Why the study?
Transcatheter mechanical resection devices were evaluated for prior ablation of aortic cusps to improve periprocedural outcomes of TAVI.
Do different transcatheter mechanical resection devices vary in resection time, efficacy, and tissue damage in porcine and human aortic valves?
Do different transcatheter mechanical resection devices vary in resection time, efficacy, and tissue damage in porcine and human aortic valves?
Transcatheter aortic valve resection is feasible using mechanical devices, though devices vary significantly in resection time and risk of surrounding tissue damage.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Requires balancing speed against tissue damage in animal models; leaves open human translation and device optimization.
Background: To improve periprocedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), transcatheter mechanical resection devices were tested for prior ablation of the aortic cusps. Methods: Three mechanical transcatheter resection devices were tested in a series of native porcine (n=30) and reassembled calcified human valves (n=54). The resection time, the resected valve area, the number of released cusps, and the degree of surrounding tissue damage were measured. Afterwards, postmortem transapical-transcatheter-resections of the aortic valve in two humans were performed. Results: In the native porcine hearts, the Aesculap II device demonstrated significantly shorter resection time compared to the R&R II and the Randstad devices (6.5±2.0 vs. 28.6±24.1 vs. 23.3±14.4 sec; P=0.001). However, it created more lesions in the surrounding tissue (P=0.002). The R&R II achieved a smaller number of resected cusps than the other two devices (2.7±0.7 vs. 1.1±0.7 vs. 2.4±0.5; P<0.001, respectively). It also resected a smaller area of the aortic valve (306.5±149.2 vs. 106.7±29.6 vs. 256.8±81.3 mm2; P=0.09) but a larger mean area of the resected fragments (110.3±41.5 vs. 160.7±29.6 vs. 111.5±43.9 mm2; P=0.01). The resection of the reassembled human valves demonstrated the same results between the devices regarding resection time (P=0.001) and resected area (P=0.016), but not fragment sizes (P=0.610). Finally, transapical-transcatheter-resection of aortic valve was performed in two cadavers. Conclusions: Transcatheter aortic valve resection is feasible with variable aortic leaflet resection times and mild risk of lesions of the surrounding tissue.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dai et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: