eISSN: 1897-4295
ISSN: 1734-9338
Advances in Interventional Cardiology/Postępy w Kardiologii Interwencyjnej
Current issue Archive Manuscripts accepted About the journal Abstracting and indexing Subscription Contact Instructions for authors
SCImago Journal & Country Rank
4/2018
vol. 14
 
Share:
Share:
more
 
 
abstract:
Short communication

Valve-in-valve treatment of dysfunctional aortic bioprostheses – single-centre experience

Piotr Scisło, Kajetan Grodecki, Dana Bińczak, Janusz Kochman, Radosław Wilimski, Zenon Huczek

Adv Interv Cardiol 2018; 14, 4 (54): 425–428
Online publish date: 2018/12/11
View full text
Get citation
ENW
EndNote
BIB
JabRef, Mendeley
RIS
Papers, Reference Manager, RefWorks, Zotero
AMA
APA
Chicago
Harvard
MLA
Vancouver
 

Introduction

Modern valvular bioprostheses show good durability, but there are several mechanisms that adversely affect their functionality. Besides dysfunction due to endocarditis (1–6%) or prosthetic valve thrombosis (up to 1%), structural valve degeneration (SVD) is the major concern [1]. Structural valve degeneration is defined as deterioration of the valve’s leaflets/structures resulting in thickening, calcification, tearing, or disruption of the prosthetic valve materials with or without hemodynamic dysfunction [2]. It may occur early after implantation, but typically starts approximately 8 years after valve replacement, and its prevalence rates rapidly increase 10 years after the procedure [3, 4]. The frequency of SVD is notably time-dependant: it ranges from 5–10% after 10 years, up to 36–51% after 20 years [5]. The growing number of patients requiring re-intervention due to bioprosthetic valve dysfunction and high periprocedural mortality associated with reoperation justifies the need for less invasive procedures [6]. Thus, transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is emerging as a promising treatment option [7, 8]. The transcatheter approach has been successfully attempted also in dysfunctional mitral bioprostheses, but the lack of dedicated mitral devices still limits its application mainly to patients with failed aortic bioprostheses [9]. In current guidelines, ViV-TAVI is considered as a therapeutic option for severely symptomatic patients with aortic bioprosthesis dysfunction and assessed by the Heart Team to be at high or prohibitive risk of reoperation, in whom improvement in hemodynamic is anticipated (Class IIa, LOF: B) [10].

Aim

This paper presents our single-center experience in ViV-TAVI for treatment of patients with dysfunctional bioprostheses after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR).

Material and methods

From a total of 311 transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI) at our institution, we selected 8 cases treated due to SVD of a surgically implanted aortic bioprosthesis (either stented type or homograft). The baseline clinical characteristics of the ViV-TAVI group are shown in Table I. All patients were referred for ViV-TAVI by the local Heart Team due to high risk of reoperation.
Sizing of transcatheter heart valves (THV) was based on surgical valve label information, transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and/or computed tomography (CT) imaging...


View full text...
references:
Habib G, Lancellotti P, Antunes MJ, et al. 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of infective endocarditis. Eur Heart J 2015; 36: 3075-123.
Dvir D, Bourguignon T, Otto CM, et al. Standardized definition of structural valve degeneration for surgical and transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves. Circulation 2018; 137: 388-99.
Foroutan F, Guyatt GH, O’Brien K, et al. Prognosis after surgical replacement with a bioprosthetic aortic valve in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis: systematic review of observational studies. BMJ 2016; 354: i5065.
Wang M, Furnary AP, Li HF, Grunkemeier GL. Bioprosthetic aortic valve durability: a meta-regression of published studies. Ann Thorac Surg 2017; 104: 1080-7.
Rodriguez-Gabella T, Voisine P, Dagenais F, et al. Long-term outcomes following surgical aortic bioprosthesis implantation. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 71: 1401-12.
Balsam LB, Grossi EA, Greenhouse DG, et al. Reoperative valve surgery in the elderly: predictors of risk and long-term survival. Ann Thorac Surg 2010; 90: 1195-200.
Gąsior T, Huczek Z, Jagielak D, Wojakowski W. Aortic valve-in-valve procedures for treatment of failing surgically implanted bioprosthesis. Cor Vasa 2017; 59: e35-41.
Huczek Z, Kochman J, Scisło P, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in a patient with severe aortic insufficiency of aortic valve homograft. Kardiol Pol 2013; 71: 1325.
Webb JG, Mack MJ, White JM, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation within degenerated aortic surgical bioprostheses: PARTNER 2 valve-in-valve registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2017; 69: 2253-62.
Nishimura RA, Otto CM, Bonow RO, et al. 2017 AHA/ACC Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients with Valvular Heart Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines 2017.
Zoghbi WA, Chambers JB, Dumesnil JG, et al. Recommendations for evaluation of prosthetic valves with echocardiography and Doppler ultrasound. A report from the American Society of Echocardiography’s guidelines and standards committee and the task force on prosthetic valves, developed in conjunction. J Am Soc Echocardiogr 2009; 22: 975-1014.
Kappetein AP, Head SJ, Genereux P, et al. Updated standardized endpoint definitions for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 consensus document. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012; 33: 1438-54.
Dvir D, Barbanti M, Tan J, Webb JG. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation for patients with degenerative surgical bioprosthetic valves. Curr Probl Cardiol 2014; 39: 7-27.
Simonato M, Webb J, Kornowski R, et al. Transcatheter replacement of failed bioprosthetic valves: large multicenter assessment of the effect of implantation depth on hemodynamics after aortic valve-in-valve. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2016; 9: pii: e003651.
Nielsen-Kudsk JE, Andersen A, Therkelsen CJ, et al. High-pressure balloon fracturing of small dysfunctional Mitroflow bioprostheses facilitates transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation. EuroIntervention 2017; 13: e1020-5.
Quick links
© 2019 Termedia Sp. z o.o. All rights reserved.
Developed by Bentus.
PayU - płatności internetowe