Effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation on QT dispersion in patients with aortic stenosis

Background QT dispersion （QTd） is a predictor of ventricular arrhythmia. Ventricular arrhythmia is an important factor influencing morbidity and mortality in patients with aortic stenosis. Surgical aortic valve replacement reduced the QTd in this patients group. However, the effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation （TAVI） on QTd in patients with aortic stenosis is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of TAVI on QTd in patients with aortic stenosis. Methods Patients with severe aortic stenosis, who were not candi-dates for surgical aortic valve replacement due to contraindications or high surgical risk, were included in the study. All patients underwent electrocardiographic and echocardiographic evaluation before, and at the 6th month after TAVI, computed QTd and left ventricular mass index （LVMI）. Results A total 30 patients were admitted to the study （mean age 83.2 ± 1.0 years, female 21 and male 9, mean valve area 0.7 ± 3 mm2）. Edwards SAPIEN heart valves, 23 mm （21 patients） and 26 mm （9 patients）, by the transfemoral approach were used in the TAVI procedures. All TAVI procedures were successful. Both QTd and LVMI at the 6th month after TAVI were significantly reduced com-pared with baseline values of QTd and LVMI before TAVI （73.8 ± 4 ms vs. 68 ± 2 ms, P=0.001 and 198 ± 51 g/m2 vs. 184 ± 40 g/m2, P=0.04, respectively）. There was a significant correlation between QTd and LVMI （r=0.646, P〈0.001）. Conclusions QTd, which malign ventricular arrhythmia marker, and LVMI were significantly reduced after TAVI procedure. TAVI may decrease the possibility of ventricu-lar arrhythmia in patients with aortic stenosis.     

Management of implant failure during transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background : Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an emerging alternative to palliative medical therapy for nonsurgical patients with severe aortic stenosis. There is a paucity of detailed data on the management and outcome of complications related to the sub‐optimal deployment of the prosthesis. We appraised the incidence and management of early implant failure occurring during TAVI. Methods : Of 110 patients who underwent TAVI using the third generation 18‐French CoreValve ReValving System (Medtronic, MN) in our Institution between June 2007 and January 2010, we identified those experiencing early implant failure and reported on their management and clinical outcome. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) at 30 days and mid‐term follow up. Results : Early implant failure occurred in 18 of 110 patients (16.3%). The most common cause was prosthesis under‐expansion conditioning moderate to severe peri‐valvular leak (44.4%). Prosthesis deployment too low or too high with respect to the aortic annulus leading to severe peri‐valvular leak occurred in 22.2% and 5.5% of patients, respectively. Need of valve retrieve after the first attempt of deployment occurred in four cases (22.2%). Prosthesis embolization in the ascending aorta occurred in 5.5% of patients who experienced early implant failure. All implant failure cases were managed percutaneously with gain in aortic valve area from 0.44 ± 0.17 to 1.28 ± 0.27 cm² (P < 0.001), decrease of mean transaortic gradient from 55.00 ± 19.51 to 11.58 ± 5.91 mmHg (P < 0.001) and no MACCE at 30 days. After 11 ± 6 months, MACCE occurred cumulatively in two patients (11.1%). Conclusions : Early implant failure can complicate the TAVI procedure with the CoreValve system, but it can be managed safely and effectively with bailout transcatheter techniques, avoiding surgery, with good early and mid‐term clinical and echocardiographic results. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Clinical outcome of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with low‐flow,low gradient aortic stenosis

