Absence of prosthesis-patient mismatch with the new generation of Edwards stented aortic bioprosthesis

Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) remains a controversial issue with the most recent stented biological valves. We analyzed the incidence of PPM after implantation of the Carpentier-Edwards Perimount Magna Ease aortic valve (PMEAV) bioprosthesis and assessed the early clinical outcome. Two hundred and seventy consecutive patients who received a PMEAV bioprosthesis between January 2007 and July 2008 were analyzed. Pre-, peri- and postoperative data were assessed and echocardiographic as well as clinical follow-up was performed. Mean age was 72+/-9 years, 168 (62.2%) were males. Fifty-seven patients (21.1%) were below 65 years of age. Absence of PPM, corresponding to an indexed effective orifice area >0.85 cm(2)/m(2), was 99.5%. Observed in-hospital mortality was 2.2% (six patients), with a predicted mortality according to the additive EuroSCORE of 7.6+/-3.1%. At echocardiographic assessment after a mean follow-up period of 150+/-91 days, mean transvalvular gradient was 11.8+/-4.8 mmHg (all valve sizes). No paravalvular leakage was seen. Nine patients died during follow-up. The Carpentier-Edwards PMEAV bioprosthesis shows excellent hemodynamic performance. This valve can be implanted in all sizes with an incidence of severe PPM below 0.5%.

Clinical experience with the ATS 3f Enable® Sutureless Bioprosthesis

The ATS 3f Enable® Bioprosthesis is a self-expanding valve with a tubular design that allows for decreased leaflet stress and preservation of aortic sinuses. We report the midterm results of a prospective, multicenter clinical study evaluating the safety and efficacy of this stented bioprosthesis in patients undergoing isolated aortic valve replacement with or without concomitant procedures.

Percutaneous aortic valve replacement for severe aortic regurgitation in degenerated bioprosthesis: the first valve in valve procedure using the Corevalve Revalving system

Percutaneous valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis has shown to be an alternative treatment option for non-surgical candidates. We report on the first successful valve in valve procedure in an 80-year-old patient with a severe regurgitation of a degenerated aortic bioprosthesis using the Corevalve Revalving system.

Clinical performance of a sutureless aortic bioprosthesis: five-year results of the 3f Enable long-term follow-up study.

OBJECTIVE Sutureless valves are designed to facilitate surgical implantation, including less-invasive techniques in aortic valve replacement, by maintaining surgical precision of implantation compared with transcatheter techniques. Long-term clinical experience with sutureless valves is lacking. We report the 5-year follow-up results of an international, prospective, multicenter study evaluating the clinical performance and safety of the 3f Enable valve (Medtronic Inc, Minneapolis, Minn). METHODS Between March 2007 and December 2009, 141 patients (54 male; mean age, 76.1±5.7 years) undergoing aortic valve replacement with the 3f Enable valve were enrolled in 10 European sites. The mean follow-up was 2.76 years (range, 2 days to 5.1 years; total, 388.7 patient-years). Echocardiographic valvular hemodynamic and morphologic analyses were performed by an independent core laboratory. RESULTS The mean systolic gradient was 10.4±4.4 mm Hg at discharge and 7.7±4.1 mm Hg at 5 years. The mean effective orifice area was 1.7±0.5 cm2 at discharge and 1.6±0.2 cm2 at 5 years. Freedom from all-cause and valve-related mortality was 87.6%±2.9% and 96.8%±1.6% at 1 year (113 patients at risk) and 77.0%±7.5% and 93.8%±4.8% at 5 years (24 patients at risk), respectively. Six patients underwent reoperation (4 because of major paravalvular leakage and 2 because of endocarditis). Freedom from reoperation was 95.4%±1.9% at 1 year and 95.4%±6.1% at 5 years. No structural valve deterioration occurred during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS The sutureless 3f Enable valve represents a safe and effective treatment for aortic valve stenosis, providing an excellent hemodynamic profile. This study represents the longest follow-up study for a sutureless bioprosthesis. Sutureless valves may become an option for all patients with indicated biological aortic valve replacement.

Ventricular prosthesis embolization during transapical aortic valve implantation: the role of transesophageal echocardiography in diagnosis and management

The authors present the case of an 81-year-old patient with severe aortic stenosis who experienced left ventricular embolization of an aortic bioprosthesis during transapical aortic valve implantation. The authors discuss reasons for prosthesis embolization and reinforce the attention to technical details and the widespread use of multimodality imaging techniques. In this context, transesophageal echocardiography appears indispensable in the detection and management of procedure-related complications.

