Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation in degenerative rapid deployment bioprostheses

  • Uri Landes
  • Danny Dvir
  • Wolfgang Schoels
  • Christopher Tron
  • Stephan Ensminger
  • Matheus Simonato
  • Ulrich Schäfer
  • Matjaz Bunc
  • Gabriel S Aldea
  • Alfredo Cerillo
  • Stephan Windecker
  • Antonio Marzocchi
  • Martin Andreas
  • Nicolas Amabile
  • John Webb
  • Ran Kornowski

Abstract

AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) implantation performance in rapid deployment (ViVr) vs. conventional (ViVc) surgical heart valves.

METHODS AND RESULTS: A multicentre registry was developed as part of the VIVID international registry. A total of 30 ViVr patients (Perceval, n=24, ATS 3f Enable™, n=5, and the INTUITY, n=1) were evaluated and compared with 2,288 ViVc patients. Propensity score (PS) matching was performed to adjust further for bias. Compared with ViVc, ViVr patients presented twice as early after surgical heart valve (SHV) implantation (55.2±36.1 vs. 118.4±57.7 months, p<0.001), were more commonly female (82.8% vs. 41.3%, p<0.001), and had shorter body stature and reduced body weight (p<0.05 for both) prior to PS. Implantation was successful in all ViVr cases and, compared with ViVc, was associated with equally favourable haemodynamic outcomes (mean gradient: 14.6±8.3 vs. 16.2±8.9 mmHg, p=0.356; regurgitation ≥mild: 3.7% vs. 5.2%, p=0.793). Periprocedural complication rates were similar and low in both groups. There was no coronary obstruction event in any ViVr case; one patient (3.6%) died during one year of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS: ViVr appears effective, safe and associated with favourable haemodynamic outcome.

Bibliographical data

Original languageEnglish
ISSN1774-024X
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 20.05.2019
Externally publishedYes
PubMed 30777843