Background : Low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis is associated with relevant postoperative mortality whereas conservative management results in dismal prognosis. We present the initial experience of low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis treated with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods : From June 2008 to December 2010 167 consecutive patients with native severe aortic stenosis and an excessive operative risk underwent TAVI. Of these, 15 patients presented with low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis (aortic valve area < 1 cm², left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction < 40%, aortic mean gradient < 40 mm Hg). The CoreValve prosthesis 18‐F‐generation (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) was inserted retrograde. Clinical follow‐up and echocardiography were performed 6 months after procedure. Results : Patients with low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis (mean LV ejection fraction 32 ± 6%, mean aortic gradient 27 ± 7 mm Hg) had higher all‐cause mortality 6 months after TAVI compared to patients without low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis (33% vs. 13%, P = 0.037). In the surviving 10 patients with low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis, LV ejection fraction increased (34 ± 6% before vs. 46 ± 11% 6 months after TAVI, p = 0.005) and more distance covered in the 6‐minute walk test (218 ± 102 meters before vs. 288 ± 129 meters 6 months after TAVI, p = 0.038). Conclusion : Our study suggests that TAVI is feasible in patients with severe co‐morbidities and low‐flow, low‐gradient aortic stenosis. Within the first 6 months after treatment all‐cause mortality was considerable high, but the surviving patients showed symptomatic benefit and significant improvement of myocardial function and exercise capacity. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for treatment of patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses—valve‐in‐valve technique

Background: The management of patients with degeneration of surgical bioprosthetic valve replacement remains a challenge because of the higher risk of re‐do aortic valve replacement. We present a case series of five patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses treated with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods: From December 2009 to May 2010, five patients with degenerated aortic valve bioprostheses (aortic valve area < 1 cm² or severe aortic regurgitation), an excessive operative risk (EuroSCORE ≥ 30%), symptoms of heart failure (NYHA ≥ III) and an internal diameter of bioprosthetic aortic valve 20.5 ± 0.5 mm were included. Procedures were performed without hemodynamic support using femoral arteries. Balloon valvuloplasty with a 20‐mm balloon under rapid pacing was carried out before valve implantation. The 26‐mm CoreValve prosthesis, 18‐F‐generation (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) was inserted retrograde under fluoroscopic guidance. Invasive and echocardiographic measurements were done immediately before and after TAVI. Clinical followup and echocardiography were performed after procedure (mean followup 72 days ± 60, range: 176–30 days). Results: In all patients TAVI was successful with immediate decrease of transaortic peak‐to‐peak pressure (P = 0.002). Mild aortic regurgitation occurred in two patients and one patient received a new permanent pacemaker. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events did not arise. NYHA functional class improved in all patients and left ventricular ejection fraction increased (P = 0.019). Conclusion: Our experiences with the valve‐in‐valve technique using the CoreValve prosthesis suggest that transfemoral TAVI is feasible in high risk patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

First‐in‐man transcatheter aortic valve implantation of a 20‐mm edwards SAPIEN XT valve: One step forward for the treatment of patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus

We present the case of an 85‐year‐old woman diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis, porcelain aorta, and a small aortic annulus (17.3 mm), who underwent successful transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with a 20‐mm Edwards SAPIEN XT valve using the NovaFlex+ delivery system. At 1‐month follow‐up the patient was in NYHA functional class I, and Doppler echocardiography showed a mean residual gradient of 15 mm Hg and trivial paravalvular aortic regurgitation. This case, which shows for the first time the feasibility of TAVI with a 20‐mm valve, opens a new avenue for the challenging treatment of patients with aortic stenosis and a small aortic annulus. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

超声心动图在主动脉瓣狭窄经导管主动脉瓣植入术中的应用价值

目的探讨超声心动图在主动脉瓣狭窄患者经导管主动脉瓣植入术中的作用。方法3例重度主动脉瓣瓣膜狭窄患者接受经导管主动脉瓣人工瓣膜植入术。使用PhilipS iE33型彩色多普勒超声诊断仪,配备经胸探头S5—1和经食道探头S7—2,X7—2t。超声观察内容包括明确主动脉瓣膜病变范围和程度,测量主动脉瓣环前后径,人工瓣膜植入术后瓣膜功能等。结果3例患者经导管主动脉瓣植入术均取得了成功,人工瓣膜位置稳定,常规超声心动图3例患者术前经胸超声心动图与术中经食管超声心动图诊断相符,跨瓣压差较术前明显下降,主动脉瓣瓣上流速明显下降,瓣周漏瞬时反流量平均约1．2mL。结论经导管主动脉瓣人工瓣膜植入术在治疗严重主动脉瓣瓣膜狭窄中方法可行,效果良好;超声心动图在这项工作中具有重要的辅助作用。     

