Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 Apr 11:16:e09.
doi: 10.15420/usc.2021.20. eCollection 2022.

Valve-in-valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical Valves and Adjunctive Therapies

Emily Perdoncin  1 , Gaetano Paone  2 , Isida Byku  1
Affiliations
Review

Valve-in-valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical Valves and Adjunctive Therapies

Emily Perdoncin et al. US Cardiol. .

Abstract

While redo surgical aortic valve replacement has traditionally been the gold standard for the treatment of failed surgical valves, valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has arisen as a viable, less invasive option with the potential for improved short-term morbidity and mortality. Retrospective registry data regarding ViV TAVR outcomes have been encouraging, with excellent 1-year mortality, and sustained valve performance and quality of life improvement out to 3 years. Operators must be comfortable with CT analysis for procedural planning, and be able to identify and troubleshoot patients who are at risk for coronary obstruction and patient prosthesis mismatch. The authors provide a review of clinical outcomes associated with ViV TAVR, procedural planning recommendations, and strategies to overcome technical challenges that can occur during ViV TAVR.

Keywords: Bioprosthetic heart valve failure; coronary artery obstruction; structural heart disease; transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: GP is a consultant and proctor for Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:. CT Predictors for Coronary Obstruction with Valve-in-valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Figure 2:
Figure 2:. Rescue Snorkel Stenting for Acute Coronary Obstruction of the Left Main Coronary Artery
Figure 3:
Figure 3:. Left BASILICA
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Alkhouli M, Alqahtani F, Kawsara A et al. National trends in mechanical valve replacement in patients aged 50 to 70 years. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2020;76:2687–8. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.09.608. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sondergaard L, Ihlemann N, Capodanno D et al. Durability of transcatheter and surgical bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients at lower surgical risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73:546–53. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2018.10.083. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Onorati F, Biancari F, De Feo M et al. Outcome of redo surgical aortic valve replacement in patients 80 years and older: results from the Multicenter RECORD Initiative. Ann Thorac Surg. 2014;97:537–43. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.09.007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Vrachatis DA, Vavuranakis M, Tsoukala S et al. TAVI: valve in valve. A new field for structuralists? Literature review. Hellenic J Cardiol. 2020;61:148–53. doi: 10.1016/j.hjc.2019.10.016. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dvir D, Webb JG, Bleiziffer S et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic surgical valves. JAMA. 2014;312:162–70. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.7246. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources