Self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation for aortic stenosis after mitral valve surgery

Combined transcatheter aortic valve and tricuspid valve-in-valve implantation in a patient with a mitral mechanical prosthesis

Despite progressively uncommon in Western countries, rheumatic heart disease still portrays a significant global burden. In elderly or high-surgical risk patients, plurivalvular disease may require a complex percutaneous approach. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with previous monoleaflet mitral prosthesis is challenging due to interference between the aortic valve and the rigid mitral mechanical prosthesis "ring." Prior cases report the use of CoreValve or Edwards Sapien aortic valves in patients with adequate mitro-aortic distance. Performing a second major procedure, such as tricuspid valve-in-valve (TVIV), sequentially during a single percutaneous intervention, increases treatment complexity. An 83-year-old woman with rheumatic heart disease, with previous implantation of a Bjork-Shiley monoleaflet mitral prosthesis, and Carpentier-Edwards 29 tricuspid bioprosthesis presented with decompensated heart failure due to severe aortic stenosis and tricuspid bioprosthesis stenosis. After HeartTeam discussion, the patient was deemed as inoperable due to a prohibitive surgical risk. As an alternative, a TAVI (Navitor FlexNav) and a transcatheter TVIV replacement (Edwards Sapiens 3 Ultra) were discussed and proposed, with both techniques being performed sequentially in a single procedure. TAVI in a patient with a previous monoleaflet mitral mechanical prosthesis and TVIV may be a feasible approach in inoperable patients with plurivalvular disease.

Percutaneous Treatment of Severe Aortic Regurgitation After Surgical Mitral Valve Repair

A 54-year-old woman who had recently undergone surgical mitral and tricuspid valve repair was diagnosed with severe aortic regurgitation. She was scheduled for percutaneous treatment and underwent successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation with a 27-mm Trilogy valve (JenaValve Technology). The case documents feasibility of percutaneous treatment in the presence of a mitral ring.

Redo aortic valve replacement versus valve-in-valve trans-catheter aortic valve implantation: a UK propensity-matched analysis

This study sought to compare the morbidity and mortality of redo aortic valve replacement (redo-AVR) versus valve-in-valve trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (valve-in-valve TAVI) for patients with a failing bioprosthetic valve. A multicenter UK retrospective study of redo-AVR or valve-in-valve TAVI for patients referred for redo aortic valve intervention due to a degenerated aortic bioprosthesis. Propensity score matching was performed for confounding factors. From July 2005 to April 2021, 911 patients underwent redo-AVR and 411 patients underwent valve-in-valve TAVI. There were 125 pairs for analysis after propensity score matching. The mean age was 75.2±8.5 years. In-hospital mortality was 7.2% (n=9) for redo-AVR versus 0 for valve-in-valve TAVI, p=0.002. Surgical patients suffered more post-operative complications, including intra-aortic balloon pump support (p=0.02), early re-operation (p<0.001), arrhythmias (p<0.001), respiratory and neurological complications (p=0.02 and p=0.03) and multi-organ failure (p=0.01). The valve-in-valve TAVI group had a shorter intensive care unit and hospital stay (p<0.001 for both). However, moderate aortic regurgitation at discharge and higher post-procedural gradients were more common after valve-in-valve TAVI (p<0.001 for both). Survival probabilities in patients who were successfully discharged from the hospital were similar after valve-in-valve TAVI and redo-AVR over the 6-year follow-up (log-rank p=0.26). In elderly patients with a degenerated aortic bioprosthesis, valve-in-valve TAVI provides better early outcomes as opposed to redo-AVR, although there was no difference in mid-term survival in patients successfully discharged from the hospital.

Previously implanted mitral surgical prosthesis in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Procedural outcome and morphologic assessment using multidetector computed tomography

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in the presence of a preexisting mitral prosthesis is challenging and its influence on the morphology of mitral prosthesis and the positioning of transcatheter heart valve (THV) is unknown. We assessed the feasibility of TAVI for patients with preexisting mitral prostheses, its influence on mitral prosthesis morphology, and the positional interaction between a newly implanted THV and mitral prosthesis using serial multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Thirty-one patients with preexisting mitral prosthesis undergoing TAVI were included. MDCT was performed before and after TAVI. Thirty patients successfully underwent TAVI without interference from preexisting mitral prosthesis. Although opening disturbance of the mechanical mitral prosthesis by the THV edge was observed in 1 patient, the patient was managed conservatively. No THV embolization occurred. THV shift during deployment occurred in 9 patients and was predicted by a larger aortic annulus area (odds ratio: 1.24 per 10 mm², 1.03–1.49, p = 0.02), possibly because of large THVs. The mitral mean pressure gradient was slightly higher after TAVI (3.7 vs. 4.3 mmHg, p = 0.002), whereas the mitral regurgitation grade was similar. MDCT showed that the size of the mitral prosthesis housing was unchanged after TAVI. The median distance between the mitral prosthesis and THV was 2.6 mm. The postprocedural angle between the mitral prosthesis and THV was larger than the preprocedural angle between the mitral prosthesis and the left ventricular outflow tract (64° vs. 61°, p = 0.03). Thus, TAVI is feasible in the case of preexisting mitral prosthesis. Serial MDCT demonstrated favorable THV positioning and unchanged mitral prosthesis morphology after TAVI.

Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the presence of a mitral prosthesis

PURPOSE

In the current case series, we present our experience with the self-expanding CoreValve or Evolut R (Medtronic Inc.) in patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis and concomitant mitral valve prosthesis.

METHODS

Twelve patients with previous mitral valve prosthesis underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis and/or aortic valve regurgitation. All patients underwent evaluation with an echocardiogram, computed tomography and coronary angiogram. After the index intervention and before discharge all patients underwent transthoracic echocardiography. All outcomes were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 criteria.

RESULTS

Eleven patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis and one patient for severe aortic valve regurgitation. There was immediate improvement of patients' hemodynamic status; no cases of procedural death, stroke, myocardial infarction, or urgent cardiac surgery occurred. There was no 30-day mortality and all patients improved, with 91.6% in functional New York Heart Association class I-II.

CONCLUSION

The current study demonstrates that in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis or regurgitation and mitral valve prosthesis, the implantation of a self-expanding aortic valve via the transfemoral route is safe and feasible, with maintained long-term results.

Transfemoral transcatheter ACURATE-neo™ aortic valve replacement in a patient with a previous mechanical mitral valve

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in the presence of a mechanical mitral valve (MMV) prosthesis is challenging due to the stiff mitral cage in the boundaries of the aorto-mitral curtain. We describe the technique for TAVR using the ACURATE-neo™ aortic bioprosthesis in a patient with a MMV prosthesis.

Evolut R Implantation to Treat Severe Pure Aortic Regurgitation in a Patient With Mitral Bioprosthesis

Transcatheter aortic valves have been designed to treat high-risk surgical candidates affected by severe aortic stenosis, but little is known about the use of transcatheter valves in patients with severe pure aortic regurgitation. We describe the implantation of Medtronic CoreValve Evolut R (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) to treat an 82-year-old patient affected by severe pure aortic regurgitation who underwent prior mitral valve replacement with a biological valve protruding into the left ventricular outflow tract.

Transapical aortic valve implantation in patients with pre-existing mitral valve prostheses: a case report

Background

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has proven to be a valid option for patients with severe aortic stenosis who are at high perioperative risk, particularly in patients with previous cardiac surgery. Several patients with previous mitral valve surgery were reported to have been successfully treated with TAVI.

Case presentation

Two patients, one with mechanical and one with biological mitral valve prosthesis, presented with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. After discussion among our multidisciplinary heart team transapical approach and a JenaValve™ prosthesis was used for TAVI. Main reasons were to decrease the perioperative risk, avoid a re-opening of the chest via median sternotomy, and discuss the possible superiority of the JenaValve™ device due to its design. The patients were successfully treated and discharged on the 11th and 14th post-operative day, respectively. Echocardiographic follow up before discharge and up to 2.8 years post-operatively showed excellent results.

Conclusions

In conclusion, TAVI in patients with preexisting mitral prostheses-mechanical or biological-is feasible, safe, and effective and offers a valid alternative to conventional aortic valve replacement in this particular re-operation scenario. The JenaValve™ device does not interact with the mitral prosthesis and offers therefore due to its unique design a potential advantage.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a mitral prosthesis; single center experience and review of literature

OBJECTIVES

Following the encouraging results of several registries and trials, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been recognized as a valid option in patients with severe aortic stenosis deemed at high or prohibitive risk for surgical treatment. Good procedural success and good clinical outcomes have been showed and very limited data exist on TAVI in the setting of a preexisting mitral prosthesis regarding the technique, potential complications, and outcomes.

