Why the study?
Bioprosthetic aortic and mitral valves have limited durability due to structural degeneration, and transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation has emerged as an alternative to redo surgery in high-risk surgical patients.
Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation offers a valid alternative to redo surgery for degenerated bioprostheses in high-risk patients, provided meticulous procedural planning is performed to avoid severe complications.
May support valve-in-valve in selected high-risk patients; leaves open need for randomized durability data.
Introduction: Aortic and mitral bioprosthesis are the gold standard treatment to replace a pathological native valve. However, bioprostheses are prone to structural valve degeneration, resulting in limited long-term durability. During the past decade, the implantation of transcatheter stent-valves within degenerated aortic and mitral bioprostheses, (the so-called ‘valve-in-valve’ procedure), represents a valid alternative to redo surgery in patients with high-risk surgical profiles.Areas covered: We reviewed the clinical outcomes and the procedural details of transcatheter aortic and mitral valve-in-valve series according to current published literature and include a practical guide for valve sizing and stent-valve positioning and strategies to prevent complications.Expert opinion: In both aortic and mitral positions meticulous planning is fundamental in these procedures to avoid serious complications including patient prosthesis mismatch, coronary obstruction and left ventricular outflow tract obstruction.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gallo et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: