 0.68; 95%CI 0.50 to 0.94). Amongst males there was no difference in mortality between TAVI and SAVR at 1 year (OR 1.09; 95%CI 0.86 to 1.39). There was statistically significant evidence of a difference in treatment effect between genders at 1 year (p interaction = 0.02). In an attempt to explore the mechanisms for an increased mortality rate in women undergoing SAVR, different endpoints were explored in female patients exclusively. It was shown that women, undergoing SAVR, having both a higher periprocedural mortality, higher rates of bleeding and acute kidney injury, worse patient prosthesis match and worse long term recovery of left ventricular function.In the recent PARTNER 3 the composite of death from any cause, stroke, or rehospitalization had occurred in 42 patients (8.5%) in the TAVI group as compared with 68 patients (15.1%) in the surgery group at 1 year. The difference was 6.6% (95%CI -10.8% to -2.3%) and thus exceeded the pre-defined non-inferiority margin of 6%.

Subgroup analyses of the primary end point at 1 year showed no heterogeneity of treatment effect in any of the subgroups that were examined including gender (p=0.27). There were 292 women included with an endpoint rate of 18.5% for SAVR (men 13.8%) and 8.1% for TAVI (men 8.7%), showing a clear trend for an increased benefit of women undergoing TAVI instead of SAVR (rate difference -10.4%; 95%CI -18.3% to -2.5%). Nonetheless, the benefits of TAVI were preserved in both men and women.Earlier observational and clinical studies indicated an increased risk for women undergoing SAVR compared to men while being at a comparable risk for TAVI. In a recent meta-analysis of TAVI vs. SAVR in men and women the risk of dying from the intervention was reduced by a relative 32% in women (OR 0.38; 95%CI 0.50-0.94) while there was no such difference in men (OR 1.09; 95%CI 0.86-1.39). This was mostly documented as being the effect of a reduced periprocedural mortality with TAVI (-54%; OR 0.46; 95%CI 0.22-0.96) and major bleeding (-57%; OR 0.43; 95%CI 0.25-0.73) while the difference in strokes and acute kidney injury did not reach statistical significance. Taken all available scientific data on the comparison of TAVI versus open surgery in patients with indication for AVR together it remains probable, that independently of the individual surgical risk female patients in particular seem to benefit from a non-surgical aortic valve replacement strategy.

As the indirect comparisons of the intermediate to low risk outcomes in PARTNER 2/3 suggest a favorable risk reduction in women compared to men as described, the investigators believe it is timely for a dedicated trial to demonstrate the non-inferiority of TAVI in women compared to SAVR and, in case of this being true, whether TAVI is actually superior to performing SAVR.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Aortic Valve Stenosis Heart Valve Diseases

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

OTHER

Blinding Strategy

NONE

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

SAPIEN 3 or SAPIEN 3 Ultra

Edwards SAPIEN 3 THV system Model 9600 TFX (20, 23, 26 and 29 mm) or SAPIEN 3 Ultra THV system Model 9750 TFX (20, 23, 26) with the associated transfemoral delivery systems.

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) or aortic valve replacement with a commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valve.

any surgical bioprosthetic aortic valve

Any commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valve

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) or aortic valve replacement with a commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valve.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVI) or aortic valve replacement with a commercially available surgical bioprosthetic valve.

Intervention Type PROCEDURE

Other Intervention Names

Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.

Surgical aortic valve replacement

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Female patients with severe aortic stenosis as follows:

• High gradient severe AS (Class I Indication for aortic valve replacement \[AVR\]): Jet velocity ≥ 4.0 m/s or mean gradient ≥ 40 mmHg with Aortic Valve Area (AVA) ≤ 1.0 cm\^2 or AVA index ≤ 0.6 cm\^2/m\^2 OR

• Low gradient severe aortic stenosis (Class I/IIa indication of AVR) Jet velocity \< 4.0 m/s and mean gradient \< 40 mmHg and AVA ≤ 1.0 cm\^2 and AVA index ≤ 0.6 cm\^2/m\^2 with confirmation of severe AS by: mean gradient ≥40 mmHg on dobutamine stress echocardiography and/or aortic valve calcium score ≥ 1200 AU on non-contrast CT.

AND
* NYHA Functional Class ≥ II OR
* Exercise test that demonstrates a limited exercise capacity, abnormal BP response, or arrhythmia
2. Age ≥ 18 years
3. The study patient has been informed of the nature of the study, agrees to its provisions and has provided written informed consent as approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB)/Ethics Committee (EC) of the respective clinical site.

Exclusion Criteria

1. Patient is not a candidate for both surgical and transcatheter aortic valve replacement.
2. Native aortic annulus size unsuitable for sizes 20, 23, 26, or 29 mm THV based on 3D imaging analysis
3. Iliofemoral vessel characteristics that would preclude safe placement of the introducer sheath.
4. Evidence of an acute myocardial infarction ≤ 1 month (30 days) before randomization
5. Aortic valve is unicuspid, bicuspid, or is non-calcified
6. Severe aortic regurgitation (\>3+)
7. Any concomitant valve disease that requires an intervention
8. Pre-existing mechanical or bioprosthetic valve in any position (mitral ring is not an exclusion).
9. Complex coronary artery disease:

* Unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis
* Syntax score \> 32 (in the absence of prior revascularization)
* Heart Team assessment that optimal revascularization cannot be performed.
10. Symptomatic carotid or vertebral artery disease or successful treatment of carotid stenosis within 30 days before randomization
11. Leukopenia (WBC \< 3000 cell/mcL), anemia (Hgb \< 9 g/dL), Thrombocytopenia (Plt \< 50,000 cell/mcL), history of bleeding diathesis or coagulopathy, or hypercoagulable states
12. Hemodynamic or respiratory instability requiring inotropic support, mechanical ventilation or mechanical heart assistance within 30 days before randomization
13. Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with obstruction
14. Ventricular dysfunction with lleft ventricular ejection fraction \< 30%
15. Cardiac imaging (echo, CT, and/or MRI) evidence of intracardiac mass, thrombus or vegetation
16. Inability to tolerate or condition precluding treatment with anti- thrombotic/anticoagulation therapy during or after the valve implant procedure
17. Stroke or transient ischemic attack within 90 days before randomization
18. Renal insufficiency (eGFR \< 30 ml/min per the Cockcroft-Gault formula) and/or renal replacement therapy
19. Active bacterial endocarditis within 180 days of randomization
20. Severe lung disease (FEV1 \< 50%) or currently on home oxygen
21. Severe pulmonary hypertension (e.g., pulmonary arterial systolic pressure ≥ 2/3 systemic pressure)
22. History of cirrhosis or any active liver disease
23. Significant abdominal or thoracic aortic disease (such as porcelain aorta, aneurysm, severe calcification, aortic coarctation, etc.) that would preclude safe passage of the delivery system or cannulation and aortotomy for surgical AVR.
24. Hostile chest or conditions or complications from prior surgery that preclude safe reoperation (e.g., mediastinitis, radiation damage, abnormal chest wall, adhesion of aorta or internal mammary artery to sternum, etc.)
25. Patient refuses blood products
26. BMI \> 50 kg/m\^2
27. Estimated life expectancy \< 24 months
28. Absolute contraindications or allergy to iodinated contrast agent that cannot be adequately treated with pre-medication
29. Immobility that would prevent completion of study procedures
30. Currently participating in an investigational drug or another device study.
31. Pregnancy or lactation
Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Edwards Lifesciences

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role collaborator

Optimapharm

INDUSTRY

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Responsibility Role SPONSOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Hélène Eltchaninoff, Prof.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

CHU Rouen - Hopital Charles Nicolle

Didier Tchétché, Dr.

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Clinique Pasteur Toulouse

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

LKH-Univ. Klinikum Graz

Graz, , Austria

Site Status

Universitätskliniken Innsbruck

Innsbruck, , Austria

Site Status

Universitätsklinikum St. Pölten - Lilienfeld

Sankt Pölten, , Austria

Site Status

Allgemeines Krankenhaus der Stadt Wien

Vienna, , Austria

Site Status

Clinique Saint-Luc

Bouge, , Belgium

Site Status

CHU De Charleroi

Charleroi, , Belgium

Site Status

UZ Leuven Campus Gasthuisberg

Leuven, , Belgium

Site Status

Nicosia General Hospital

Nicosia, , Cyprus

Site Status

University hospital Hradec Králové

Hradec Králové, , Czechia

Site Status

Fakultni nemocnice Olomouc

Olomouc, , Czechia

Site Status

IKEM (Institut Klinické a Experimentální Medicíny)