Relationship between the logistic EuroSCORE and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score in patients implanted with the CoreValve ReValving system--a Bern-Rotterdam Study

Background Surgical risk scores, such as the logistic EuroSCORE (LES) and Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality (STS) score, are commonly used to identify high-risk or “inoperable” patients for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). In Europe, the LES plays an important role in selecting patients for implantation with the Medtronic CoreValve System. What is less clear, however, is the role of the STS score of these patients and the relationship between the LES and STS. Objective The purpose of this study is to examine the correlation between LES and STS scores and their performance characteristics in high-risk surgical patients implanted with the Medtronic CoreValve System. Methods All consecutive patients (n = 168) in whom a CoreValve bioprosthesis was implanted between November 2005 and June 2009 at 2 centers (Bern University Hospital, Bern, Switzerland, and Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands) were included for analysis. Patient demographics were recorded in a prospective database. Logistic EuroSCORE and STS scores were calculated on a prospective and retrospective basis, respectively. Results Observed mortality was 11.1%. The mean LES was 3 times higher than the mean STS score (LES 20.2% ± 13.9% vs STS 6.7% ± 5.8%). Based on the various LES and STS cutoff values used in previous and ongoing TAVI trials, 53% of patients had an LES ≥15%, 16% had an STS ≥10%, and 40% had an LES ≥20% or STS ≥10%. Pearson correlation coefficient revealed a reasonable (moderate) linear relationship between the LES and STS scores, r = 0.58, P < .001. Although the STS score outperformed the LES, both models had suboptimal discriminatory power (c-statistic, 0.49 for LES and 0.69 for STS) and calibration. Conclusions Clinical judgment and the Heart Team concept should play a key role in selecting patients for TAVI, whereas currently available surgical risk score algorithms should be used to guide clinical decision making.

Early hemodynamic and neurohormonal response after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

The conventional surgical aortic bioprostheses used for treatment of aortic stenosis (AS) are inherently stenotic in nature. The more favorable mechanical profile of the Medtronic CoreValve bioprosthesis may translate into a better hemodynamic and neurohormonal response.

Clinical experience with the second-generation 3f Enable sutureless aortic valve prosthesis

The 3f Enable aortic bioprosthesis (ATS Medical, Inc, Minneapolis, Minn) represents a new generation of equine pericardial self-expanding valve designed for sutureless implantation. This study evaluated technical aspects of implantation and safety and effectiveness of the valve in the short term.

Second valve implantation for the treatment of a malpositioned transcatheter aortic valve

Unfavorable immediate or delayed results after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may be a consequence of bioprosthesis malfunctioning, malpositioning, embolization, or degeneration. Deployment of a second valve within the first one implanted (TAVI-in-TAV) may be a potentially helpful therapeutic strategy.

Short-term clinical outcomes among patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation in Switzerland: the Swiss TAVI registry

Aims: To evaluate short-term clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using CE-mark approved devices in Switzerland. Methods and results: The Swiss TAVI registry is a national, prospective, multicentre, monitored cohort study evaluating clinical outcomes in consecutive patients undergoing TAVI at cardiovascular centres in Switzerland. From February 2011 to March 2013, a total of 697 patients underwent TAVI for native aortic valve stenosis (98.1%), degenerative aortic bioprosthesis (1.6%) or severe aortic regurgitation (0.3%). Patients were elderly (82.4±6 years), 52% were females, and the majority highly symptomatic (73.1% NYHA III/IV). Patients with severe aortic stenosis (mean gradient 44.8±17 mmHg, aortic valve area 0.7±0.3 cm2) were either deemed inoperable or at high risk for conventional surgery (STS 8.2%±7). The transfemoral access was the most frequently used (79.1%), followed by transapical (18.1%), direct aortic (1.7%) and subclavian access (1.1%). At 30 days, rates of all-cause mortality, cerebrovascular events and myocardial infarction were 4.8%, 3.3% and 0.4%, respectively. The most frequently observed adverse events were access-related complications (11.8%), permanent pacemaker implantation (20.5%) and bleeding complications (16.6%). The Swiss TAVI registry is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01368250). Conclusions: The Swiss TAVI registry is a national cohort study evaluating consecutive TAVI procedures in Switzerland. This first outcome report provides favourable short-term clinical outcomes in unselected TAVI patients.

Predictors of Permanent Pacemaker Implantation in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis Undergoing TAVR

Background Atrioventricular (AV) conduction disturbances requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation may complicate transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Available evidence on predictors of PPM is sparse and derived from small studies. Objectives The objective of this study was to provide summary effect estimates for clinically useful predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. Methods We performed a systematic search for studies that reported the incidence of PPM implantation after TAVR and that provided raw data for the predictors of interest. Data on study, patient, and procedural characteristics were abstracted. Crude risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals for each predictor were calculated by use of random effects models. Stratified analyses by type of implanted valve were performed. Results We obtained data from 41 studies that included 11,210 TAVR patients, of whom 17% required PPM implantation after intervention. The rate of PPM ranged from 2% to 51% in individual studies (with a median of 28% for the Medtronic CoreValve Revalving System [MCRS] and 6% for the Edwards SAPIEN valve [ESV]). The summary estimates indicated increased risk of PPM after TAVR for men (RR: 1.23; p < 0.01); for patients with first-degree AV block (RR: 1.52; p < 0.01), left anterior hemiblock (RR: 1.62; p < 0.01), or right bundle branch block (RR: 2.89; p < 0.01) at baseline; and for patients with intraprocedural AV block (RR: 3.49; p < 0.01). These variables remained significant predictors when only patients treated with the MCRS bioprosthesis were considered. The data for ESV were limited. Unadjusted estimates indicated a 2.5-fold higher risk for PPM implantation for patients who received the MCRS than for those who received the ESV. Conclusions Male sex, baseline conduction disturbances, and intraprocedural AV block emerged as predictors of PPM implantation after TAVR. This study provides useful tools to identify high-risk patients and to guide clinical decision making before and after intervention.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves.

