Repeat Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Transcatheter Prosthesis Dysfunction

Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in the Lotus Mechanically Expanded Transcatheter Heart Valve: Bench-Top Analysis, Clinical Experience, and Procedural Guidance

BACKGROUND

Redo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is increasing as patients outlive their transcatheter heart valves (THVs) and present with bioprosthetic valve failure. The Lotus mechanically expanded THV has unique design characteristics, which have specific implications for Redo TAVI.

METHODS

The design features of the Lotus valve and their relevance to Redo TAVI were reviewed. Bench-top analysis of Redo TAVI was performed using different contemporary THVs. Procedural and outcome data were obtained from 10 patients who had undergone Redo TAVI for Lotus bioprosthetic valve failure in 5 centers. Recommendations for performing Redo TAVI in Lotus are made, based on these findings.

RESULTS

The Lotus leaflets extend from the frame inflow, with a Neoskirt of only 13 mm, hence a low risk of coronary obstruction during Redo TAVI. The Lotus frame posts prevent full apposition of the Redo prosthesis in the upper part of the frame, while implantation of the Redo THV above the Lotus inflow leads to inadequate apposition of the Lotus leaflets. Inflow-to-inflow positioning is therefore recommended for effective sealing and leaflet pinning. The Lotus locking mechanism prevents overexpansion of the frame, limiting Redo THV oversizing. Redo TAVI was favorable with SAPIEN 3, Evolut, and Navitor THVs on bench-top analysis but not with ACURATE Neo 2 due to the upper crowns and short stent preventing inflow-to-inflow deployment. Case review demonstrated satisfactory outcomes in 10 patients treated with Evolut (n=6), SAPIEN 3 (n=3), and Portico (n=1) valves, with no mortality, major morbidity, or coronary obstruction. Three patients had residual mean gradient ≥20 mm Hg, including 2 of 3 SAPIEN cases. Guidance on procedural planning, valve choice, sizing, and positioning is provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo TAVI in Lotus requires an understanding of unique design characteristics, and adherence to key procedural recommendations, but can be safely and effectively performed with most contemporary valve types.

Feasibility of Coronary Access Following Redo-TAVR for Evolut Failure: A Computed Tomography Simulation Study

BACKGROUND

Coronary accessibility following redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (redo-TAVR) is increasingly important, particularly in younger low-risk patients. This study aimed to predict coronary accessibility after simulated Sapien-3 balloon-expandable valve implantation within an Evolut supra-annular, self-expanding valve using pre-TAVR computed tomography (CT) imaging.

METHODS

A total of 219 pre-TAVR CT scans from the Evolut Low-Risk CT substudy were analyzed. Virtual Evolut and Sapien-3 valves were sized using CT-based diameters. Two initial Evolut implant depths were analyzed, 3 and 5 mm. Coronary accessibility was evaluated for 2 Sapien-3 in Evolut implant positions: Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4 and Evolut node 5.

RESULTS

With a 3-mm initial Evolut implant depth, suitable coronary access was predicted in 84% of patients with the Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4, and in 31% of cases with the Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 5 (P<0.001). Coronary accessibility improved with a 5-mm Evolut implant depth: 97% at node 4 and 65% at node 5 (P<0.001). When comparing 3- to 5-mm Evolut implant depth, sinus sequestration was the lowest with Sapien-3 outflow at Evolut node 4 (13% versus 2%; P<0.001), and the highest at Evolut node 5 (61% versus 32%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Coronary accessibility after Sapien-3 in Evolut redo-TAVR relates to the initial Evolut implant depth, the Sapien-3 outflow position within the Evolut, and the native annular anatomy. This CT-based quantitative analysis may provide useful information to inform and refine individualized preprocedural CT planning of the initial TAVR and guide lifetime management for future coronary access after redo-TAVR.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02701283.

Feasibility of Redo-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Sapien Valves Based on In Vivo Computed Tomography Assessment

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to assess the feasibility of repeat transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) replacement for degenerated Sapien3 (S3) prostheses by simulating subsequent implantation of S3 or Evolut, using in vivo computed tomography-based sizing and the impact on coronary and patient-prosthesis mismatch risks.

METHODS

Computed tomography scans from 356 patients with prior S3 TAV replacement implantation were analyzed. The in vivo sizing for second TAV based on averaged area of 3 levels of outflow, mid (narrowest) and inflow, was compared with in vitro recommendations, that is, same size as index S3 for second S3 and 1 size larger for Evolut. Risks of coronary obstruction and patient-prosthesis mismatch were determined by valve-to-aorta distance and estimated effective orifice area, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, the majority of patients (n=328; 92.1%) had underexpanded index S3 with an expansion area of 94% (91%-97%), leading to significant differences in size selection of the second TAV between in vivo and in vitro sizing strategies. Expansion area <89% served as a threshold, resulting in 1 size smaller than the in vitro recommendations were selected in 45 patients (13%) for S3-in-S3 and 13 (4%) for Evolut-in-S3, while the remaining patients followed in vitro recommendations (P<0.01, in vivo versus in vitro sizing). Overall, 57% of total patients for S3-in-S3 simulation and 60% for Evolut-in-S3 were considered low risk for coronary complications. Deep index S3 implantation (odds ratio, 0.76 [interquartile range, 0.67-0.87]; P<0.001) and selecting Evolut as the second TAV (11% risk reduction in intermediate- or high-risk patients) reduced coronary risk. Estimated moderate or severe patient-prosthesis mismatch risk was 21% for S3-in-S3 and 1% for Evolut-in-S3, assuming optimal expansion of the second TAV.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo-TAV replacement with S3-in-S3 and Evolut-in-S3 could be feasible with low risk to coronaries in ≈60% of patients, while the remaining 40% will be at intermediate or high risk. The feasibility of redo-TAV replacement is influenced by sizing strategy, type of second TAV, native annular anatomy, and implant depth.

