37 research outputs found

    Two birds with one stone: transcatheter valve-in-valve treatment of a failed surgical bioprosthesis with concomitant severe stenosis and paravalvular leak

    Full text link
    Implantation of bioprosthetic surgical valves has been a common procedure in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis due to patientsÂŽ preferences avoiding anticoagulation therapy. However, this valve presents sometime certain deterioration degree (i.e., dysfunction due to stenosis or regurgitation) or even paravalvular leak. Transcatheter heart valve implantation is a good alternative in high-risk patients. The valve-in-valve procedure has been shown to be a safe and effective procedure. However, the presence of the fixed sewing ring of the surgical bioprosthesis can hamper appropriate expansion of the THV. For this reason, the use of cracking balloon seems to be a safe alternative to increase the effective orifice area. We present a case of a patient with a degenerated previous implanted biological valve and paravalvular leak. We used the treatment strategy of valve-in-valve with post-dilatation with high-pressure balloon, in a way to treat both, the degenerated valve and the paravalvular leak. The use of a single percutaneous procedure was enough and safe to treat both problems without further complications

    Comparison of latest generation supra-annular and intra-annular self-expanding transcatheter heart valves

    Get PDF
    Background This study compares two latest-generation self-expanding transcatheter heart valves (THV), the supra-annular ACURATE neo (Boston Scientific) and the intra-annular Centera THV (Edwards Lifesciences). Methods In this single center observational cohort trial 317 patients treated with the ACURATE neo and 78 patients treated with the Centera TVH were included. The main endpoints were device success and the early safety endpoint at 30 days. Results Besides higher incidence of diabetes mellitus and higher body mass index in patients treated with the ACURATE neo THV, there were no baseline differences between the groups. Device success was similar in both groups (neo: 91.8% vs. Centera: 93.6%; P=0.598), with numerically higher rates of moderate to severe paravalvular leakage in the ACURATE neo group (4.7% vs. 1.3%; P=0.214). At 30 days all-cause mortality rates were low in both groups (0.3% vs. 0%; P=0.620) and no difference occurred in the early safety at 30 days (19.3% vs. 16.7%; P=0.599). However, all-cause stroke rates were significantly higher in patients treated with the Centera THV (6.4 vs. 1.6%; P=0.015). Conclusions The ACURATE neo and the Centera THV show low mortality rates as well as comparable, favorable hemodynamics. The finding of higher stroke rates at 30 days with the repositionable Centera SE-THV needs further assessment

    Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Balloon-Expandable Valves: Comparison of SAPIEN 3 Ultra Versus SAPIEN 3

    Full text link
    OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the SAPIEN 3 Ultra (Ultra) and SAPIEN 3 (S3) transcatheter heart valves (THVs). BACKGROUND The latest generation balloon-expandable Ultra THV incorporates new technical features and might improve outcomes following TAVR. METHODS This registry included all consecutive patients who underwent TAVR with either the Ultra or S3 between January 2014 and January 2020. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics. In-hospital and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-2-defined outcomes were investigated. RESULTS A total of 310 patients (n = 155 Ultra, n = 155 S3) were included. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics after propensity score matching. Procedures were significantly more often performed under conscious sedation with Ultra compared with S3 (97.4% vs. 71.6%; p < 0.001). Pre-dilatation was more frequent with S3 compared with Ultra (85.2% vs. 42.6%; p < 0.001). In-hospital outcomes, including device success (91.6% vs. 95.5%; p = 0.165), major vascular complications (12.3% vs. 11.0%; p = 0.723), and new pacemaker implantation (5.8% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.608), were comparable between S3 and Ultra patients, respectively. Post-procedural mean transprosthetic gradients (13.2 ± 5.7 mm Hg vs. 13.1 ± 4.7 mm Hg; p = 0.829) and rate of moderate or greater paravalvular leakage (PVL) (1.3% vs. 2.7%; p = 0.414) were comparable, whereas mild PVL was more frequent with S3 compared with Ultra (43.0% vs. 18.7%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Device success rates were high with both balloon-expandable THVs, with overall low rates of adverse events up to 30 days after TAVR. Despite a lower frequency of pre-dilatation, significant reduction of mild PVL confirms improved annular sealing properties of the novel Ultra THV

    Meta-Analysis of Bioprosthetic Valve Thrombosis after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

    No full text
    Bioprosthetic valve thrombosis may complicate transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). This meta-analysis sought to evaluate the prevalence and clinical impact of subclinical leaflet thrombosis (SLT) and clinical valve thrombosis (CVT) after TAVI. We summarized diagnostic strategies, prevalence of SLT and/or CVT and estimated their impact on the risk of all-cause death and stroke. Twenty studies with 12,128 patients were included. The prevalence of SLT and CVT was 15.1% and 1.2%, respectively. The risk of all-cause death was not significantly different between patients with SLT (RR 0.77; p= 0.22) and CVT (RR 1.29; p= 0.68) compared to patients without. The risk of stroke was higher in patients with CVT (RR 7.51; p< 0.001) as compared to patients without, while patients with SLT showed no significant increase in the risk of stroke (RR 1.81; p= 0.17). Reduced left ventricular function was associated with increased prevalence, while oral anticoagulation was associated with reduced prevalence of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis. Bioprosthetic valve thrombosis is frequent after TAVI, but does not increase the risk of death. Clinical valve thrombosis is associated with a significantly increased risk of stroke. Future studies should focus on prevention and treatment of bioprosthetic valve thrombosis
    corecore