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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

• 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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

New York Heart Association Classification (NYHA) Class I Subject with cardiac disease but without resulting limitations of physical activity. Class II Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. Class III Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in marked limitation of physical activity. Class IV Subjects with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort.

The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) risk model predicts the risk of operative mortality and morbidity after adult cardiac surgery on the basis of patient demographic and clinical variables. After information has been entered on a given case, the online STS risk calculator provides a risk percentage for each of the outcomes. The risk percentage estimates the chance of a specific outcome for a patient with the indicated risk factors. A higher score indicates a higher risk. A lower score indicates a lower risk.

The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is a method of calculating predicted operative mortality for patients undergoing cardiac surgery. If a risk factor is present, a weight/number is assigned. The weights are added to give an approximate percent of predicted mortality. A higher score indicates a higher risk. A lower score indicates a lower risk..

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 denominators included deaths (n=2). Taken deaths out, you have n=51 at 30 days.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.

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)

The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.

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)

The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.

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)

The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.

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)

The Kaplan-Meier Method was used to calculate the number.

• 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

The AT cohort that went through an index procedure were analyzed for Device Success. Also, all components that went into the success measures had to be non-missing. Therefore n=53.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had mean gradients available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had EOA measurement available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had Total AR available at 24 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 24 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had LVEF measurement available at 36 months were analyzed. Not everyone followed to 36 months had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

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.

The implanted cohorts that had non-missing data at this time point were analyzed. Implanted subjects that had Q of L available at this visit were analyzed. Not everyone followed to this visit had this measurement. This is true of all other echo data results, and explains if the number is different from the Number of Participants Analyzed.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The subclavian access is additionally chosen (as the secondary access site) when physicians may require an alternative to the femoral access site for patients who would benefit from the therapy but have unfavorable peripheral vasculature such as excessive atherosclerosis, calcifications, or tortuosity of common femoral arteries.

For patients who would benefit from the therapy but have unfavorable non-aortic vasculature of the transfemoral and subclavian/axillary access sites (i.e. excessive atherosclerosis, calcifications, or tortuosity of arteries), the direct aortic approach is currently being used in oversea(EU and US) in clinical practice with similar outcomes to transfemoral and subclavian/ axillary artery approaches.

This includes subjects from all access approaches, iliofemoral, subclavian and direct aortic.