Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type.

Landes, Uri; Richter, Ilan; Danenberg, Haim; Kornowski, Ran; Sathananthan, Janarthanan; De Backer, Ole; Søndergaard, Lars; Abdel-Wahab, Mohamed; Yoon, Sung-Han; Makkar, Raj R; Thiele, Holger; Kim, Won-Keun; Hamm, Christian; Buzzatti, Nicola; Montorfano, Matteo; Ludwig, Sebastian; Schofer, Niklas; Voigtlaender, Lisa; Guerrero, Mayra; El Sabbagh, Abdallah; ... (2022). Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type. JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions, 15(15), pp. 1543-1554. Elsevier 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.05.016

Text Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type.pdf - Published Version Restricted to registered users only Available under License Publisher holds Copyright. Download (1MB) | Request a copy

BACKGROUND

As transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement is increasingly used in patients with longer life expectancy, a sizable proportion will require redo TAV replacement (TAVR). The unique configuration of balloon-expandable TAV (bTAV) vs a self-expanding TAV (sTAV) potentially affects TAV-in-TAV outcome.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to better inform prosthesis selection, TAV-in-TAV outcomes were assessed according to the type of initial and subsequent TAV.

METHODS

Patients from the Redo-TAVR registry were analyzed using propensity weighting according to their initial valve type (bTAV [n = 115] vs sTAV [n = 106]) and subsequent valve type (bTAV [n = 130] vs sTAV [n = 91]).

RESULTS

Patients with failed bTAVs presented later (vs sTAV) (4.9 ± 2.1 years vs 3.7 ± 2.3 years; P < 0.001), with smaller effective orifice area (1.0 ± 0.7 cm2 vs 1.3 ± 0.8 cm2; P = 0.018) and less frequent dominant regurgitation (16.2% vs 47.3%; P < 0.001). Mortality at 30 days was 2.3% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 0% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.499) and 1.7% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 1.0% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.612); procedural safety was 72.6% (TAV-in-bTAV) vs 71.2% (TAV-in-sTAV) (P = 0.817) and 73.2% (bTAV-in-TAV) vs 76.5% (sTAV-in-TAV) (P = 0.590). Device success was similar according to initial valve type but higher with subsequent sTAV vs bTAV (77.2% vs 64.3%; P = 0.045), primarily because of lower residual gradients (10.3 mm Hg [8.9-11.7 mm Hg] vs 15.2 mm Hg [13.2-17.1 mm Hg]; P < 0.001). Residual regurgitation (moderate or greater) was similar after bTAV-in-TAV and sTAV-in-TAV (5.7%) and nominally higher after TAV-in-bTAV (9.1%) vs TAV-in-sTAV (4.4%) (P = 0.176).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients, no association was observed between TAV type and redo TAVR safety or mortality, yet subsequent sTAV was associated with higher device success because of lower redo gradients. These findings are preliminary, and more data are needed to guide valve choice for redo TAVR.

Interest & Impact

Downloads

1 since deposited on 27 Dec 2022
1 in the past 12 months

Citations

5 Citations in Web of Science ®
6 Citations in Scopus

Search

in Google Scholar™

Services

Actions (login required)

Edit item

Actions (login required)

Edit item