Influence of corevalve revalving system implantation on mitral valve function

Objectives : The purpose of this study is to verify whether transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) determined changes in mitral valve (MV) function, in terms of mitral regurgitation (MR) and stenosis. Background : Little data is available regarding the effects of TAVI on global MV function, often derived from analysis primarily focused on clinical and aortic related outcomes. Methods : From May 2008 to March 2010, 73 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the CoreValve ReValving System. The study population consisted of 58 patients (27 males, mean age 82 ± 7 years) who underwent transthoracic echocardiography at least ≥1 month after implantation (mean follow‐up 7.8 ± 5.4 months). Results : In patients with a left ventricular dysfunction (ejection fraction, EF, <45%) at the baseline, EF significantly increased from 37 ± 6% to 48 ± 7% after TAVI (P = 0.003). Before TAVI, 42 patients had no or mild MR, 13 mild‐to‐moderate, and 3 moderate or moderate‐to‐severe. During follow‐up, the MR degree was unchanged in the majority of patients (55%), 12% reduced, and 33% worsened. Variables associated with worsening in MR were depth of aortic prosthesis (P = 0.02 for the distance between the ventricular end and the right coronary cusp; P = 0.04 for mean distance right‐left coronary cusps) and left atrium area at the baseline (P = 0.02). After TAVI, six patients (10%) developed mild or moderate mitral stenosis, often in a native valve with anterior calcifications. Conclusions : In the majority of patients no significant changes occurred in the degree of MR in native valve, but we found that if the aortic valve was deeply implanted in the left ventricle outflow tract, a worsening in MR can be observed. A mitral stenosis development must be sought in patients with heavy calcifications of the anterior leaflet. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Early experience of implantation of the new CoreValve® Evolut™ in degenerated bioprosthetic aortic valves

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment for severe aortic stenosis in high‐risk patients. The PARTNER trial demonstrated equivalent 1‐year survival rates between patients randomized to TAVI versus conventional surgery (Leon et al., N Engl J Med 2010;363:1597–1607), with sustained benefit up to 2 years (Makkar et al., NEJM 2012;366:1696–1704). Recently, the ADVANCE registry cited all‐cause mortality rates of 4.5%, 12.8%, and 17.9% at 30‐days, 6 months, and 1‐year following TAVI in 1,015 high‐risk patients (Linke, TCT 2012, 2012). In addition, TAVI was demonstrated to be a feasible treatment for severe native valve regurgitation in a series of 31 high‐risk patients. The all‐cause 30‐day mortality rate was 6.4%, with a 30‐day major stroke rate of 6.4%. At 1‐year, the all‐cause mortality rate was 12.5% (Roy et al., J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60(17S):B264). We report the successful transcatheter implantation of the new CoreValve^® Evolut^? in two patients with regurgitant aortic bioprostheses. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Incidence,timing, and predictors of valve dislodgment during TAVI with the medtronic corevalve system