IMPORTANCE Owing to a considerable shift toward bioprosthesis implantation rather than mechanical valves, it is expected that patients will increasingly present with degenerated bioprostheses in the next few years. Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation is a less invasive approach for patients with structural valve deterioration; however, a comprehensive evaluation of survival after the procedure has not yet been performed. OBJECTIVE To determine the survival of patients after transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation inside failed surgical bioprosthetic valves. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Correlates for survival were evaluated using a multinational valve-in-valve registry that included 459 patients with degenerated bioprosthetic valves undergoing valve-in-valve implantation between 2007 and May 2013 in 55 centers (mean age, 77.6 [SD, 9.8] years; 56% men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons mortality prediction score, 9.8% [interquartile range, 7.7%-16%]). Surgical valves were classified as small (≤21 mm; 29.7%), intermediate (>21 and <25 mm; 39.3%), and large (≥25 mm; 31%). Implanted devices included both balloon- and self-expandable valves. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Survival, stroke, and New York Heart Association functional class. RESULTS Modes of bioprosthesis failure were stenosis (n = 181 [39.4%]), regurgitation (n = 139 [30.3%]), and combined (n = 139 [30.3%]). The stenosis group had a higher percentage of small valves (37% vs 20.9% and 26.6% in the regurgitation and combined groups, respectively; P = .005). Within 1 month following valve-in-valve implantation, 35 (7.6%) patients died, 8 (1.7%) had major stroke, and 313 (92.6%) of surviving patients had good functional status (New York Heart Association class I/II). The overall 1-year Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 83.2% (95% CI, 80.8%-84.7%; 62 death events; 228 survivors). Patients in the stenosis group had worse 1-year survival (76.6%; 95% CI, 68.9%-83.1%; 34 deaths; 86 survivors) in comparison with the regurgitation group (91.2%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 10 deaths; 76 survivors) and the combined group (83.9%; 95% CI, 76.8%-91%; 18 deaths; 66 survivors) (P = .01). Similarly, patients with small valves had worse 1-year survival (74.8% [95% CI, 66.2%-83.4%]; 27 deaths; 57 survivors) vs with intermediate-sized valves (81.8%; 95% CI, 75.3%-88.3%; 26 deaths; 92 survivors) and with large valves (93.3%; 95% CI, 85.7%-96.7%; 7 deaths; 73 survivors) (P = .001). Factors associated with mortality within 1 year included having small surgical bioprosthesis (≤21 mm; hazard ratio, 2.04; 95% CI, 1.14-3.67; P = .02) and baseline stenosis (vs regurgitation; hazard ratio, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.33-7.08; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this registry of patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves, overall 1-year survival was 83.2%. Survival was lower among patients with small bioprostheses and those with predominant surgical valve stenosis.

The Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless valve: Single-center experience, outcome and long-term durability

Abstract Objectives We report our institutional experience and long-term results with the Sorin Freedom SOLO bovine pericardial stentless bioprosthesis. Methods Between January 2005 and November 2009, 149 patients (mean age 73.6±8.7 years, 68 [45.6%] female) underwent isolated (n=75) or combined (n=74) aortic valve replacement (AVR) using the SOLO in our institution. Follow-up was 100% complete with an average follow-up time of 5.9±2.6 years (maximum 9.6 years) and a total of 885.3 patient years. Results Operative (30-day) mortality was 2.7% (1.3% for isolated AVR [n=1] and 4.0% for combined procedures [n=3]). All causes of death were not valve-related. Preoperative peak (mean) gradients of 74.2±23.0 mmHg (48.6 ± 16.3 mmHg) decreased to 15.6±5.4 (8.8±3.0) after AVR, and remained low for up to 9 years. The postoperative effective orifice area (EOA) was 1.6 ±0.57 cm2, 1.90±0.45 cm2, 2.12±0.48 cm2 and 2.20±0.66 cm2 for the valve sizes 21, 23, 25 and 27, respectively; with absence of severe prosthesis-patient-mismatch (PPM) and 0.7% (n=1) moderate PPM. During follow-up, Twenty-six patients experienced structural valve deterioration (SVD) and 14 patients underwent explantation. Kaplan-Meier estimates for freedom from death, explantation and SVD at 9 years averaged 0.57 [0.47‒0.66], 0.82 [0.69‒0.90] and 0.70 [0.57‒0.79], respectively. Conclusions The Freedom SOLO stentless aortic valve is safe to implant and shows excellent early and mid-term hemodynamic performance. However, SVD was observed in a substantial number of patients after only 5 ̶ 6 years and the need for explantation increased markedly, suggesting low durability.