Small Left Ventricle and Clinical Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Saito T
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8174314 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:A 67-year-old man with a history of chest radiotherapy and severe aortic valve stenosis with calcification of the ascending aortic wall underwent implantation of an apicoaortic conduit from the left ventricular apex to the descending aorta. Eight years later, he presented with progressive exertional dyspnea. Imaging revealed severe native aortic valve insufficiency and calcification, with worsening left ventricular function. We decided to leave the apicoaortic conduit intact and perform transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a balloon-expandable prosthesis. Despite concerns that eliminating the obstruction across the native left ventricular outflow tract might decrease conduit flow and eventually cause graft thrombosis and peripheral embolization, we elected to move forward after a multidisciplinary discussion. The procedure resulted in angiographically and qualitatively similar forward flow across the newly implanted prosthesis and the existing apicoaortic conduit, with no hemodynamic or electrical dysfunction. The patient was discharged from the hospital the next day. At the 1-month follow-up visit, the patient felt well and reported marked functional improvement, with minimal symptoms during moderate to heavy exertion. The stroke volume index across the new bioprosthetic valve was low (13 mL/m2 at 1 mo and 18 mL/m2 at 1 y), suggesting that a substantial amount of blood was still exiting the ventricle through the left ventricle-to-aorta conduit. This report offers some guidance for treating patients with existing apicoaortic conduits and suggests that transcatheter aortic valve replacement is safe and effective if native aortic valve insufficiency develops.
| S-EPMC9632384 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify outcomes of patients undergoing emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and determine predictors of in-hospital mortality.BackgroundEmergency TAVR has emerged as a viable treatment strategy for patients with decompensated severe aortic stenosis and/or regurgitation; however, data on patients undergoing emergency TAVR are limited.MethodsAll emergency TAVR procedures were identified from a single tertiary academic center between January 2015 and August 2018.Results31 patients underwent emergency TAVR due to cardiogenic shock (26 patients), electrical instability with incessant ventricular tachycardia (2 patients), severe refractory angina (2 patients), and decompensated heart failure with hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation (1 patient). Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) was used in 16 (51.6%). MCS initiation occurred immediately prior to TAVR in 10 patients and placed post-TAVR in 6 patients. 6 patients died before hospital discharge (in-hospital mortality 19.4%). 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 61.0% and 55.9%, respectively. Univariate predictors of in-hospital mortality were preprocedural pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) ≤1.8 (66.7% vs. 20.0%, p=0.01), intraprocedural cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) (83.3% vs 4.0%, p ≤ 0.001), acute kidney injury post-TAVR (80.0% vs. 4.2%, p ≤ 0.001), initiation of dialysis post-TAVR (60.0% vs. 4.2%, p ≤ 0.001), and MCS initiation post-TAVR (50.0% vs. 12.0%, p=0.03). MCS initiation before TAVR was associated with improved survival compared with post-TAVR initiation.ConclusionEmergency TAVR in extreme risk patients with acute decompensated heart failure or cardiogenic shock secondary to severe aortic valve disease is associated with high in-hospital mortality rates. Careful patient selection taking into account right heart function, assessed by PAPi, and early utilization of MCS may improve survival following emergency TAVR.