METHODS

Here, we report six cases of transfemoral TAVI with a self-expanding bioprosthesis (CoreValve; Medtronic, Inc) in patients who had previously undergone mitral valve replacement. Preprocedural, intraprocedural ve postprocedural outcome and data were analyzed and a brief literature review is also presented.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Our experiences show that transfemoral CoreValve implantation can be performed successfully in patients with mechanical and bioprosthetic mitral valves.

Direct Flow Implantation in a Patient With Mechanical Mitral Prostheses

We describe a case of Direct Flow (Direct Flow Medical Inc, Santa Rosa, CA) transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a patient with a mechanical valve in a mitral position.

Transfemoral aortic valve implantation in severe aortic stenosis patients with prior mitral valve prosthesis

Introduction

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis in patients with a previous mitral valve prosthesis is technically challenging, and pre-procedural comprehensive assessment of these patients before transcatheter aortic valve implantation is vital for an uncomplicated and successful procedure.

Aim

We want to share our experience with transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a preexisting functional mitral valve prosthesis and describe a series of important technical and pre-procedural details.

Material and methods

At our center, 135 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis were treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Six of them with a preexisting mitral valve prosthesis received an Edwards SAPIEN XT valve through the transfemoral route.

Results

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was performed successfully in all 6 patients without any deformation of the cobalt-chromium/steel stents of the aortic valve bioprosthesis. Also no distortion or malfunction in the mitral valve prosthesis was observed after the procedure. There were no complications during the hospitalization period. Post-procedural echocardiography revealed no or mild aortic paravalvular regurgitation and normal valve function in all the patients. In addition, serial echocardiographic examination demonstrated that both the stability and function of the aortic and mitral prosthetic valves were normal without any deterioration in the gradients and the degree of the regurgitation at long-term follow-ups.

Conclusions

Our experience confirms that transcatheter aortic valve implantation is technically feasible in patients with previous mitral valve replacement but comprehensive evaluation of patients by multimodal imaging techniques such as transesophageal echocardiography and multislice computed tomography is mandatory for a successful and safe procedure.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a patient with previous mitral valve replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has shown favorable outcomes in patients with severe symptomatic aortic valve stenosis who are at high surgical risk or are unsuitable candidates for open heart surgery. However, concerns exist over treating patients who have previously undergone mitral valve surgery due to the potential interference between the mitral prosthetic valve or ring and the TAVI device. In this case report, we present a patient with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and previous mechanical mitral valve replacement who was successfully treated with TAVI using a CoreValve.

Transapical JenaValve in a patient with mechanical mitral valve prosthesis

We report the first case of transcatheter aortic valve replacement implantation using JenaValve™ in a patient with mechanical mitral valve prosthesis. We believe that the design features of this valve may be particularly suited for use in this setting.

Expanding the indication for sutureless aortic valve replacement to patients with mitral disease

OBJECTIVES

To review our experience with sutureless aortic valve replacement (AVR) in the setting of concomitant mitral valve (MV) surgery and discuss the technical considerations.

METHODS

Between January 2012 and March 2013, 10 patients underwent sutureless AVR with the Perceval prosthesis in the setting of concomitant mitral disease. Five patients underwent MV repair, 4 underwent MV replacement, and 1 had a previously implanted mechanical mitral prosthesis.

RESULTS

The median age was 79 years and 7 patients (70%) were male. Median logistic EuroSCORE II was 6.2%. All valves were successfully implanted with no 30-day mortality. There was no residual aortic paravalvular leak. Two patients had from third-degree atrioventricular block requiring permanent pacemaker implantation. At a mean follow-up of 8±4 months (range, 2-16 months), the overall survival was 80% with 2 non-valve-related deaths and the mean transaortic gradient and aortic valve area had improved to 11.1±4.6 mm Hg and 1.5±0.3 cm2, respectively. There was no evidence of mitral dysfunction in any patient.

CONCLUSIONS

In our experience, sutureless AVR in the setting of concomitant mitral surgery is a feasible and reproducible procedure. Elderly patients undergoing multiple valve surgery present a higher operative risk, therefore extending the indication for sutureless AVR to patients with concomitant mitral disease could greatly benefit this specific population.