Objectives : To determine the incidence, timing and predictors of periprocedural valve dislodgment with the Medtronic Corevalve System (MCS). Background : Periprocedural valve dislodgment may occur during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods : Ninety‐eight consecutive patients underwent TAVI with the MCS after a comprehensive baseline assessment including invasive angiography, echocardiography, and Multi‐Slice Computed Tomography (MSCT). The invasive monitoring charts and angiographic studies of all TAVI procedures were reviewed to determine the incidence and timing of valve dislodgment. Results : Valve dislodgment occurred in 18 patients. Patients with valve dislodgment had a larger Aortic Valve Area (0.76 ± 0.25 cm² vs. 0.61 ± 0.19 cm², P = 0.007), lower mean transaortic gradient (37.65 ± 14.62 mm Hg vs. 47.11 ± 16.08 mm Hg, P = 0.03) and significantly less aortic root calcification (Agatston score median 1951 AU (IQR, 799–3103) vs. 3289 AU (IQR 2097–4481), P = 0.016). A lower aortic root calcium score (Agatston score < 2359 AU) was the single independent predictor for valve dislodgment (OR 3.10, 1.09–8.84). After valve dislodgment, the valve could be successfully retrieved and implanted in the proper anatomic location in all cases. Valve dislodgment was associated with a lower incidence of post‐procedural AR ≥ 2 (11.1% vs. 34.6%, P = 0.05). There were no relevant procedural or clinical implications to valve dislodgment. Conclusions : The incidence of periprocedural valve dislodgment was 18% in these series. Less aortic root calcification appeared the single independent predictor. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Changes in mitral regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Objectives : To assess the acute and intermediate changes in mitral regurgitation (MR) severity after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with the CoreValve Revalving SystemTM (CRS). Background : Following surgical aortic valve replacement, improvement in MR is reported in 27–82% of the patients. The changes in MR severity following CRS implantation are unknown. Methods : Transthoracic echocardiography was performed in 79 consecutive patients before and after treatment, and at the first outpatient visit. Left ventricular dimensions and ejection fraction (LVEF), left atrial (LA) size, and aortic gradient were measured. MR was assessed by color flow mapping and was graded as none, mild, moderate, or severe. It was defined as organic or functional. The depth of CRS implantation was measured by angiography. Results : Post‐treatment, the mean gradient decreased from 48 ± 16 mm Hg to 9 ± 5 mm Hg (P < 0.0001). There was no significant change in the left ventricular dimensions, LA size, and LVEF. MR pretreatment was mild, moderate, or severe in 57%, 18%, and 1% of the patients, respectively. It was defined as organic in 27 patients (36%) and functional in 27 patients (36%). The degree of MR remained unchanged in 61% of the patients, improved in 17%, and worsened in 22%. MR improvement was associated with a lower baseline LVEF (P = 0.02). There was no association between the changes in MR severity and the depth of CRS implantation. Conclusions : Most patients who underwent TAVI had some degree of MR. Overall there was no change in the degree of MR post‐treatment. Patients in whom MR improved had a lower LVEF at baseline. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation within a previous bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement

This report documents the first reported case of transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the CoreValve ReValving system (Medtronic CoreValve System, Luxembourg), within a previous bioprosthetic aortic valve replacement. TAVI has become a recognized percutaneous treatment for patients with severe native or bioprosthetic aortic valve stenosis. However, as the number of patients screened for TAVI increases, a number of patients are found with absolutely no option for peripheral arterial access, either from the femoral or subclavian routes. Transaortic CoreValve placement offers an alternate minimally invasive hybrid surgical/interventional technique when peripheral access is not possible. A CoreValve prosthesis was implanted via the transaortic route in an 81‐year‐old woman with severe bioprosthetic aortic valve stenosis (21 mm Mitroflow pericardial valve, peak instantaneous gradient of 99 mmHg, effective valve orifice area (EOA) of 0.3 cm², as ilio‐femoral and left subclavian angiography revealed small calibre vessels (<6 mm). Access was achieved via a mini thoracotomy via the left anterior second intercostal space. The procedure went without complication. Post procedure the patient was transferred directly to the Cardiac Care Unit for recuperation. Post procedure echocardiography showed that the TAVI was well positioned with no para‐valvular leak and a reduction in peak instantaneous gradient to 30 mmHg and an increase in EOA to 1.5 cm². She was discharged on the third post‐procedural day in sinus rhythm with a narrow QRS complex. CoreValve implantation within previous surgical bioprosthesis is now an established treatment. The transaortic approach to transcatheter implantation is a promising recent development, when due to anatomical reasons, transfemoral or subclavian TAVI is not feasible. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background : Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a rapidly evolving strategy for therapy of aortic stenosis. We describe the effect of the learning curve from the first 270 high‐risk patients in Vancouver, Canada. Methods : Patients underwent TAVI by transfemoral (63%) or transapical (37%) routes using balloon expandable valves. The experience was divided into the first half (FH, patients 1–135) and second half (SH, patients 136–270). Results : The mean age was 83.2 ± 8 years (FH 83 ± 12 vs. SH 81 ± 7 years, P = 0.12). The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Score (STS) was 9.5% ± 5.2%‐ FH 10.5 vs. SH 8.5% (P = 0.01). The overall procedural success rate in the FH was 92.6%, improving to 97.8% in the SH (P = 0.05). The transfemoral procedural success improved—FH 89.3% to SH 98.8% (P = 0.01). The transapical procedural success remained high—FH 98.0% to SH 96.1% (P = 0.53). The overall 30‐day mortality was 9.6%, improving from FH 13.3% to SH 5.9% (P = 0.04). In the transfemoral cases, 30‐day mortality decreased by 56% [10.7–4.7%, P = 0.14], and similarly in transapical cases [17.6–7.8%, P = 0.14]. In‐hospital stroke occurred in 3.3% (FH 3.7% vs. SH 2.9%, P = 0.74). The overall need for a new permanent pacemaker was 5.9% (FH 5.9% vs. SH 5.9%, P = 1). The overall major vascular injury rate was 6.7% (FH 8.1% vs. SH 5.2%, P = 0.33). The overall incidence of coronary vessel occlusion was 1.1% (FH 1.5 % vs. SH 0.7%, P = 0.56). Device embolization or failure to cross the valve was rare and largely seen in the FH only. Procedural experience (>135 procedures) was an independent predictor of 30‐day survival (HR: 6.7, 95% CI: 1.2–18.1, P = 0.03). Conclusion : TAVI outcomes improve with experience and device development. While overall complication rates are low, scope remains to further reduce procedural adverse events.© 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Balloon aortic valvuloplasty for severe aortic stenosis as a bridge to transcatheter/surgical aortic valve replacement