| S-EPMC6875395 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services national coverage determination for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) includes volume requirements for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for hospitals seeking to initiate or continue TAVR programs. Evidence regarding the association between SAVR volume and TAVR outcomes is limited.ObjectiveTo examine the association of hospital SAVR and combined SAVR and TAVR volumes with patient outcomes of TAVR procedures performed within 1 year, 2 years, and for the entire period after initiation of TAVR programs.Design, setting, and participantsThis observational cohort study included 60 538 TAVR procedures performed in 438 hospitals between October 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015, among Medicare beneficiaries.Main outcomes and measuresThe associations between SAVR volume, SAVR and TAVR volumes, and risks of death, death or stroke, and readmissions within 30 days were determined using a hierarchical logistic regression model adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. The association between SAVR and SAVR and TAVR volumes and 1-year and 2-year mortality after TAVR procedures was determined using a multivariable proportional hazard model with a robust variance estimator. The associations for procedures performed within 1 year, 2 years, and for the entire period after initiation of TAVR programs were examined.ResultsAmong the 60 538 patients, 29 173 were women and 31 365 were men, with a mean (SD) age of 82.3 (8.0) years. Hospitals with high SAVR volume (mean annual volume, ≥97 per year) were more likely to adopt TAVR early and had a higher growth in TAVR volumes over time (median TAVR volume by hospitals with high SAVR volume and low SAVR volume: year 1, 32 vs 19; year 2, 48 vs 28; year 3, 82 vs 38; year 4, 118 vs 54; P < .001). In adjusted analysis, high hospital SAVR volume alone was not associated with better patient outcomes after TAVR. When hospital TAVR and SAVR volumes were jointly analyzed, patients treated in hospitals with high TAVR volume had lower 30-day mortality after TAVR (high TAVR and low SAVR vs low TAVR and low SAVR: odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72-0.99; high TAVR and high SAVR vs low TAVR and high SAVR: odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95), the effect of which was more pronounced when hospitals also had high SAVR volume. Patients treated in hospitals with high SAVR volume and high TAVR volume had the lowest 30-day mortality (vs hospitals with low SAVR volume and TAVR volume: odds ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.66-0.89).Conclusions and relevanceHospitals with high SAVR volume are most likely to be fast adopters of TAVR. Hospital SAVR volume alone is not associated with better TAVR outcomes. Accumulating high volumes of TAVR is associated with lower mortality after TAVR, particularly when hospitals have high SAVR volumes. Hospitals with high caseloads of both SAVR and TAVR are likely to achieve the best outcomes.
| S-EPMC6583695 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the association between pre-procedural left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) patterns and clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).BackgroundThe association between pre-procedural LVH pattern and severity and clinical outcomes after TAVR is uncertain.MethodsPatients (n = 31,199) across 422 sites who underwent TAVR from November 2011 through June 2016 as part of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapies) Registry linked with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services database were evaluated by varying LVH patterns, according to sex-specific cutoffs for left ventricular mass index and relative wall thickness. The association between LVH pattern (concentric remodeling, concentric LVH, and eccentric LVH) and outcomes (rates of mortality, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, new dialysis requirement) at 1-year follow-up were evaluated using multivariate hazard models.ResultsThere were no significant associations between concentric remodeling (death: adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.93 to 1.15; MI: HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.46; stroke: HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.39; new dialysis: HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.15), concentric LVH (death: HR: 1.04; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.15; MI: HR: 1.12; 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.52; stroke: HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.40; new dialysis: HR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.90 to 1.52), or eccentric LVH (death: HR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.10; MI: HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.63; stroke: HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.32; new dialysis: HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.92 to 1.70) and outcomes at 1 year compared with patients without LVH.ConclusionsIn a contemporary cohort of patients who underwent TAVR, pre-procedural LVH according to left ventricular mass index and relative wall thickness was not associated with adverse outcomes at 1-year follow-up. TAVR is likely to benefit patients with severe aortic stenosis regardless of the presence of LVH.
| S-EPMC6822896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTranscatheter valve-in-valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) has emerged as an alternative to redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (Redo-SAVR) for the treatment of failed surgical aortic bioprostheses. However, the benefit of ViV-TAVR compared with Redo-SAVR remains debated with regard to short-term hemodynamic results and short- and long-term clinical outcomes.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare short-term hemodynamic performance and long-term clinical outcomes of ViV-TAVR vs. Redo-SAVR in patients treated for surgical aortic bioprosthetic valve failure.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed the data prospectively collected in 184 patients who underwent Redo-SAVR or ViV-TAVR. Transthoracic echocardiography was performed before and after the procedure and analyzed in an echocardiography core laboratory using the new Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. An inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to compare the outcomes between both procedures.ResultsViV-TAVR showed lower rate of intended hemodynamic performance (39.2% vs. 67.7%, p < 0.001) at 30 days, which was essentially driven by a higher rate (56.2% vs. 28.8%, p = 0.001) of high residual gradient (mean transvalvular gradient ≥20 mm Hg). Despite a trend for higher 30-day mortality in the Redo-SAVR vs. ViV-TAVR group (8.7% vs. 2.5%, odds ratio [95% CI]: 3.70 [0.77-17.6]; p = 0.10), the long-term mortality was significantly lower (24.2% vs. 50.1% at 8 years; hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.48 [0.26-0.91]; p = 0.03) in the Redo-SAVR group. After inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis, Redo-SAVR remained significantly associated with reduced long-term mortality compared with ViV-TAVR (hazard ratio [95% CI]: 0.32 [0.22-0.46]; p < 0.001).ConclusionsViV-TAVR was associated with a lower rate of intended hemodynamic performance and numerically lower mortality at 30 days but higher rates of long-term mortality compared with Redo-SAVR.
