Search

Background: Valve-in-valve-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a feasible and increasingly used treatment option for failed surgical aortic prosthesis, but data from clinical practice are limited. We aimed to examine patient characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing TAVI in a surgival valve (valve-in-valve TAVI) compared with patients undergoing TAVI in a native valve., Methods: Using nationwide registries, we identified all Danish citizens, who underwent TAVI from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2020., Results: A total of 6,070 patients undergoing TAVI were identified; 247 (4%) patients had a history of SAVR (The valve-in-valve cohort). The median age of the study population was 81 (25th-75th percentile 77-85) and 55% were men. Patients with valve-in-valve-TAVI were younger but had a greater burden of cardiovascular comorbidities compared with patients with native-valve-TAVI. Within 30 days post procedure, 11 (0.2%) and 748 (13.8%) patients who underwent valve-in-valve-TAVI and native-valve-TAVI, respectively, had a pacemaker implantation. The cumulative 30-day risk of death among patients with valve-in-valve-TAVI was 2.4% (95% CI: 1.0%-5.0%) and 2.7% (95% CI: 2.3%-3.1%) in patients with native-valve-TAVI, respectively. Correspondingly, the cumulative 5-year risk of death was 42.5% (95% CI: 34.2%-50.6%) and 44.8% (95% CI: 43.2%-46.4%), respectively. In multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, valve-in-valve-TAVI was not associated with a significantly different risk of death at 30 days (Hazard ratio (HR) = 0.95, 95% CI 0.41-2.19) and 5 years (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.62-1.00) post-TAVI compared with native-valve-TAVI., Conclusions: TAVI in a failed surgical aortic prosthesis as compared to TAVI in a native valve, was not associated with significantly different short- and long-term mortality, suggesting that valve-in-valve-TAVI is a safe procedure., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest None reported., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: We examined loop diuretic treatment before and 1-year after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), as a proxy for changes in symptom severity and secondly assessed how changes in loop diuretics related to mortality risk., Background: Randomized clinical trials suggest that approximately one third of patients undergoing TAVI do not achieve symptom relief, but "all-comer" data are lacking., Methods: Using Danish nationwide registries, we identified all citizens, who underwent TAVI from 2008 to 2019 and were alive at 1-year post-discharge. Loop diuretic treatment pre-TAVI and at 1-year post-TAVI were assessed and grouped as receiving 1) no-loop diuretics; 2) low: 1-40 mg of furosemide (or equivalent bumetanide) daily; 3) intermediate: 41-120 mg of furosemide daily; or 4) high: >120 mg furosemide daily., Results: Among the 4431 patients undergoing TAVI, 2173 (49%) patients were not treated with loop diuretics at the time of TAVI, 918 (21%) had low-loop diuretics, 881 (20%) had intermediate-loop diuretics, and 459 (10%) had high-loop diuretics. At 1-year post-TAVI, 893 (20%) patients had increased, 1010 (23%) had reduced, and 2528 (57%) had unchanged loop diuretic treatment. The cumulative 5-year risk of death in patients surviving one year, was 61% (95% CI: 56.4% to 65.3%) in patients with increased and 47% (95% CI: 44.9% to 49.9%) in patients with reduced/unchanged loop diuretic treatment, respectively. In multivariable Cox proportional hazard analysis, increased loop diuretic treatment was associated with a higher risk of death compared with reduced/unchanged loop diuretic treatment (Hazard ratio: 1.4; 95% CI: 1.22 to 1.52)., Conclusions: Among patients undergoing TAVI, surviving one year, one fifth of patients had increased loop diuretic treatment, and a little over one fifth had reduced loop diuretic treatment 1-year post-procedure. In patients with increased diuretic treatment, the risk of death was higher compared to those with reduced/unchanged loop diuretic treatment., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Begun et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)