Outcomes of repeat transcatheter aortic valve replacement with balloon-expandable valves: a registry study

BACKGROUND

With increasing numbers of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), data on management of failed TAVR, including repeat TAVR procedure, are needed. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of redo-TAVR in a national registry.

METHODS

This study included all consecutive patients in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry from Nov 9, 2011, to Dec 30, 2022 who underwent TAVR with balloon-expandable valves in failed transcatheter heart valves (redo-TAVR) or native aortic valves (native-TAVR). Procedural, echocardiographic, and clinical outcomes were compared between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR cohorts using propensity score matching.

FINDINGS

Among 350 591 patients (1320 redo-TAVR; 349 271 native-TAVR), 1320 propensity-matched pairs of patients undergoing redo-TAVR and native-TAVR were analysed (redo-TAVR cohort: mean age 78 years [SD 9]; 559 [42·3%] of 1320 female, 761 [57·7%] male; mean predicted surgical risk of 30-day mortality 8·1%). The rates of procedural complications of redo-TAVR were low (coronary compression or obstruction: four [0·3%] of 1320; intraprocedural death: eight [0·6%] of 1320; conversion to open heart surgery: six [0·5%] of 1319) and similar to native-TAVR. There was no significant difference between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR populations in death at 30 days (4·7% vs 4·0%, p=0·36) or 1 year (17·5% vs 19·0%, p=0·57), and stroke at 30 days (2·0% vs 1·9%, p=0·84) or 1 year (3·2% vs 3·5%, p=0·80). Redo-TAVR reduced aortic valve gradients at 1 year, although they were higher in the redo-TAVR group compared with the native-TAVR group (15 mm Hg vs 12 mm Hg; p<0·0001). Moderate or severe aortic regurgitation rates were similar between redo-TAVR and native-TAVR groups at 1 year (1·8% vs 3·3%, p=0·18). Death or stroke after redo-TAVR were not significantly affected by the timing of redo-TAVR (before or after 1 year of index TAVR), or by index transcatheter valve type (balloon-expandable or non-balloon-expandable).

INTERPRETATION

Redo-TAVR with balloon-expandable valves effectively treated dysfunction of the index TAVR procedure with low procedural complication rates, and death and stroke rates similar to those in patients with a similar clinical profile and predicted risk undergoing TAVR for native aortic valve stenosis. Redo-TAVR with balloon-expandable valves might be a reasonable treatment for failed TAVR in selected patients.

FUNDING

Edwards Lifesciences.

Incidence and Outcomes of Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Failed Bioprosthetic Valves

INTRODUCTION

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a widely used, comparably efficient and safe alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Its utilization continues to grow, especially among younger patients. Despite improvements in durability, degeneration and subsequent re-interventions of failed prosthetic valves are still common. Even though valve-in-valve procedures have become more frequent, little is known about the trends over time or about clinical and echocardiographic long-term outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent a valve-in-valve procedure between December 2011 and December 2022 in a large tertiary university hospital were analyzed. Primary outcomes were defined as procedural and device successes as well as event-free survival. Secondary analyses between subsets of patients divided by index valve and date of procedure were performed.

RESULTS

Among 1407 procedures, 58 (4%) were valve-in-valve interventions, with an increased frequency observed over time. Overall, technical success was achieved in 88% and device success in 85% of patients. Complications were predominantly minor, with similar success rates among TAVR-in-SAVR (TiSAVR) and TAVR-in-TAVR (TiTAVR). Notably, there were significant and lasting improvements in mean echocardiographic gradients at 1 year. Event-free survival was 76% at one month and 69% at one year.

CONCLUSIONS

Over the last decade, a rising trend of valve-in-valve procedures was observed. Despite an increase in procedures, complications show a contrasting decline with improved technical and device success over time. TiSAVR and TiTAVR showed comparable rates of procedural and device success as well as similar outcomes, highlighting the utility of valve-in-valve procedures in an aging population.

In-Series Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement-in-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: ACURATE neo Transcatheter Heart Valve Degeneration Successfully Managed with Myval, Avoiding Coronary Flow Obstruction-A Case Report

•Durability is vital for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in younger patients.•Aortic insufficiency is one of the features of structural valve degeneration.•Degenerated ACURATE neo can be treated with low implantation of an oversized Myval.

Redo-TAVR: Essential Concepts, Updated Data and Current Gaps in Evidence

Within the last two decades, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has transformed the treatment strategy for symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS), representing a less invasive alternative to traditional open-chest surgery. With time, advances in device features, imaging planning, and implantation techniques have contributed to an improvement in safety as well as a reduction in procedural complications. This has led to the expansion of TAVR to lower-risk patients, where TAVR has shown favorable outcomes compared to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). As TAVR expands to younger and lower-risk patients with longer life expectancies, the need for reintervention for failing transcatheter heart valves is expected to increase. Redo-TAVR has gained increasing relevance in the lifetime management of AS as one of the treatment strategies available for structural valve dysfunction (SVD). However, some issues are associated with this approach, including coronary re-access and the risk of coronary obstruction. In this review, we provide essential concepts to properly select candidates for Redo-TAVR, updated data on clinical outcomes and complication rates, and current gaps in evidence.

Redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement in degenerated transcatheter bioprosthesis (TAV-in-TAV)

INTRODUCTION

With the expanding indications of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to younger and low-risk patients, the life expectancy of patients currently undergoing TAVR will likely outlive the durability of transcatheter bioprosthesis. Consequently, the number of failed transcatheter bioprosthesis requiring surgical valve explant or redo TAVR is expected to increase.

AREAS COVERED

The aim of this review is to provide an updated overview of redo TAVR for treating degenerated transcatheter bioprosthesis, focusing on pre-procedural planning, potential challenges of coronary reaccess during TAVR-in-TAVR and main outcomes of TAVR explant and redo TAVR.

EXPERT OPINION

Patient-tailored device selection and individualized implantation height should be carefully assessed during the index TAVR procedure (weighting between pacemaker avoidance and the potential risk of coronary occlusion in future TAVR-in-TAVR). Future prospective studies comparing safety and clinical outcomes between redo TAVR vs TAVR explant are eagerly awaited.

Trends in surgical aortic valve replacement in pre- and post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement eras at a structural heart center

Background

The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has directly impacted the lifelong management of patients with aortic valve disease. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved TAVR for all surgical risk: prohibitive (2011), high (2012), intermediate (2016), and low (2019). Since then, TAVR volumes are increasing and surgical aortic valve replacements (SAVR) are decreasing. This study sought to evaluate trends in isolated SAVR in the pre- and post-TAVR eras.

Methods

From January 2000 to June 2020, 3,861 isolated SAVRs were performed at a single academic quaternary care institution which participated in the early trials of TAVR beginning in 2007. A formal structural heart center was established in 2012 when TAVR became commercially available. Patients were divided into the pre-TAVR era (2000-2011, n = 2,426) and post-TAVR era (2012-2020, n = 1,435). Data from the institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database was analyzed.

Results

The median age was 66 years, similar between groups. The post-TAVR group had a statistically higher rate of diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, heart failure, more reoperative SAVR, and lower STS Predicted Risk of Mortality (PROM) (2.0% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.0001). There were more urgent/emergent/salvage SAVRs (38% vs. 24%) and fewer elective SAVRs (63% vs. 76%), (p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR group. More bioprosthetic valves were implanted in the post-TAVR group (85% vs. 74%, p < 0.0001). Larger aortic valves were implanted (25 vs. 23 mm, p < 0.0001) and more annular enlargements were performed (5.9% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.0001) in the post-TAVR era. Postoperatively, the post-TAVR group had less blood product transfusion (49% vs. 58%, p < 0.0001), renal failure (1.4% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.0001), pneumonia (2.3% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.01), shorter lengths of stay, and lower in-hospital mortality (1.5% vs. 3.3%, p = 0.0007).

Conclusion

The approval of TAVR changed the landscape of aortic valve disease management. At a quaternary academic cardiac surgery center with a well-established structural heart program, patients undergoing isolated SAVR in the post-TAVR era had lower STS PROM, more implantation of bioprosthetic valves, utilization of larger valves, annular enlargement, and lower in-hospital mortality. Isolated SAVR continues to be performed in the TAVR era with excellent outcomes. SAVR remains an essential tool in the lifetime management of aortic valve disease.

A bench study of balloon-expandable valves for the treatment of self-expanding valve failure

BACKGROUND

Coronary obstruction and access are concerns in patients undergoing redo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI).

AIMS

We sought to assess the neoskirt height, leaflet overhang, leaflet deflection,and transcatheter heart valve (THV) expansion and performance, at 2 different implant depths, of the SAPIEN 3 Ultra (S3U) within the ACURATE neo2 (ACn2) THV.

METHODS

An in vitro study was performed with a 23 mm S3U deployed within a small (S) ACn2 and a 26 mm S3U deployed within a medium (M) and a large (L) ACn2. The S3U outflow was positioned at the top of the ACn2 crown (low implant) and at the base of the commissural post of the ACn2 (high implant). Testing was performed under physiological conditions as per ISO-5840-3 standard.

RESULTS

The neoskirt height was shorter when the S3U outflow was positioned at a low implantation depth (S: 9.6 mm, M: 12.2 mm, L: 13.8 mm vs S: 15.2 mm, M: 15.1 mm, L: 17.8 mm ACn2 for high implants). Hydrodynamic performance was acceptable for all configurations. Leaflet overhang was <50% for all configurations except the low implant of the 26 mm S3U in the L ACn2 (77.6%). There was a gap from the side of the neoskirt to the outer border of the THV frame which was >2 mm for all configurations. The S3U was underexpanded for all configurations, and the achieved area was 77.9%-92.9% of the expected nominal area.

CONCLUSIONS

Redo TAVI with an S3U within an ACn2 has favourable hydrodynamics and moderate leaflet overhang. Importantly, the design of the ACn2 results in a neoskirt that is not deflected all the way to the outer dimensions of the THV, hence creating a space that facilitates coronary flow and access.

Management of coronary artery disease in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. A clinical consensus statement from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions in collaboration with the ESC Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery

Significant coronary artery disease (CAD) is a frequent finding in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), and the management of these two conditions becomes of particular importance with the extension of the procedure to younger and lower-risk patients. Yet, the preprocedural diagnostic evaluation and the indications for treatment of significant CAD in TAVI candidates remain a matter of debate. In this clinical consensus statement, a group of experts from the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) in collaboration with the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Working Group on Cardiovascular Surgery aims to review the available evidence on the topic and proposes a rationale for the diagnostic evaluation and indications for percutaneous revascularisation of CAD in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter treatment. Moreover, it also focuses on commissural alignment of transcatheter heart valves and coronary re-access after TAVI and redo-TAVI.