Objectives : This study aimed to determine success‐ and complication rates after balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) and the outcome of BAV as a standalone therapy versus BAV as a bridge to transcatheter/surgical aortic valve replacement (T/SAVR). Background : The introduction of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has led to a revival in BAV as treatment for patients with severe aortic stenosis. Methods : A cohort of 472 patients underwent 538 BAV procedures. The cohort was divided into two groups: BAV alone 387 (81.9%) and BAV as a bridge 85 (18.1%) to (n = 65, TAVR; n = 20, surgery). Clinical, hemodynamic, and follow‐up mortality data were collected. Results : There was no significant difference between the two groups in mean age (81.7 ± 8.3 vs. 83.2 ± 10.9 years, P = 0.18), society of thoracic surgeons score (13.1 ± 6.2 and 12.4 ± 6.4, P = 0.4), logistic EuroSCORE (45.4 ± 22.3 vs. 46.9 ± 21.8, P = 0.43), and other comorbidities. The mean increase in aortic valve area was 0.39 ± 0.25 in the BAV alone group and 0.42 ± 0.26 in the BAV as a bridge group, P = 0.33. The decrease in mean gradient was 24.1 ± 13.1 in the BAV alone group vs. 27.1 ± 13.8 in the BAV as a bridge group, P = 0.06. During a median follow up of 183 days [54–409], the mortality rate was 55.2% (n = 214) in the BAV alone group vs. 22.3% (n = 19) in the BAV as a bridge group during a median follow‐up of 378 days [177–690], P < 0.001. Conclusion : In high‐risk patients with aortic stenosis and temporary contraindications to SAVR/TAVR, BAV may be used as a bridge to intervention with good mid‐term outcomes. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Lessons Learned from Balloon Aortic Valvuloplasty Experience from the Pre‐transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Era

Background: Balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) has been used as a bridge to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in high‐risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). Such patients are now being referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We sought to study the indications and outcomes of BAV in patients with severe AS in the pre‐TAVI era. Methods: We analyzed consecutive patients with severe AS undergoing BAV from 1990 to 2005. In these patients with no immediate surgical option, BAV was attempted to temporarily improve hemodynamics, with a goal to improve general health of the patient, and ultimately AVR. Results : A total of 99 BAVs (eight repeats, one second repeat) were performed in 90 consecutive patients. Baseline ejection fraction was ≤25% in 36 (36%) patients. The 30‐day mortality rate was 17% (n = 17). Of the 99 patients, 27 (30%) underwent AVR. Average follow‐up of patients with and without AVR was 55 ± 57 months and 16 ± 23 months, respectively. The 6‐month and 1‐year survival rates in patients who underwent AVR were 81% and 78%, respectively, versus 57% and 44% in patients who did not undergo AVR (P = 0.024). Conclusion: BAV can be used successfully to clinically improve the health of some nonsurgical patients with severe symptomatic AS, and a proportion of these patients improve to a point where AVR can be performed. Bridging to TAVI will provide further options to high‐risk patients who cannot be bridged to conventional AVR. The role of BAV in bridging to TAVI merits further study. (J Interven Cardiol 2010;23:499–508)     

