King's College London

Research portal

ACTIVATION (PercutAneous Coronary inTervention prIor to transcatheter aortic VAlve implantaTION): A Randomized Clinical Trial

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

ACTIVATION Trial Investigators

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1965-1974
Number of pages10
JournalJACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Issue number18
Published27 Sep 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information: The ACTIVATION trial was funded by Edwards Lifesciences and Boston Scientific. Drs Clayton and Dodd have received reimbursement from King’s College London as independent statisticians for performing statistical analysis. Dr Morice is the CEO of Cardiovascular European Research Center CTU. Dr Meneveau has received consulting fees, speaker fees, and project funding from Bayer HealthCare and BMS/Pfizer; has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; and has received consulting fees from Abbott and Terumo. Dr Banning has received institutional grant support for an educational fellowship from Boston Scientific and has been partially funded by the NHS Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. Dr Thomas is an employee of Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Prendergast has received unrestricted educational and research grants from Edwards Lifesciences; has received speaker/consultancy fees from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, and Anteris. Dr Hildick-Smith has served as Proctor/Advisory to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards. Dr Redwood has served as a proctor and received speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. Publisher Copyright: © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation Copyright: Copyright 2021 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.

King's Authors


Objectives: This study sought to determine if percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) prior to transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with significant coronary artery disease would produce noninferior clinical results when compared with no PCI (control arm). Background: PCI in patients undergoing TAVR is not without risk, and there are no randomized data to inform clinical practice. Methods: Patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis and significant coronary artery disease with Canadian Cardiovascular Society class ≤2 angina were randomly assigned to receive PCI or no PCI prior to TAVR. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death or rehospitalization at 1 year. Noninferiority testing (prespecified margin of 7.5%) was performed in the intention-to-treat population. Results: At 17 centers, 235 patients underwent randomization. At 1 year, the primary composite endpoint occurred in 48 (41.5%) of the PCI arm and 47 (44.0%) of the no-PCI arm. The requirement for noninferiority was not met (difference: -2.5%; 1-sided upper 95% confidence limit: 8.5%; 1-sided noninferiority test P = 0.067). On analysis of the as-treated population, the difference was -3.7% (1-sided upper 95% confidence limit: 7.5%; P = 0.050). Mortality was 16 (13.4%) in the PCI arm and 14 (12.1%) in the no-PCI arm. At 1 year, there was no evidence of a difference in the rates of stroke, myocardial infarction, or acute kidney injury, with higher rates of any bleed in the PCI arm (P = 0.021). Conclusions: Observed rates of death and rehospitalization at 1 year were similar between PCI and no PCI prior to TAVR; however, the noninferiority margin was not met, and PCI resulted in a higher incidence of bleeding. (Assessing the Effects of Stenting in Significant Coronary Artery Disease Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation; ISRCTN75836930)

View graph of relations

© 2020 King's College London | Strand | London WC2R 2LS | England | United Kingdom | Tel +44 (0)20 7836 5454