Explant vs Redo-TAVR After Transcatheter Valve Failure: Mid-Term Outcomes From the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR International Registry

BACKGROUND

Valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) failure has not been studied in detail.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to determine outcomes of TAVR surgical explantation (TAVR-explant) vs redo-TAVR because they are largely unknown.

METHODS

From May 2009 to February 2022, 396 patients in the international EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR registry underwent TAVR-explant (181, 46.4%) or redo-TAVR (215, 54.3%) for transcatheter heart valve (THV) failure during a separate admission from the initial TAVR. Outcomes were reported at 30 days and 1 year.

RESULTS

The incidence of reintervention after THV failure was 0.59% with increasing volume during the study period. Median time from index-TAVR to reintervention was shorter in TAVR-explant vs redo-TAVR (17.6 months [IQR: 5.0-40.7 months] vs 45.7 months [IQR: 10.6-75.6 months]; P < 0.001], respectively. TAVR-explant had more prosthesis-patient mismatch (17.1% vs 0.5%; P < 0.001) as the indication for reintervention, whereas redo-TAVR had more structural valve degeneration (63.7% vs 51.9%; P = 0.023), with a similar incidence of ≥moderate paravalvular leak between groups (28.7% vs 32.8% in redo-TAVR; P = 0.44). There was a similar proportion of balloon-expandable THV failures (39.8% TAVR-explant vs 40.5% redo-TAVR; P = 0.92). Median follow-up was 11.3 (IQR: 1.6-27.1 months) after reintervention. Compared with redo-TAVR, TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days (13.6% vs 3.4%; P < 0.001) and 1 year (32.4% vs 15.4%; P = 0.001), with similar stroke rates between groups. On landmark analysis, mortality was similar between groups after 30 days (P = 0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first report of the EXPLANTORREDO-TAVR global registry, TAVR-explant had a shorter median time to reintervention, with less structural valve degeneration, more prosthesis-patient mismatch, and similar paravalvular leak rates compared with redo-TAVR. TAVR-explant had higher mortality at 30 days and 1 year, but similar rates on landmark analysis after 30 days.

Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement After Prior Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

BACKGROUND

Aortic stenosis treatment should consider risks and benefits for lifetime management. Although the feasibility of redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) remains unclear, concerns are emerging regarding reoperation after TAVR.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to define comparative risk of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) after prior TAVR or SAVR.

METHODS

Data on patients undergoing bioprosthetic SAVR after TAVR and/or SAVR were extracted from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database (2011-2021). Overall and isolated SAVR cohorts were analyzed. The primary outcome was operative mortality. Risk adjustment using hierarchical logistic regression as well as propensity score matching for isolated SAVR cases were performed.

RESULTS

Of 31,106 SAVR patients, 1,126 had prior TAVR (TAVR-SAVR), 674 had prior SAVR and TAVR (SAVR-TAVR-SAVR), and 29,306 had prior SAVR (SAVR-SAVR). Yearly rates of TAVR-SAVR and SAVR-TAVR-SAVR increased over time, whereas SAVR-SAVR was stable. The TAVR-SAVR patients were older, with higher acuity, and with greater comorbidities than other cohorts. The unadjusted operative mortality was highest in the TAVR-SAVR group (17% vs 12% vs 9%, respectively; P < 0.001). Compared with SAVR-SAVR, risk-adjusted operative mortality was significantly higher for TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.53; P = 0.004), but not SAVR-TAVR-SAVR (OR: 1.02; P = 0.927). After propensity score matching, operative mortality of isolated SAVR was 1.74 times higher for TAVR-SAVR than SAVR-SAVR patients (P = 0.020).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of post-TAVR reoperations is increasing and represent a high-risk population. Yet even in isolated SAVR cases, SAVR after TAVR is independently associated with increased risk of mortality. Patients with life expectancy beyond a TAVR valve and unsuitable anatomy for redo-TAVR should consider a SAVR-first approach.

Coronary Obstruction during Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Pre-Procedural Risk Evaluation, Intra-Procedural Monitoring, and Follow-Up

Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is emerging as an effective treatment for patients with symptomatically failing bioprosthetic valves and a high prohibitive surgical risk; a longer life expectancy has led to a higher demand for these valve reinterventions due to the increased possibilities of outliving the bioprosthetic valve's durability. Coronary obstruction is the most feared complication of valve-in-valve (ViV) TAVR; it is a rare but life-threatening complication and occurs most frequently at the left coronary artery ostium. Accurate pre-procedural planning, mainly based on cardiac computed tomography, is crucial to determining the feasibility of a ViV TAVR and to assessing the anticipated risk of a coronary obstruction and the eventual need for coronary protection measures. Intraprocedurally, the aortic root and a selective coronary angiography are useful for evaluating the anatomic relationship between the aortic valve and coronary ostia; transesophageal echocardiographic real-time monitoring of the coronary flow with a color Doppler and pulsed-wave Doppler is a valuable tool that allows for a determination of real-time coronary patency and the detection of asymptomatic coronary obstructions. Because of the risk of developing a delayed coronary obstruction, the close postprocedural monitoring of patients at a high risk of developing coronary obstructions is advisable. CT simulations of ViV TAVR, 3D printing models, and fusion imaging represent the future directions that may help provide a personalized lifetime strategy and tailored approach for each patient, potentially minimizing complications and improving outcomes.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Aortic Valve Infective Endocarditis: A Systematic Review and Call for Action

