Back to Search Start Over

Outcomes in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Authors :
van Nieuwkerk AC
Santos RB
Fernandez-Nofrerias E
Tchétché D
de Brito FS Jr
Barbanti M
Kornowski R
Latib A
D'Onofrio A
Ribichini F
Mainar V
Dumonteil N
Baan J
Abizaid A
Sartori S
D'Errigo P
Tarantini G
Lunardi M
Orvin K
Pagnesi M
Larraya GL
Ghattas A
Dangas G
Mehran R
Delewi R
Source :
The American journal of cardiology [Am J Cardiol] 2022 Jun 01; Vol. 172, pp. 81-89. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Mar 26.
Publication Year :
2022

Abstract

The use of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is increasing, but studies evaluating clinical outcomes in these patients are scarce. Also, there are limited data to guide the choice of valve type in ViV-TAVI. Therefore, this CENTER-study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI compared to patients with native valve TAVI (NV-TAVI). In addition, we compared outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI treated with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable valves. A total of 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 11333 patients with NV-TAVI were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching, resulting in 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 512 patients with NV-TAVI. Mean age was 81±7 years, 58% were female, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.3% (4.0% to 12.8%). Mortality rates were comparable between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI patients at 30 days (4.1% vs 5.9%, p = 0.30) and 1 year (14.2% vs 17.3%, p = 0.34). Stroke rates were also similar at 30 days (2.8% vs 1.8%, p = 0.38) and 1 year (4.9% vs 4.3%, p = 0.74). Permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted in patients with ViV-TAVI (8.8% vs 15.0%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.92, p = 0.02). Patients with ViV-TAVI were treated with self-expandable valves (n = 162) and balloon-expandable valves (n = 94). Thirty-day major bleeding was less frequent in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 13%, odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.42 to 18.52, p = 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was numerically lower in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 7%, odds ratio 3.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 14.51, p = 0.11). In conclusion, ViV-TAVI seems a safe and effective treatment for failing bioprosthetic valves with low mortality and stroke rates comparable to NV-TAVI for both valve types.<br />Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr. de Brito Jr is a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr. Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences and Boston Scientific. Dr. Latib is a consultant for Medtronic and has received honoraria from Abbott Vascular. Dr. Baan receives an unrestricted research grant from Edwards Lifesciences. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.<br /> (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1879-1913
Volume :
172
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
The American journal of cardiology
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
35351288
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2022.02.028