Prague, , Czechia

Site Status

Nemocnice Na Homolce

Prague, , Czechia

Site Status

Helsinky University Hospital

Helsinki, , Finland

Site Status

Tampere University Hospital

Tampere, , Finland

Site Status

CHU de Bordeaux - Hôpital cardiologique du Haut-Lévêqu

Bordeaux, , France

Site Status

CHRU de Brest

Brest, , France

Site Status

GHE-Hôpital Cardiologique Louis Pradel

Bron, , France

Site Status

CHU Clermont-Ferrand - Hôpital Gabriel Montpied

Clermont-Ferrand, , France

Site Status

CHU Dijon

Dijon, , France

Site Status

CHU Lille - Institute Coeur Poumon

Lille, , France

Site Status

CHU Montpellier

Montpellier, , France

Site Status

CHU de Nantes - Hôpital Guillaume et René Laënnec

Nantes, , France

Site Status

Hôpital Privé Jacques Cartier

Paris, , France

Site Status

CHU et Université de Poitiers

Poitiers, , France

Site Status

CHU Rennes - Hopital de Pontchaillou

Rennes, , France

Site Status

CHU Rouen - Hopital Charles Nicolle

Rouen, , France

Site Status

Les Hopitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg - Nouvel Hôpital Civil

Strasbourg, , France

Site Status

Clinique Pasteur

Toulouse, , France

Site Status

Universitätsklinik der Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Bad Oeynhausen, , Germany

Site Status

Deutsches Herzzentrum Berlin

Berlin, , Germany

Site Status

Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt Am Main

Frankfurt, , Germany

Site Status

Universitätsmedizin der Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz

Mainz, , Germany

Site Status

St. James´s Hospital

Dublin, , Ireland

Site Status

Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Policlinico "G.Rodolico - San Marco"

Catania, , Italy

Site Status

A.O.U. Careggi

Florence, , Italy

Site Status

Ospedale del Cuore G. Pasquinucci

Massa, , Italy

Site Status

Universita di Padova

Padua, , Italy

Site Status

European Hospital

Roma, , Italy

Site Status

Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata Verona

Verona, , Italy

Site Status

Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven

Eindhoven, , Netherlands

Site Status

Leids Universitair Medisch Centrum

Leiden, , Netherlands

Site Status

St Antonius Ziekenhuis Nieuwegein

Nieuwegein, , Netherlands

Site Status

Inselspital Universitätsspital Bern

Bern, , Switzerland

Site Status

Hirslanden Klinik Im Park

Zurich, , Switzerland

Site Status

Universitätsspital Zürich

Zurich, , Switzerland

Site Status

Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh

Edinburgh, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Morriston Hospital

Morriston, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Oxford University Hospitals - John Radcliffe hospital

Oxford, , United Kingdom

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Austria Belgium Cyprus Czechia Finland France Germany Ireland Italy Netherlands Switzerland United Kingdom

References

Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.

Tchetche D, Pibarot P, Bax JJ, Bonaros N, Windecker S, Dumonteil N, Nietlispach F, Messika-Zeitoun D, Pocock SJ, Berthoumieu P, Swaans MJ, Timmers L, Rudolph TK, Bleiziffer S, Leroux L, Modine T, van der Kley F, Auffret V, Tomasi J, Stastny L, Hengstenberg C, Andreas M, Leclercq F, Gandet T, Mascherbauer J, Trescher K, Prendergast B, Vasa-Nicotera M, Chieffo A, Mares J, Wesselink W, Rakova R, Kurucova J, Bramlage P, Eltchaninoff H. Transcatheter vs. surgical aortic valve replacement in women: the RHEIA trial. Eur Heart J. 2025 Jun 9;46(22):2079-2088. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf133.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 40171878 (View on PubMed)

Eltchaninoff H, Bonaros N, Prendergast B, Nietlispach F, Vasa-Nicotera M, Chieffo A, Pibarot P, Bramlage P, Sykorova L, Kurucova J, Bax JJ, Windecker S, Dumonteil N, Tchetche D. Rationale and design of a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter heart valve replacement in female patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis requiring aortic valve intervention (Randomized researcH in womEn all comers wIth Aortic stenosis [RHEIA] trial). Am Heart J. 2020 Oct;228:27-35. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2020.06.016. Epub 2020 Jun 30.

Reference Type DERIVED
PMID: 32745733 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

CIV-19-11-030544

Identifier Type: OTHER

Identifier Source: secondary_id

RHEIA

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Thoracoabdominal Aortic Aneurysms
NCT06267573 NOT_YET_RECRUITING