We aimed to systematically analyze the literature on the use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) to treat active aortic valve infective endocarditis (AV-IE). Surgery is declined in one-third of patients with IE who meet indications because of prohibitive surgical risk. TAVR might be an alternative for selected patients with AV-IE as a bridge-to-surgery or stand-alone therapy. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched (2002-2022) for studies on TAVR use in active AV-IE. Of 450 identified reports, six met inclusion criteria (all men, mean age 71 ± 12 years, median Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score 27, EuroSCORE 56). All patients were prohibitive surgical risk candidates. Five out of six patients had severe, and one patient had moderate aortic regurgitation on presentation. Five out of six patients had prosthetic valve endocarditis after surgical valve replacement 13 years before (median), and one patient had TAVR a year before hospitalization. All patients had cardiogenic shock as the indication for TAVR. Four patients received balloon-expanding, and two patients received self-expanding TAVR after a median of 19 (IQR 9-25) days from diagnosis of IE. No death or myocardial infarction occurred, but one patient had a stroke within the first 30 days. The median event-free time was 9 (IQR 6-14) months including no death, reinfection, relapse IE, or valve-related rehospitalization. Our review suggests that TAVR can be considered as an adjuvant therapy to medical treatment for selected patients in whom surgery is indicated for treatment of acute heart failure due to aortic valve destruction and incompetence caused by infective endocarditis, but who have a prohibitive surgical risk. Nonetheless, a well-designed prospective registry is urgently needed to investigate the outcomes of TAVR for this off-label indication. No evidence exists for using the TAVR to treat infection-related surgical indications such as uncontrolled infection or control of septic embolization.

Aortic valve reintervention after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Despite the rapid adoption of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), there are scant data regarding aortic valve reintervention after initial TAVR.

METHODS

Between 2011 and 2019, 1487 patients underwent a TAVR at the University of Michigan. Among these, 24 (1.6%) patients required an aortic valve reintervention. Additionally, 4 patients who received a TAVR at another institution underwent a valve reintervention at our institution. We retrospectively reviewed these 28 patients.

RESULTS

The median age was 72 years, 36% were female and 86% of implanted TAVR devices were self-expandable. The leading indications for reintervention were structural valve degeneration (39%) and paravalvular leak (36%). The cumulative incidence of aortic valve reintervention was 4.6% at 8 years. Most (71%) were deemed unsuitable for repeat TAVR because of the need for concurrent cardiac procedures (50%), unfavorable anatomy (45%), or endocarditis (10%). TAVR valve explant was associated with frequent concurrent procedures, consisting of aortic repair (35%), mitral repair/replacement (35%), tricuspid repair (25%), and coronary artery bypass graft (20%). Seventy-one percent of aortic procedures were unplanned but proved necessary because of severe adhesion of the devices to the contacting tissue. There were 3 (15%) in-hospital mortalities in the TAVR valve explant group, whereas there was no mortality in the repeat TAVR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Repeat TAVR procedure was frequently not feasible because of unfavorable anatomy and/or the need for concurrent cardiac procedures. Careful assessment of TAVR procedure repeatability should be weighed at the initial TAVR workup especially in younger patients who are expected to require a valve reintervention.

Contemporary issues and lifetime management in patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Latest clinical trials have indicated favorable outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in low surgical risk patients with severe aortic stenosis. However, there are unanswered questions particularly in younger patients with longer life expectancy. While current evidence are limited to short duration of clinical follow-up, there are certain factors which may impair patients clinical outcomes and quality-of-life at long-term. Contemporary issues in the current TAVR era include prosthesis-patient mismatch, heart failure hospitalization, subclinical thrombosis, future coronary access, and valve durability. In this review, the authors review available evidence and discuss each remaining issues and theoretical treatment strategies in lifetime management of TAVR patients.

Valvular Heart Disease: New Concepts in Pathophysiology and Therapeutic Approaches

This review discusses recent advancements in the field of valvular heart disease. Topics covered include recognition of the impact of atrial fibrillation on development and assessment of valvular disease, strategies for global prevention of rheumatic heart disease, understanding and management of secondary mitral regurgitation, the updated classification of bicuspid aortic valve disease, recognition of heightened cardiovascular risk associated with moderate aortic stenosis, and a growing armamentarium of transcatheter therapies.

Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation with the ALLEGRA Transcatheter Heart Valve: Insights from Bench Testing

PURPOSE

Failure of transcatheter heart valves (THV) may potentially be treated with repeat transcatheter aortic valve implantation (redo TAVI). We assessed hydrodynamic performance, stability and pinwheeling utilizing the ALLEGRA (New Valve Technology, Hechingen, Germany) THV, a CE approved and marketed THV in Europe, inside different THVs.

METHODS

Redo TAVI was simulated with the 27 mm ALLEGRA THV at three implantation depths (-4 mm, 0 mm and +4 mm) in seven different 'failed' THVs: 26 mm Evolut Pro, 25 mm Lotus, 25 mm JenaValve, 25 mm Portico, 23 mm Sapien 3, 27 mm ALLEGRA and M ACURATE neo. Hydrodynamic evaluation was performed according to International Standards Organization 5840-3:2021.

RESULTS

The ALLEGRA THV was stable with acceptable performance (gradient <20 mmHg, effective orifice area >2 cm2, and regurgitant fraction <20%) in all 'failed' THVs except the Evolut Pro at -4 mm implantation depth. In this configuration, the outflow of the ALLEGRA frame was constrained by the Evolut Pro THV and the ALLEGRA leaflets were unable to fully close. Pinwheeling was severe for the ALLEGRA in Evolut Pro. The neo-skirt was higher with taller frame THVs.

CONCLUSION

The ALLEGRA THV had favorable hydrodynamic performance, stability and pinwheeling in all redo TAVI samples except the Evolut Pro at low implantation depth with compromised function. The choice of initial THV may have late implications on new THV choice and function.

Multicenter experience with valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement compared with primary, native valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement

BACKGROUND

Valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) offers an alternative to reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement. The short- and intermediate-term outcomes after ViV TAVR in the real world are not entirely clear.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A multicenter, retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of 121 ViV TAVR patients and 2200 patients undergoing primary native valve TAVR from 2012 to 2017 at six medical centers. The main outcome measures were in-hospital mortality, 30-day mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, and pacemaker implantation.

RESULTS

ViV patients were more likely male, younger, prior coronary artery bypass graft, "hostile chest," and urgent. 30% of the patients had Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score <4%, 36.3% were 4%-8% and 33.8% were >8%. In both groups many patients had concomitant coronary artery disease. Median time to prosthetic failure was 9.6 years (interquartile range: 5.5-13.5 years). 82% of failed surgical valves were size 21, 23, or 25 mm. Access was 91% femoral. After ViV, 87% had none or trivial aortic regurgitation. Mean gradients were <20 mmHg in 54.6%, 20-29 mmHg in 30.6%, 30-39 mmHg in 8.3% and ≥40 mmHg in 5.87%. Median length of stay was 4 days. In-hospital mortality was 0%. 30-day mortality was 0% in ViV and 3.7% in native TAVR. There was no difference in in-hospital mortality, postprocedure myocardial infarction, stroke, or acute kidney injury.

CONCLUSION

Compared to native TAVR, ViV TAVR has similar peri-procedural morbidity with relatively high postprocedure mean gradients. A multidisciplinary approach will help ensure patients receive the ideal therapy in the setting of structural bioprosthetic valve degeneration.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Failed Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Valves

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is increasingly being performed in younger and lower surgical risk patients. Given the longer life expectancy of these patients, the bioprosthetic valve will eventually fail, and aortic valve reintervention may be necessary. Although currently rare, redo-TAVR will likely increase in the future as younger patients are expected to outlive their transcatheter bioprosthesis. This review provides a contemporary overview of the indications, procedural planning, implantation technique, and outcomes of TAVR in failed transcatheter bioprosthetic aortic valves.

Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Thrombosis and Literature Review

An 83-year-old gentleman with a history of 23-mm Hancock-II-bioprosthetic aortic valve (BAV) replacement ten-years prior presented with symptoms of dyspnea and lower extremity edema. During the preceding seven-years, he had been noted to have asymptomatic increased mean transvalvular gradients (MG; 36–50 mmHg) felt to be due to either early bioprosthetic degeneration, pannus formation, or patient–prosthesis mismatch. An echocardiogram at the time of symptom development demonstrated significant flow acceleration through the aortic valve, mild regurgitation, and severely increased MG (48 mmHg) with prolonged acceleration time (AT, 140 msec). A trial of warfarin anticoagulation resulted in dramatic improvement after only 6 weeks with laminar flow through the AV, near-total resolution of regurgitation, and a decrease in MG to 14 mmHg and AT to 114 msec. These findings strongly suggest that BAV thrombosis was the predominant mechanism responsible for the longstanding high MG. Our case highlights that BAV thrombosis should be considered in the differential of elevated gradients regardless of the age of prosthesis, and that a trial of warfarin anticoagulation may be beneficial even if elevated gradients have been present for a prolonged period. Valvular gradients are often abnormal long before a formal diagnosis; however, these may reverse quickly with anticoagulation therapy.

Lifetime management of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis: a computed tomography simulation study

BACKGROUND

Given enough time, transcatheter heart valves (THVs) will degenerate and may require reintervention. Redo transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an attractive strategy but carries a risk of coronary obstruction.

AIMS

We sought to predict how many TAVIs patients could undergo in their lifetime using computed tomography (CT) simulation.

METHODS

We analysed paired CT scans (baseline and 30 days post-TAVI) from patients in the LRT trial and EPROMPT registry. We implanted virtual THVs on baseline CTs, comparing predicted valve-to-coronary (VTC) distances to 30-day CT VTC distances to evaluate the accuracy of CT simulation. We then simulated implantation of a second virtual THV within the first to estimate the risk of coronary obstruction due to sinus sequestration and the need for leaflet modification.

RESULTS

We included 213 patients with evaluable paired CTs. There was good agreement between virtual (baseline) and actual (30 days) CT measurements. CT simulation of TAVI followed by redo TAVI predicted low coronary obstruction risk in 25.4% of patients and high risk, likely necessitating leaflet modification, in 27.7%, regardless of THV type. The remaining 46.9% could undergo redo TAVI so long as the first THV was balloon-expandable but would likely require leaflet modification if the first THV was self-expanding.

CONCLUSIONS

Using cardiac CT simulation, it is possible to predict whether a patient can undergo multiple TAVI procedures in their lifetime. Those who cannot may prefer to undergo surgery first. CT simulation could provide a personalised lifetime management strategy for younger patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and inform decision-making.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT02628899; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03557242; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03423459.

Prosthesis-patient mismatch following transcatheter aortic valve replacement for degenerated transcatheter aortic valves: the TRANSIT-PPM international project

BACKGROUND

A severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) is associated with adverse outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for de novo aortic stenosis or a failed surgical bioprosthesis. The impact of severe PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR is unknown.

AIM

We sought to investigate the incidence and 1-year outcomes of different grades of PPM in patients undergoing TAV-in-TAVR.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The TRANSIT-PPM is an international registry, including cases of degenerated TAVR treated with a second TAVR. PPM severity, as well as in-hospital, 30-day, and 1-year outcomes were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 (VARC-3) criteria.

RESULTS

Among 28 centers, 155 patients were included. Severe PPM was found in 6.5% of patients, whereas moderate PPM was found in 14.2% of patients. The rate of severe PPM was higher in patients who underwent TAV-in-TAVR with a second supra-annular self-expanding (S-SE) TAVR (10%, p = 0.04). Specifically, the rate of severe PPM was significantly higher among cases of a SE TAVR implanted into a balloon-expandable (BE) device (19%, p = 0.003). At 1-year follow-up, the rate of all-cause mortality, and the rate of patients in the New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III/IV were significantly higher in the cohort of patients with severe PPM (p = 0.016 and p = 0.0001, respectively). Almost all the patients with a severe PPM after the first TAVR had a failed < 23 mm BE transcatheter heart valve (THV): the treatment with an S-SE resolved the severe PPM in the majority of the cases.

CONCLUSION

After TAV-in-TAVR, in a fifth of the cases, a moderate or severe PPM occurred. A severe PPM is associated with an increased 1-year all-cause mortality.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

[https://clinicaltrials.gov], identifier [NCT04500964].

TAVR for All? The Surgical Perspective

In spite of the noninferiority of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in high- and intermediate-risk patients, there are still obstacles that need to be overcome before the procedure is further expanded and clinically integrated. The lack of evidence on the long-term durability of the bioprostheses used for TAVR remains of particular concern. In addition, surgery may be preferred over TAVR in patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) or with concomitant pathologies such as other valve diseases (mitral regurgitation/tricuspid regurgitation), aortopathy, and coronary artery disease. In this review, we discuss and summarize relevant data from clinical trials, current trends, and remaining obstacles, and provide our perspective on the indications for the expansion of TAVR.

Early Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valve degeneration in a haemodialysis patient successfully managed with Sapien 3 Ultra: a case report

Background

Aortic valve disease is the most prevalent valvular abnormality in the developed world and carries a high risk of morbidity and mortality. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is favoured over open-heart surgery in high-risk patient categories and is increasingly used in lower-risk groups. End stage kidney disease (ESKD) is associated with premature calcific degeneration of bioprosthetic heart valves. Redo-TAVR requires meticulous pre-procedural planning to avoid the important risks of sinus sequestration and impaired coronary access. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the Acurate Neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) has been clinically available for a short time only and there are limited reports describing redo-TAVR in the Acurate Neo.

Case summary

We present a case of early, rapid onset, structural valve degeneration in a Acurate Neo, supra-annular, self-expanding THV in a dialysis patient. The patient presented with chest pain and breathlessness 4 years after TAVR with a Acurate Neo for severe stenosis of a bicuspid aortic valve. Echocardiogram now showed severe stenosis of the THV and computed tomography revealed severe THV leaflet calcification but no pannus or leaflet thrombus. After careful pre-procedural planning a S3 Ultra balloon-expandable valve was selected and positioned relatively high to pin the first THV leaflets in a fully open position without compromising coronary artery flow or coronary access.

Discussion

End stage kidney disease may cause rapid, calcific degeneration of TAVR valves leading to presentation with severe aortic stenosis. Redo-TAVR in the Acurate Neo THV with a Sapien 3 Ultra is feasible with careful pre-procedural planning to mitigate the risks of sinus sequestration and impaired coronary access.

The role of mechanical valves in the aortic position in the era of bioprostheses and TAVR: Evidence-based appraisal and focus on the On-X valve

Patients who need a prosthetic aortic heart valve may decide, working with their cardiologist and cardiac surgeon, among a variety of options: surgical or transcatheter approach, bioprosthetic or mechanical valve, or a Ross procedure if suitable to their age and anatomy. This review article examines the evidence for survival benefit with mechanical aortic valves, discusses bioprosthetic structural valve degeneration and its consequences, and considers the risks of redo aortic valve surgery or subsequent valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter intervention. It highlights the unique characteristics of the On-X aortic valve, including the US Food and Drug Administration approved and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guideline supported reduced anticoagulation target INR of 1.5 to 2.0, and discusses the PROACT Xa trial comparing apixaban vs warfarin anticoagulation. The choice of prosthetic valve should be individualized, carefully considering each patient's unique circumstances. In that context, the On-X aortic valve offers a potential lifetime solution without need for a repeat operation, while minimizing the risks of long-term anticoagulation. In an era of enthusiasm for bioprosthetic and transcatheter-based approaches, the option of a second-generation bileaflet mechanical valve with optimized hemodynamics-the On-X aortic valve-may well align with patient expectations.

Evolving Indications of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement—Where Are We Now, and Where Are We Going

Indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have steadily increased over the last decade since the first trials including inoperable or very high risk patients. Thus, TAVR is now the most common treatment of aortic valve stenosis in elderly patients (vs. surgical aortic valve replacement -SAVR-). In this review, we summarize the current indications of TAVR and explore future directions in which TAVR indications can expand.

Concomitant Redo Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Valve-in-Mitral Annular Calcification

Contemporary challenges in structural heart intervention include redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement and transcatheter mitral valve replacement in severe mitral annular calcification. We report a case of concomitant redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement and transcatheter mitral valve replacement in mitral annular calcification in a patient with radiation heart disease. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.)

Late Balloon Valvuloplasty for Transcatheter Heart Valve Dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter heart valve (THV) dysfunction with an elevated gradient or paravalvular leak (PVL) may be documented late after THV implantation. Medical management, paravalvular plugs, redo THV replacement, or surgical valve replacement may be considered. However, late balloon dilatation is rarely utilized because of concerns about safety or lack of efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of late dilatation in the management of THV dysfunction.

METHODS

All patients who underwent late dilatation for symptomatic THV dysfunction at 2 institutions between 2016 and 2021 were identified. Baseline, procedural characteristics, and clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were documented. THV frame expansion was assessed by multislice computed tomography before and after late dilatation.

RESULTS

Late dilatation was performed in 30 patients a median of 4.6 months (IQR: 2.3-11.0 months) after THV implantation in the aortic (n = 25; 83.3%), mitral (n = 2; 6.7%), tricuspid (n = 2; 6.7%) and pulmonary (n = 1; 3.3%) position. THV underexpansion was documented at baseline, and frame expansion substantially improved after late dilatation. The mean transvalvular gradient fell in all patients. For aortic THVs specifically, mean transaortic gradient fell from 25.4 ± 13.9 mm Hg to 10.8 ± 4.1 mm Hg; P < 0.001. PVL was reduced to ≤mild in all 11 patients with a previous >mild PVL. Embolic events, stroke, annular injury, and bioprosthetic leaflet injury were not observed. Symptomatic benefit was durable at 19.6 months (IQR: 14.8-36.1 months) follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Balloon dilatation late after THV implantation appears feasible and safe in appropriately selected patients and may result in THV frame expansion resulting in improvements in hemodynamic performance and PVL.

Risk of Coronary Obstruction During Redo-TAVR in Patients With Bicuspid Versus Tricuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the risk of coronary obstruction during redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) within a previously implanted self-expanding valve in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) versus tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) stenosis.

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of BAV in TAVR patients is expected to increase as the indication expands; however, no study has investigated the risk of coronary obstruction for future redo-TAVR in these patients.

METHODS

Computed tomography (CT) simulation analysis was performed in 86 type 0 BAV, 70 type 1 BAV, and 132 TAV patients who underwent TAVR with 1 VenusA-Valve (Venus Medtech) between January 2014 and December 2019.

RESULTS

CT-identified risk of coronary obstruction during redo-TAVR was observed in 36.1% of patients for the left coronary ostium (LCO) and 27.8% of patients for the right coronary ostium (RCO); however, the incidences were significantly lower in the type 0 BAV group than in the type 1 BAV or TAV group (for LCO: OR: 1.00 [reference] vs OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.24-5.01 vs OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.40-4.81; for RCO: OR: 1.00 [reference] vs OR: 2.14; 95% CI: 1.02-4.48 vs OR: 1.97; 95% CI: 1.02-3.80). The leaflet laceration technique may be unfeasible to improve coronary flow in 61.5% of the threatened LCOs and 58.8% of the threatened RCOs during redo-TAVR. The percentages were significantly or numerically lower in the type 0 BAV group than other groups (for LCO: 26.3% vs 62.1% vs 73.2%; P overall = 0.001; for RCO: 43.8% vs 65.2% vs 61.0%; P overall = 0.374).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in anatomical features may impact the feasibility of future redo-TAVR. Type 0 BAV anatomy was associated with the lower incidence of CT-identified risk of coronary obstruction during redo-TAVR, and the leaflet laceration technique may be more feasible to ensure coronary flow in this population.

Balloon-Expandable Valve for Treatment of Evolut Valve Failure: Implications on Neoskirt Height and Leaflet Overhang

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to determine the degree of Evolut (Medtronic) leaflet pinning, diameter expansion, leaflet overhang, and performance at different implant depths of the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 (S3, Edwards Lifesciences LLC) transcatheter heart valve (THV) within the Evolut THV.

BACKGROUND

Preservation of coronary access and flow is a major factor when considering the treatment of failed Evolut THVs.

METHODS

An in vitro study was performed with 20-, 23-, 26-, and 29-mm S3 THVs deployed within 23-, 26-, 29-, and 34-mm Evolut R THVs, respectively. The S3 outflow was positioned at various depths at node 4, 5, and 6 of the Evolut R. Neoskirt height, leaflet overhang, performance, and Evolut R valve housing diameter expansion were assessed under physiological conditions as per ISO 5840-3 standard.

RESULTS

The neoskirt height for the Evolut R was shorter when the S3 outflow was positioned at node 4 compared with node 6 (node 4 height for 23 mm = 16.3 mm, 26 mm = 17.1 mm, 29 mm = 18.3 mm, and 34 mm = 19.9 mm vs node 6 height for 23 mm = 23.9 mm, 26 mm = 23.4 mm, 29 mm = 24.7 mm, and 34 mm = 27 mm Evolut R). All configurations exhibited acceptable hydrodynamic performance irrespective of the degree of leaflet overhang, except the 29-mm S3 implanted in 34-mm Evolut R at node 4 (regurgitant fraction >20%). The valve housing radius of the index Evolut R increased when the S3 was implanted, with the increase ranging from 0 to 2.5 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Placement of the S3 at a lower implant position within an index Evolut R reduces the neoskirt height with no significant compromise to S3 valve function despite a higher degree of leaflet overhang. Low S3 implantation may facilitate future coronary access after redo transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Trans-Catheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation for the Treatment of Aortic Bioprosthetic Valve Failure

Aortic valve-in-valve (ViV) procedure is a valid treatment option for patients affected by bioprosthetic heart valve (BHV) degeneration. However, ViV implantation is technically more challenging compared to native trans-catheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). A deep knowledge of the mechanism and features of the failed BHV is pivotal to plan an adequate procedure. Multimodal imaging is fundamental in the diagnostic and pre-procedural phases. The main challenges associated with ViV TAVR consist of a higher risk of coronary obstruction, severe post-procedural patient-prosthesis mismatch, and a difficult coronary re-access. In this review, we describe the principles of ViV TAVR.