| S-EPMC10242565 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Contemporary outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in nonagenarians are unknown. Methods and Results We identified 13 544 nonagenarians (aged 90-100 years) who underwent TAVR between 2012 and 2016 using Medicare claims. Generalized estimating equations were used to study the change in short-term outcomes among nonagenarians over time. We compared outcomes between nonagenarians and non-nonagenarians undergoing TAVR in 2016. A mixed-effect multivariable logistic regression was performed to determine predictors of 30-day mortality in nonagenarians in 2016. A center was defined as a high-volume center if it performed ≥100 TAVR procedures per year. After adjusting for changes in patients' characteristics, risk-adjusted 30-day mortality declined in nonagenarians from 9.8% in 2012 to 4.4% in 2016 (P<0.001), whereas mortality for patients <90 years decreased from 6.4% to 3.5%. In 2016, 35 712 TAVR procedures were performed, of which 12.7% were in nonagenarians. Overall, in-hospital mortality in 2016 was higher in nonagenarians compared with younger patients (2.4% versus 1.7%, P<0.05) but did not differ in analysis limited to high-volume centers (2.2% versus 1.7%; odds ratio: 1.33; 95% CI, 0.97-1.81; P=0.07). Important predictors of 30-day mortality in nonagenarians included in-hospital stroke (adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 8.67; 95% CI, 5.03-15.00), acute kidney injury (aOR: 4.11; 95% CI, 2.90-5.83), blood transfusion (aOR: 2.66; 95% CI, 1.81-3.90), respiratory complications (aOR: 2.96; 95% CI, 1.52-5.76), heart failure (aOR: 1.86; 95% CI, 1.04-3.34), coagulopathy (aOR: 1.59; 95% CI, 1.12-2.26; P<0.05 for all). Conclusions Short-term outcomes after TAVR have improved in nonagenarians. Several procedural complications were associated with increased 30-day mortality among nonagenarians.
| S-EPMC6898796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Although transcatheter aortic valve replacement ( TAVR ) is the least invasive treatment for patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis, some patients hesitate to undergo the procedure. We investigated the clinical impact of treatment delay after patient refusal of TAVR . Methods and Results We used the Japanese OCEAN (Optimized Catheter valvular intervention) regsitry data of 1542 patients who underwent TAVR . Refusal was defined as at least 1 refusal of TAVR at the time of informed consent. Patients were separated into 2 groups: refusal (28/1542, 1.8%) and non-refusal (1514/1542, 98.2%). We compared the baseline characteristics, procedural outcomes, and mortality rates between the groups. Additionally, data on reasons for refusal and those leading to eventually undergoing TAVR were collected. Age, surgical risk scores, and frailty were higher in the refusal group than in the non-refusal group ( P<0.05 for all). Periprocedural complications did not differ between groups, whereas 30-day and cumulative 1-year mortality were significantly higher in the refusal group than in the non-refusal group (7.1% versus 1.3%, P=0.008 and 28.8% versus 10.3%, P=0.010, respectively). Multivariate Cox regression analysis revealed that TAVR refusal was an independent predictor of increased midterm mortality (hazard ratio: 3.37; 95% confidence interval: 1.52-7.48; P=0.003). The most common reason for refusal was fear (13/28, 46.4%), and the most common reason for changing their mind was worsening heart failure (21/28, 75.0%). All patients in the refusal group decided to undergo TAVR within 20 months (median: 5.5 months). Conclusions Refusing TAVR even once led to poorer prognosis; therefore, this fact should be clearly discussed when obtaining informed consent.
