Mid-term results of 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthetic valves in elder patients with small aortic annuli: comparison with 19-mm bioprosthetic valves

Extremely Small 20-mm Versus Standard-Size Balloon-Expandable Transcatheter Heart Valves: Propensity-Matched Analysis From the OCEAN-TAVI Registry

BACKGROUND

The 20-mm balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve (THV) represents the smallest available option for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Its current underutilization stems from concerns regarding prosthesis-patient mismatch, durability, and potential adverse outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes between the 20-mm balloon-expandable THVs and standard-size balloon-expandable THVs.

METHODS

Patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SAPIEN THVs were sourced from the OCEAN-TAVI (Optimized Transcatheter Valvular Intervention) registry, an ongoing, multicenter cohort study that has enrolled over 7,000 TAVR patients in Japan. A 1:3 propensity-matched analysis, based on 24 baseline clinical and echocardiographic variables, was used to contrast the 20-mm with >20-mm balloon-expandable THVs.

RESULTS

Of 5,086 eligible patients, 284 (5.6%) received the 20-mm balloon-expandable THV. After propensity-matching, the 20-mm THV group (n = 276) and the >20-mm THV group (n = 828) demonstrated balanced baseline characteristics, with an absolute standardized difference <0.10. The average follow-up duration for patients who were alive was 955 ± 512 days, and the average time to death was 584 ± 543 days. The 20-mm group showed a higher frequency of prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) (moderate PPM: 29.2% vs 10.8%; severe PPM: 4.9% vs 1.5%; P < 0.001). Over a 5-year period, all-cause mortality and heart failure rehospitalization rates were comparable between the 2 groups (all-cause mortality: 34.2% vs 38.0%; HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.74-1.37; P = 0.970; heart failure rehospitalization: 15.2% vs 16.3%; HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.50-1.29; P = 0.371).

CONCLUSIONS

This registry-based study suggests that the initially observed inferior forward hemodynamics associated with the 20-mm THV do not translate into heightened long-term mortality or heart failure rehospitalization risks. (The OCEAN-TAVI registry [Optimized Transcatheter Valvular Intervention-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation]; UMINID:000020423).

Aortic valve replacement in small aortic root- Bi-leaflet mechanical valve is superior to a Mono-leaflet mechanical valve

Background

Patient prosthetic mismatch is a serious but avoidable complication of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) complicated by a small aortic annulus. This study aims to compare early and midterm outcomes following aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a mono-leaflet (ML) valve and a bi-leaflet (BL) valve in a small aortic root.

Methods and selection

From January 1st, 2017 to December 31st, 2019, 98 patients diagnosed with small aortic root underwent isolated aortic valve replacement with either TTK Chitra valve (Mono-leaflet/ ML group) or St. Jude medical valve (Bi-leaflet/ BL group) of size 17/ 19 mm. Echocardiography was analyzed from medical records and telephonic follow-up.

Results

Baseline parameters were comparable. The ML group had 42 patients and the BL group had 56 patients. Aortic cross-clamp time, the incidence of severe patient prosthetic mismatch (p = 0.002) and mean, peak pressure gradients were high in the ML group. Duration of ventilation, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, the incidence of stroke, need for intra-aortic balloon pump, permanent pacemaker, dialysis, and left ventricular mass index in echocardiography were comparable between the two groups postoperatively. There was no early mortality in both group. Survival at the end of 5 years was 57 ± 14.4% in the ML group; 91.8 ± 4% in the BL group (p = 0.005). Univariate and multivariate analysis revealed elderly age as a risk factor for mortality.

Conclusion

We conclude that aortic valve replacement without any root widening procedure, using a small-sized mechanical valve provides acceptable early outcomes. Bi-leaflet mechanical valves provide better hemodynamics and survival percentage.

Long-Term Outcomes and Echocardiographic Data After Aortic Valve Replacement With a 17-mm Mechanical Valve

BACKGROUND

We investigated the long-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes after aortic valve replacement (AVR) with a 17-mm mechanical valve.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between January 2005 and December 2011, 80 patients with aortic stenosis underwent AVR with the 17-mm St. Jude Medical Regent prosthetic valve. Echocardiography was performed preoperatively, at discharge, and at follow-up, which was performed at least 2 years postoperatively (median interval, 7.3 years). Prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM) was defined as an indexed effective orifice area <0.85 cm2/m2at discharge and occurred in 25 patients (31%). The median follow-up period was 8.7 years (100% complete). Overall in-hospital mortality was 2.5% (2 patients) with 27 late deaths (34%). The 5- and 10-year survival rates were 78.7% and 63.0%, respectively. Peripheral arterial disease and concomitant mitral valve repair were independent predictors of late mortality. The 5- and 10-year freedom from major adverse valve-related events (MAVRE) rates were 91.6% and 83.5%, respectively. PPM at discharge did not affect long-term survival, freedom from MAVRE, or freedom from heart failure. Echocardiographic data at follow-up revealed a significant reduction in the mean left ventricular mass index (LVMI). LVMI reduction observed at follow-up was similar between patients with and without PPM.

CONCLUSIONS

AVR with the 17-mm mechanical prosthesis had acceptable long-term clinical and hemodynamic outcomes. Significant reduction in LVMI was observed regardless of PPM.