Key result
Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction achieved procedural success in 85.7% of cases, with no deaths or significant adverse outcomes at 1 year.
Why the study?
Does transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation improve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes in high-risk surgical patients with aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction?
Observational (n=7)
Does transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation improve hemodynamics and clinical outcomes in high-risk surgical patients with aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction?
Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation is a feasible and effective treatment for high-risk patients with surgical aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction, yielding satisfactory hemodynamic and clinical outcomes at 1 year.
Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of the transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for the treatment of bioprosthesis dysfunction in high-risk surgical patients. This study presents the initial experience with valve-in-valve implantation. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural profiles were characterized, and the mid-term results of patients with surgical bioprosthesis dysfunction submitted to valve-in-valve implantation in the aortic position were reported. Seven male patients were included, aged 72.6 ± 10.0 years. The STS score was 9,6 ± 10,5%, and the logistic EuroSCORE was 22.7 ± 14.7%. Three patients had combined aortic bioprosthesis failure; two had isolated regurgitation; and two had isolated stenosis. The transfemoral access was used in six cases, and the transapical access in one case. Implanted devices included Sapien XT (n = 5) and CoreValve (n = 2) prostheses. Procedural success was achieved in six (85.7%) cases. After the procedure, the mean gradient decreased from 38.2 ± 9.6 mmHg to 20.9 ± 5.9 mmHg, and the valve area increased from 1.2 ± 0.4 cm2 to 1.5 ± 0.5 cm2. After 1 year, there were no deaths and no other significant adverse outcomes; 80% of patients were in NYHA functional class I/II. The transvalvular gradients and valve area remained unchanged in this period. The valve-in-valve procedure was effective in most high-risk surgical patients with bioprosthesis dysfunction. When performed in well-selected patients, it results in satisfactory clinical and hemodynamic outcomes. Estudos recentes têm demonstrado a eficácia do implante transcateter valve-in-valve para o tratamento de disfunção de biopróteses em pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico. Apresentamos nossa experiência inicial com o implante valve-in-valve. Caracterizamos o perfil clínico, ecocardiográfico e do procedimento, e reportamos os resultados de médio prazo de pacientes com disfunção de bioprótese submetidos a implante valve-in-valve em posição aórtica. Incluímos sete pacientes do sexo masculino, com idade de 72,6 ± 10,0 anos. O escore STS foi 9,6 ± 10,5%, e o EuroSCORE logístico foi 22,7 ± 14,7%. Três pacientes apresentavam dupla disfunção; dois tinham insuficiência; e dois exibiam estenose isolada. A via transfemoral foi utilizada em seis casos, e a transapical, em um caso. Os dispositivos implantados incluíram as próteses Sapien XT (n = 5) e CoreValve (n = 2). O sucesso do procedimento foi obtido em seis (85,7%) casos. Após o procedimento, o gradiente médio reduziu-se de 38,2 ± 9,6 mmHg para 20,9 ± 5,9 mmHg, e a área valvar elevou-se de 1,2 ± 0,4 cm2 para 1,5 ± 0,5 cm2. Ao final de 1 ano, não ocorreram óbitos e nem outros desfechos adversos significativos; 80% dos pacientes encontravam-se em classe funcional NYHA I/II. Os gradientes transvalvares e a área valvar permaneceram inalterados nesse período. O procedimento valve-in-valve foi eficaz na maioria dos pacientes de alto risco cirúrgico com disfunção de bioprótese. Quando realizado em pacientes bem selecionados, resulta em desfechos clínicos e hemodinâmicos satisfatórios.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Meneguz‐Moreno et al. (2015) conducted an observational in surgical aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction (n=7). Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation was evaluated on Procedural success. Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction achieved procedural success in 85.7% of cases, with no deaths or significant adverse outcomes at 1 year.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: