Key result
Small surgical bioprostheses (true ID ≤20 mm) in transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation showed comparable 5-year mortality to larger valves (21.6% vs 18.1%) but higher readmission rates.
Why the study?
To examine outcomes of valve-in-valve TAVI according to the inner diameter of the degenerated aortic valve bioprosthesis.
Does transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in small degenerated aortic bioprostheses (≤20 mm) increase the risk of unfavorable mid-term outcomes compared to larger bioprostheses?
Cohort (n=59)
No
Does transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in small degenerated aortic bioprostheses (≤20 mm) increase the risk of unfavorable mid-term outcomes compared to larger bioprostheses?
Absolute Event Rate: 21.6% vs 18.1%
p-value: p=0.75
Valve-in-valve TAVI in small degenerated bioprostheses (≤20 mm) yields comparable mid-term mortality and stroke rates to larger valves, but is associated with higher transvalvular gradients and hospital readmission rates.
May increase readmission risk after valve-in-valve TAVI in small bioprostheses; leaves open optimal sizing in prospective trials.
BACKGROUND: To examine outcomes of valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) according to the inner diameter (ID) of the degenerated aortic valve bioprosthesis. METHODS: We analyzed survival, stroke, permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, paravalvular (PV) leakage, acute kidney injury and vascular complications in fifty-nine patients during a ten-year period. Patients were stratified according to the ID of the indwelling degenerated biological aortic valve (true ID ≤ and >20 mm). Differences in post-procedural transvalvular gradients and hospital re-admissions were analyzed. RESULTS: The median age of the small diameter group and large diameter group was eighty-one and eighty years, respectively. Median logistic EuroSCORE I was 23.9% and 26.2% and median Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 5.7% and 7.8% for the small and large groups, respectively. Survival, stroke, PPM implantation, PV leakage, acute kidney injury and vascular complications did not reach any statistically significant difference between both groups. Postprocedural transvalvular gradients differed significantly according to the true ID of the degenerated bioprosthetic valve and consequently of the respective TAVI valve. There was a significant difference with regard to hospital readmissions according to the true ID. CONCLUSIONS: TAVI ViV implantation for aortic bioprostheses with small true IDs of ≤20 mm is associated with comparable mid-term mortality and periprocedural stroke rate compared to implantation into larger bioprostheses. However, the periprocedural and mid-term transvalvular gradients, as well as hospital re-admission rates are significantly higher in the small diameter group.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pingpoh et al. (2020) conducted a cohort in Degenerated aortic bioprostheses (n=59). Small surgical bioprosthesis (true ID ≤20 mm) vs. Large surgical bioprosthesis (true ID >20 mm) was evaluated on 5-year mortality (p=0.75). Small surgical bioprostheses (true ID ≤20 mm) in transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation showed comparable 5-year mortality to larger valves (21.6% vs 18.1%) but higher readmission rates.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: