Transcatheter Replacement of Transcatheter Versus Surgically Implanted Aortic Valve Bioprostheses
- PMID: 33413929
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.10.053
Transcatheter Replacement of Transcatheter Versus Surgically Implanted Aortic Valve Bioprostheses
Abstract
Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are now both used to treat aortic stenosis in patients in whom life expectancy may exceed valve durability. The choice of initial bioprosthesis should therefore consider the relative safety and efficacy of potential subsequent interventions.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare TAVR in failed transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) versus surgical aortic valves (SAVs).
Methods: Data were collected on 434 TAV-in-TAV and 624 TAV-in-SAV consecutive procedures performed at centers participating in the Redo-TAVR international registry. Propensity score matching was applied, and 330 matched (165:165) patients were analyzed. Principal endpoints were procedural success, procedural safety, and mortality at 30 days and 1 year.
Results: For TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV, procedural success was observed in 120 (72.7%) versus 103 (62.4%) patients (p = 0.045), driven by a numerically lower frequency of residual high valve gradient (p = 0.095), ectopic valve deployment (p = 0.081), coronary obstruction (p = 0.091), and conversion to open heart surgery (p = 0.082). Procedural safety was achieved in 116 (70.3%) versus 119 (72.1%) patients (p = 0.715). Mortality at 30 days was 5 (3%) after TAV-in-TAV and 7 (4.4%) after TAV-in-SAV (p = 0.570). At 1 year, mortality was 12 (11.9%) and 10 (10.2%), respectively (p = 0.633). Aortic valve area was larger (1.55 ± 0.5 cm2 vs. 1.37 ± 0.5 cm2; p = 0.040), and the mean residual gradient was lower (12.6 ± 5.2 mm Hg vs. 14.9 ± 5.2 mm Hg; p = 0.011) after TAV-in-TAV. The rate of moderate or greater residual aortic regurgitation was similar, but mild aortic regurgitation was more frequent after TAV-in-TAV (p = 0.003).
Conclusions: In propensity score-matched cohorts of TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV patients, TAV-in-TAV was associated with higher procedural success and similar procedural safety or mortality.
Keywords: Redo-TAVR; TAVR; surgical aortic valve; transcatheter aortic valve; valve-in-valve.
Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Author Disclosures Dr. Webb is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and ViVitro Labs. Dr. Kim has received proctor or speaker fees from Boston Scientific, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Barbanti is a consultant for Edwards; and is an Advisory Board member for Biotronik. Dr. Sondergaard has received consultant fees and institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Symetis. Dr. Redwood is a proctor for and has received lecture fees from Edwards. Dr. Hamm is an Advisory Board member for Medtronic. Dr. Sinning has received speaker honoraria and research grants from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Wood is a consultant to and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr. Sathananthan is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Schofer has received speaker fees and travel compensation from Boston Scientific; and has received travel compensation from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott/St. Jude Medical. Dr. Leipsic is a consultant to Circle CVI and Edwards Lifesciences; and provides institutional core laboratory services to Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and Neovasc. Dr. Andreas is a proctor for Edwards and Abbott; and is an Advisory Board member for Medtronic. Dr. Guerrero has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Castriota is a proctor for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr. Kodali has received research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular and JenaValve; has received personal fees from Meril Lifesciences; has received personal fees from and holds equity in Admedus; and holds equity in Supira, Microinterventional Devices, Dura Biotech, and Thubrikar Aortic Valve. Dr. Conradi is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott, Neovasc, and JenaValve. Dr. Nazif has received consulting fees or honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Biotrace, and Baylis Medical; and has received consulting fees from and holds equity in Venus Medtech. Dr. Pilgrim has received research grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Biotronik. Dr. Babaliaros is a consultant to Edwards Lifesciences; and holds equity in Transmural Systems. Dr. Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Daiichi-Sankyo, and PulseCath; and has received institutional research grant support from Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Latib has received institutional research or grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr. Hildick-Smith is a proctor and adviser to Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.
Comment in
-
As Patients Live Longer, Are We on the Cusp of a New Valve Epidemic?J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 Jan 5;77(1):15-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.024. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021. PMID: 33413935 No abstract available.
-
TAV-in-TAV Versus TAV-in-SAV: A Troublesome Analysis and the Wrong Question.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021 May 18;77(19):2450-2451. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2021.03.297. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2021. PMID: 33985690 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus redo surgery for failing surgical aortic bioprostheses: a multicentre propensity score analysis.EuroIntervention. 2017 Nov 20;13(10):1149-1156. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-16-00303. EuroIntervention. 2017. PMID: 28760721
-
Outcomes of Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement According to the Initial and Subsequent Valve Type.JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Aug 8;15(15):1543-1554. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.05.016. Epub 2022 Jul 13. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022. PMID: 35926921
-
Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Transcatheter Prosthesis Dysfunction.J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020 Apr 28;75(16):1882-1893. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.02.051. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020. PMID: 32327098
-
Redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement in degenerated transcatheter bioprosthesis (TAV-in-TAV).Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2023 Jul-Dec;21(10):703-712. doi: 10.1080/14779072.2023.2266368. Epub 2023 Oct 26. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther. 2023. PMID: 37815845 Review.
-
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for structural degeneration of previously implanted transcatheter valves (TAVR-in-TAVR): a systematic review.Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022 May 2;61(5):967-976. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezab443. Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2022. PMID: 34662376
Cited by
-
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation for Degenerated Surgical Aortic Bioprosthesis: A Systematic Review.Heart Views. 2022 Jan-Mar;23(1):1-9. doi: 10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_25_22. Epub 2022 May 16. Heart Views. 2022. PMID: 35757448 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Redo-TAVI with the ACURATE neo2 and Prime XL for balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve failure.EuroIntervention. 2024 Mar 18;20(6):e376-e388. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00783. EuroIntervention. 2024. PMID: 38506739 Free PMC article.
-
Redo-TAVR: Essential Concepts, Updated Data and Current Gaps in Evidence.J Clin Med. 2023 Jul 20;12(14):4788. doi: 10.3390/jcm12144788. J Clin Med. 2023. PMID: 37510906 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry.EuroIntervention. 2024 Mar 18;20(6):e363-e375. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-23-00779. EuroIntervention. 2024. PMID: 38506737 Free PMC article.
-
Challenging Anatomies for TAVR-Bicuspid and Beyond.Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021 Apr 13;8:654554. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.654554. eCollection 2021. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2021. PMID: 33928138 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical