Key result
Simultaneous TDVI achieves 100% early technical and device success without short-term mortality.
Why the study?
Combined surgical aortic and mitral valve replacement carries high risk in redo settings, and evidence for transcatheter double-valve implantation as an alternative is very limited.
Does simultaneous transcatheter aortic and mitral valve implantation (TDVI) provide technical success and safety in high-risk patients with severe structural valve degeneration?
Cohort (n=13)
No
Does simultaneous transcatheter aortic and mitral valve implantation (TDVI) provide technical success and safety in high-risk patients with severe structural valve degeneration?
Simultaneous transcatheter aortic and mitral valve implantation demonstrates excellent technical success and 30-day safety in high-risk patients with structural valve degeneration, offering a feasible alternative to redo surgery.
Supports feasibility of simultaneous TDVI in high-risk patients; leaves open need for larger prospective validation.
OBJECTIVES: The growing elderly population contributes to an increasing prevalence of severe degenerative native aortic valve (AV) or mitral valve (MV) disease in combination with bio-prosthetic valve failure of prior implanted (aortic or mitral) bio-prostheses, as well as concomitant failure of both aortic and mitral bio-prosthetic valves. A combined surgical AV and MV replacement carries a markedly higher risk, especially in the redo setting. Transcatheter double-valve implantation (TDVI) is emerging as a promising alternative that may mitigate the risks of redo surgery. The evidence for TDVI is very limited. This study aims to address the current gap in the literature by analysing a large institutional series of single-stage TDVI. METHODS: Single-centre retrospective analysis of all patients (n = 13) undergoing simultaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) from October 2018 until April 2024. Primary end-points were Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) and Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) technical success, 30-day device success and early safety (MVARC procedural success). Secondary end-points included echocardiographic TDVI performance, adverse events, symptom change and survival. RESULTS: The median age of patients was 77 years, with 7/13 (53.8%) females. Median EuroSCORE II was 16.9%. All patients presented with structural valve degeneration with severe haemodynamic valve deterioration according to the VARC-3 definition. Procedural outcomes showed 100% technical success. There was absence of 30-day mortality (0%). Thirty-day device success and early safety/MVARC procedural success were 100%. No major adverse events occurred. After TDVI, the median New York Heart Association functional class improved from III to II. CONCLUSIONS: TDVI appears to be a safe and effective alternative to surgical redo double-valve replacement for selected patients. Our findings support the feasibility of TDVI with excellent early outcomes. Further prospective multicentre studies with larger cohorts are needed to validate the long-term effects and to establish TDVI as a guideline consideration.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hinkov et al. (2025) conducted a cohort in Structural valve degeneration (n=13). Simultaneous transcatheter aortic and mitral valve implantation (TDVI) was evaluated on VARC-3 and MVARC technical success, 30-day device success and early safety. Simultaneous transcatheter aortic and mitral valve implantation (TDVI) achieved 100% technical success, 100% 30-day device success, and 0% 30-day mortality.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: