Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with pure aortic insufficiency (PAI).BackgroundThe treatment of choice for patients with severe symptomatic PAI is SAVR. However, not all patients are candidates for surgery because of comorbidities or are deemed high risk for surgery. As a result, TAVR is being used as an off-label procedure in some patients with PAI.Patients and methodsWe analyzed the National Inpatient Sample database from January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2017, using the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision. Inclusion criteria were patients with aortic valve insufficiency undergoing either TAVR or SAVR. Patients with concomitant aortic stenosis, or history of infective endocarditis, and those below the age of 18 years were excluded.ResultsA total of 14,720 patients with PAI underwent valve replacement. Of those, 6.2% underwent TAVR. The TAVR group was significantly older (median age 78 years vs 64 years; P <.001). There was no evidence of a difference in in-hospital mortality between the 2 groups. However, after adjustment, patients in the TAVR group were associated with favorable outcomes in terms of acute kidney injury, cardiogenic shock, postoperative respiratory complications, and length of stay. On the other hand, those in the SAVR group were less likely to need permanent pacemakers.ConclusionThere was no evidence of a significant statistical difference in in-hospital mortality between patients with PAI treated by either SAVR or TAVR, both in unmatched and propensity-matched cohorts. TAVR could be considered for patients with PAI who are not candidates for surgery.
Project description:Bicuspid aortic insufficiency (BAI) patients with root aneurysm often require aortic valve and root replacement in a composite procedure. The valve-sparing root replacement (VSARR) procedure is aimed at preserving the native valve when possible. This case highlights a successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement procedure in a BAI patient previously treated with VSARR. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).
Project description:Considering the surgical risk stratification for patients with severe calcific aortic stenosis (AS), transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a reliable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (Fan et al., 2020, 2021; Lee et al., 2021). Despite the favorable clinical benefits of TAVR, stroke remains a dreaded perioperative complication (Auffret et al., 2016; Kapadia et al., 2016; Kleiman et al., 2016; Huded et al., 2019). Ischemic overt stroke, identified in 1.4% to 4.3% of patients in TAVR clinical practice, has been associated with prolonged disability and increased mortality (Auffret et al., 2016; Kapadia et al., 2016; Levi et al., 2022). The prevalence of hyperintensity cerebral ischemic lesions detected by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI) was reported to be about 80%, which is associated with impaired neurocognitive function and vascular dementia (Vermeer et al., 2003; Barber et al., 2008; Kahlert et al., 2010).
Project description:An 89-year-old woman with severe aortic regurgitation and an aneurysmal interventricular membranous septum extending into the aortic annulus underwent successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement. A challenging case because of the risk of valve mispositioning complications attributed to the co-occurrence of pure aortic regurgitation (very low calcium burden) with an aneurysmal interventricular membranous septum. (Level of Difficulty: Intermediate.).
Project description:This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to summarize the available evidence on the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with Native Aortic Valve Regurgitation (NAVR) and compare outcomes between first and second generation valves. Owing to the improvements in transcatheter heart valve design and procedural success, TAVR has become increasingly performed in broader aortic valve pathologies. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases from 2007 to 2018 and performed a systematic review on reports with at least 10 patients with aortic valve regurgitation undergoing TAVR procedure. The main outcome of interest was all-cause mortality at 30 days. A total of 638 patients across 12 studies were included. Mean age ranged from 68 to 84. Society of Thoracic Surgeons score ranged from 5.4% to 13.1% and Logistic EuroSCORE ranged from 18.2% to 33%. The incidence rate of all-cause mortality at 30 days was found to be 11% (95% CI 7%-16%; I2 = 20.86%). All-cause mortality at 30 days for first generation valves had an incidence rate of 15% (95% CI 10%-20%; I2 = 10%) compared to 7% (95% CI 3%-13%; I2 = 37%) in second generation valves with subgroup interaction analysis P = 0.059. Device success incidence rate in second generation valves was 92% (95% CI 83%-99%; I2 = 67%) vs 68% (95% CI 59%-77%; I2 = 53%) in first generation valves with P = 0.001. TAVR appears to be a feasible treatment choice for NAVR patients at high risk for surgical valve replacement. Second generation valves show promising results in terms of short-term outcomes.
Project description:PurposeConcerns have been consistently raised in regards to the considerable amount of contrast dye used during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with renal insufficiency. In the present study, we introduced minimal contrast TAVR and compared its 30-day clinical outcomes with conventional TAVR.Materials and methodsWe retrospectively investigated 369 patients who underwent TAVR between July 2011 and April 2020 in our institute. Among them, 93 patients with severe aortic stenosis and renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤50 mL/min/1.73 m²) were included and divided into a conventional TAVR group (n=56) and a minimal contrast TAVR group (n=37). In the minimal contrast TAVR group, the total amount of contrast was <10 mL during the entire TAVR procedure. Thirty-day major adverse clinical events (MACE), including death, stroke, implantation of permanent pacemaker, and initiation of hemodialysis, were investigated.ResultsThe incidence of MACE was significantly lower in the minimal contrast TAVR group than the conventional TAVR group (16.2% vs. 42.9%, p=0.010). Death occurred in 9 patients (16.1%) in the conventional TAVR group and in 0 patients in the minimal contrast group (p=0.011). Hemodialysis was initiated in 2 patients (5.4%) in the minimal contrast TAVR group and in 7 patients (12.5%) in the conventional TAVR group (p=0.256). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the minimal contrast TAVR procedure was an independent predictor for reducing MACE (hazard ratio 0.208, 95% confidence interval: 0.080-0.541, p=0.001).ConclusionMinimal contrast TAVR is feasible and shows more favorable short-term clinical outcomes than conventional TAVR in patients with renal insufficiency.
Project description:To analyse the impact of postprocedural mitral regurgitation (MR), in an interaction with aortic regurgitation (AR), on mortality following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).To assess the interaction between MR and AR, we compared the survival rate of patients (i) without both significant MR and AR versus (ii) those with either significant MR or significant AR versus (iii) with significant MR and AR, all postprocedure. 381 participants of the Polish Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Registry (166 males (43.6%) and 215 females (56.4%), age 78.8±7.4 years) were analysed. Follow-up was 94.1±96.5 days.In-hospital and midterm mortality were 6.6% and 10.2%, respectively. Significant MR and AR were present in 16% and 8.1% patients, including 3.1% patients with both significant MR and AR. Patients with significant versus insignificant AR differed with respect to mortality (log rank p=0.009). This difference was not apparent in a subgroup of patients without significant MR (log rank p=0.80). In a subgroup of patients without significant AR, there were no significant differences in mortality between individuals with versus without significant MR (log rank p=0.44). Significant MR and AR had a significant impact on mortality only when associated with each other (log rank p<0.0001). At multivariate Cox regression modelling concomitant significant MR and AR were independently associated with mortality (OR 3.2, 95% CI 1.54 to 5.71, p=0.002).Significant MR or AR postprocedure, when isolated, had no impact on survival. Combined MR and AR had a significant impact on a patient's prognosis.