| S-EPMC6222955 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe past decade has witnessed an ever-increasing momentum of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and a subsequent paradigm shift in the contemporary management of severe aortic stenosis (AS). We conducted a multi-centric TAVR registry based on Chinese patients (the China Aortic valve tRanscatheter Replacement registrY [CARRY]) to delineate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of Chinese patients who underwent TAVR and compare the results between different valve types in different Chinese regions.MethodsCARRY is an all-comer registry of aortic valve disease patients undergoing TAVR across China and was designed as an observational study that retrospectively included all TAVR patients at each participating site. Seven hospitals in China participated in the CARRY, and 1204 patients from April 2012 to November 2020 were included. Categorical variables were compared using the chi-squared test, and continuous variables were analyzed using a t test or analysis of variance (ANOVA) test. The Kaplan-Meier curve was used to estimate the risk of adverse events during follow-up.ResultsThe mean age of the patients was 73.8 ± 6.5 years and 57.2% were male. The median Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score was 6.0 (3.7-8.9). Regarding the aortic valve, the proportion of bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) was 48.5%. During the hospital stay, the stroke rate was 0.7%, and the incidence of high-degree atrioventricular block indicating permanent pacemaker implantation was 11.0%. The in-hospital all-cause mortality rate was 2.2%. After 1 year, the overall mortality rate was 4.5%. Compared to patients with tricuspid aortic valve (TAV), those with BAV had similar in-hospital complication rates, but a lower incidence of in-hospital mortality (1.4% vs. 3.3%) and 1 year mortality (2.3% vs. 5.8%).ConclusionsTAVR candidates in China were younger, higher proportion of BAV, and had lower rates of post-procedural complications and mortality than other international all-comer registries. Given the use of early generation valves in the majority of the population, patients with BAV had similar rates of complications, but lower mortality than those with TAV. These findings further propel the extension of TAVR in low-risk patients.Trial registrationhttps://www.chictr.org.cn/ (No. ChiCTR2000038526).
| S-EPMC8631376 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7451866 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronary obstruction during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a rare, yet life-threatening, complication. The routine use of left main (LM) protection with or without stent placement in high-risk patients remains controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of LM protection during TAVR and identify anatomic factors associated with need for stent placement.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed all TAVR cases (native and valve-in-valve) performed in our institution between 2014 and 2019 and identified patients who underwent LM protection with a coronary wire, balloon, and/or stent during the procedure. We compared the pre-TAVR computed tomography aortic root characteristics, procedural data, short-, and long-term outcomes among the patients who eventually received an LM stent and those who did not.ResultsAmong 1925 TAVR patients, 41 (2.1%) underwent LM protection, and 10 of them (25%) had eventually a stent placed in the LM for threatened obstruction after valve deployment. In the native TAVR group (n = 35), 8 patients underwent LM stenting. A larger TAVR prosthesis, larger annular circumference (83.8 vs 76.1 mm; P = .038), lower ratio of sinotubular junction diameter to prosthesis size (1.02 vs 1.11; P = .032), and longer left coronary cusp (15.1 vs 13.9 mm; P = .18) were associated with higher incidence of LM stenting. In the valve-in-valve TAVR group (n = 6), 5 patients had a valve-to-coronary distance of less than 4 mm, and 2 of them received an LM stent. Both stent and nonstent groups had excellent outcomes with no major adverse cardiovascular events or coronary obstruction at 30 days. After a median follow-up of 351 days, 4 patients died (9.7%) (1 in the stent and 3 in the nonstent group), without any cases of late coronary obstruction or percutaneous coronary intervention in either group.ConclusionsLM protection with a coronary guidewire, balloon, or stent is a safe and effective method of coronary protection during TAVR in appropriately selected high-risk patients. Annular circumference, prosthesis size, left coronary cusp length, LM ostial height, and ratio of sinotubular junction to prosthesis size are important predictors of stent deployment.
| S-EPMC11307958 | biostudies-literature