NYHA Classification Over Time
NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased.
NYHA Classification Over Time
NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased.
NYHA Classification Over Time
NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased.
NYHA Classification Over Time
NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased.
NYHA Classification Over Time
NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION CLASSIFICATION (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary physical activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain.
Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of cardiac insufficiency or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased.
Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)
MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)
Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)
MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)
Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)
MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)
Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)
MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)
Major Adverse Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE)
MACCE is defined as a composite of:
all-cause death
myocardial infarction (MI)
all stroke, and
reintervention (defined as any cardiac surgery or percutaneous reintervention catheter procedure that repairs, otherwise alters or adjusts, or replaces a previously implanted valve)
Device Success as Defined in the Description.
successful vascular access, delivery and deployment of the device, and successful retrieval of the delivery system
correct position of the device in the proper anatomical location (placement in the annulus with no impedance on device function)
Intended performance of the prosthetic valve (aortic valve area >1.2 cm² (by echocardiography using the continuity equation) and mean aortic valve gradient < 20 mmHg or peak velocity < 3 m/sec, without moderate or severe prosthetic valve AR)
Only one valve implanted in the proper anatomical location
Procedural Success, Defined as Device Success and Absence of In-hospital MACCE.
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Mean Gradient
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Mean Gradient
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance- Effective Orifice Area (EOA)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction (LVEF)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)
Echocardiographic Assessment of Prosthetic Valve Performance - Total Aortic Valve Regurgitation (Transvalvular & Paravalvular) (Total AR)
Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)
The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.
Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)
The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.
Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)
The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.
Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)
The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.
Quality of Life Assessment Using SF-36 Questionnaire - Physical Component Summary (Paired Change From Baseline) (Q of L)
The SF-36 assessment was used to evaluate subject Quality of life (QoL) by assessing change in physical function and general health status. The SF-36 v2TM Scoring Program2,3 was used to convert raw scores ranging from 0 to 100 into norm-based scores, allowing direct comparison to the reference values for the Japanese population. A norm-based score of less than 50 was interpreted as below average when compared to the Japanese population whereas norm-based scores greater than 50 were interpreted as above average.