Impact of coronary artery disease on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: Coronary artery disease (CAD) negatively impacts prognosis of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement and revascularization is generally recommended at the time of surgery. Implications of CAD and preprocedural revascularization in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are not known. Method: Patients who underwent successful TAVI from January 2005 to December 2007 were retrospectively divided into five groups according to the extent of CAD assessed with the Duke Myocardial Jeopardy Score: no CAD, CAD with DMJS 0, 2, 4, and ≥6. Study endpoints included 30‐day and 1‐year survival, evolution of symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and mitral regurgitation (MR) and need of revascularization during follow‐up. Results: One hundred and thirty‐six patients were included, among which 104 (76.5%) had coexisting CAD. Thirty‐day mortality in the five study groups was respectively 6.3, 14.6, 7.1, 5.6, and 17.7% with no statistically significant difference between groups (P = 0.56). Overall survival rate at one year was 77.9% (95% CL: 70.9, 84.9) with no difference between groups (P = 0.63). Symptoms, LVEF, and MR all significantly improved in the first month after TAVI, but the extent of improvement did not differ between groups (P > 0.08). Revascularization after TAVI was uncommon. Conclusion: The presence of CAD or nonrevascularized myocardium was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events in this initial cohort. On the basis of these early results, complete revascularization may not constitute a prerequisite of TAVI. This conclusion will require re‐assessment as experience accrues in patients with extensive CAD. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The novel echo‐guided ProGlide technique during percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Objectives

The aim of this study was to assess clinical benefit of the Echo‐guided ProGlide technique in patients undergoing percutaneous transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF‐TAVI).

Background

The efficacy of the Echo‐guided ProGlide technique during percutaneous TF‐TAVI was not previously clarified.

Methods

A total of 121 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous TF‐TAVI at our institution between February 2014 and July 2017 were enrolled in this study. According to the introduction of this novel technique in March 2016, patients were divided into two groups (echo‐guided group who underwent TAVI from March 2016 to July 2017, n = 63; not echo‐guided group who underwent TAVI from February 2014 to February 2016, n = 58). The incidence of major vascular complications, defined per the Valve Academic Research Consortium‐2 criteria, and ProGlide complications including acute femoral artery stenosis or occlusion and bleeding requiring any intervention.

Results

The incidence of major vascular complication and ProGlide complication were significantly lower in the echo‐guided group than in not echo‐guided group (1.6% vs 17.2%, P < 0.002; 1.6% vs 15.5%, P = 0.003; respectively). Use of the Echo‐guided ProGlide technique was independently associated with prevention of ProGlide complications (odds ratio, 0.11; 95% confidential interval, 0.01‐0.76; P = 0.03).

Conclusions

This novel Echo‐guided ProGlide technique was associated with a lower rate of major vascular complications, particularly ProGlide complications during percutaneous TF‐TAVI.     

Outcomes of patients with low‐pressure aortic gradient undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: The risk/benefit balance of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with low‐gradient aortic stenosis (LGAS) remains to be well defined. Aim of the study was to investigate the impact of LGAS in patients undergoing TAVI. Methods: Medline, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched for articles reporting outcome of patients with LGAS undergoing TAVI. The primary endpoint was 12‐months all‐cause mortality and the secondary endpoint was 30‐day all‐cause mortality. Using event‐rates as dependent variable, a meta‐regression was performed to test for interaction between baseline clinical features (age, gender, diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and type of implanted valve) and transaortic gradient for the primary endpoint. Results: Eight studies with a total of 12,589 patients were included. Almost one‐third of the patients presented with LGAS (27.3%: 24.4–29.2). Median LVEF was 48% in patients with LGAS and 56% in patients with high‐gradient AS. Patients with LGAS were more likely to have diabetes mellitus, previous coronary artery disease, higher mean Logistic EuroSCORE, and lower EF. At 12 (12–16.6) months, low transaortic gradient emerged as independently associated with all‐cause death, both if evaluated as a dichotomous and continuous value (respectively OR 1.17; 1.11–1.23 and OR 1.02; 1–1.04, all CI 95%). Clinical variables, including EF did not affect this result. Conclusions: In a population of TAVI patients, LGAS appears to be independently related to dismal prognosis. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Valve prosthesis distortion after cardiac compression in a patient who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI)

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been developed as an alternative to conventional aortic valve replacement for the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis in high‐risk patients. Nevertheless, TAVI has been associated with serious complications such as stroke, vascular injury, renal failure, and arrhythmia. Herein we describe a case of distortion of the Edward‐Sapien prosthesis (Edwards Lifesciences, USA), which was mounted on a balloon‐expandable stent, after chest compression for cardiac resuscitation in a patient who underwent TAVI for severe aortic stenosis. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Stenting of the unprotected left main coronary artery in patients with severe aortic stenosis prior to percutaneous valve interventions

AimsHigh-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are candidates for transcatheter valve implantation (TAVI) or balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) may additionally require revascularization of the unprotected left main coronary artery (UPLM). We aimed to assess the feasibility and procedural safety of UPLM stenting in such patients.Methods and ResultsTen cases of UPLM stenting prior to BAV or TAVI at three medical centers over a 2-year period were identified. Mean age was 84±4 years, aortic valve area was 0.70±0.12 cm², left ventricular ejection fraction was 58%±3%, and logistic EuroScore was 32±17. Intraaortic balloon counterpulsation was used in three patients. A single stent was used in seven patients, and two stents were used in three patients. One patient received a bare-metal stent, and the others received drug-eluting stents. No procedural complications occurred, and the patients were hemodynamically stable. Three patients subsequently underwent BAV, and seven underwent TAVI. During 6 months of follow-up, two patients died: one due to AS restenosis 6 months after BAV and one due to vascular complications 18 days after TAVI (34 days after UPLM stenting).ConclusionsStenting of the UPLM in patients with severe AS prior to percutaneous valve intervention seems feasible and safe. This approach may enable more patients to achieve comprehensive percutaneous therapy for severe coronary and valvular disease.     

Transaortic transcatheter aortic valve implantation using edwards sapien valve

Objectives: To evaluate feasibility and outcome of Transoartic Transcatheter Sapien valve implantation. Background: Transcatheter Aortic valve implantation (TAVI) using the Edwards SAPIEN device (Edwards LifeScience, Irvine, CA) is usually performed via the transfemoral (TF) or transapical (TA) routes. Some patients are not suitable for these approaches. We report our experience with the novel transaortic (TAo) approach via a partial upper sternotomy and discuss the advantages and future applications. Methods: Between January 2008 to March 2011 193 patients with severe aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the Edwards SAPIEN bioprosthesis at the St. Thomas' Hospital, London. 108 patients were unable to undergo a TF‐TAVI and of those 17 were accepted for a TAo‐TAVI on the basis of anatomy, risk, LV function, and significant respiratory disease. Results: The TAo‐TAVI group (n = 17) had more prevalent respiratory disease than the TA‐TAVI group (47.0% vs. 18.7%, P = 0.011). Otherwise the groups were similar in demographics and history. Despite this the 30 day mortalities were not significantly different between the groups (TAo‐TAVI 4.3% at 30 days versus TA‐TAVI 7.7%, P = 0.670). There were no significant differences in procedural complications. Conclusions: The TA‐TAVI approach may not be desirable in patients with severe chest deformity, poor lung function or poor left ventricular function. TAo‐TAVI via a partial sternotomy is safe and feasible in these patients. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.