Hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation during sequential follow-ups in patients with bicuspid aortic valve compared with tricuspid aortic valve

BACKGROUND: To investigate the individual sequential hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), especially for patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV), in comparison with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV). METHODS: The study population comprised 85 patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVI for BAV (n = 49) or TAV (n = 36) with at least two serial echocardiographic follow-ups. Doppler echocardiography was scheduled to be performed at discharge and 1, 3, 6 months and 1 year after the procedure. D peak transvalvular velocities and D mean transvalvular gradients were calculated as the difference at follow-up time points and discharge. Paravalvular leak (PVL) was assessed as another indicator for prosthesis performance. RESULTS: Comparisons between patients with BAV and TAV revealed similar gradient performances (1.00 [-2.00, 2.00] vs. 1.00 [-0.25, 5.00] mm Hg, p = 0.57 at 1 month; -0.71 ± 7.52 vs. 1.55 ± 3.97 mm Hg, p = 0.21 at 3 months; 0.96 ± 7.81 vs. 1.53 ± 5.85 mm Hg, p = 0.79 at 6 months; 1.00 [-0.50, 2.25] vs. 3.00 [-0.50, 7.50] mm Hg, p = 0.07 at 1 year). Moreover, the incidence of ≥ mild PVL was not significantly different in patients with BAV and TAV during follow-up (34.88% vs. 19.35%, p = 0.14 at 1 month; 45.83% vs. 27.27%, p = 0.19 at 3 months; 30.00% vs. 23.53%, p = 0.89 at 6 months; 30.00% vs. 17.65%, p = 0.56 at 1 year). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI is effective and applicable in BAV anatomy with sustained and acceptable mid- -term prosthesis hemodynamic performance. (Cardiol J 2017; 24, 4: 350-357).