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.     

Balloon valuloplasty prior to transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation in a degenerated mitroflow aortic bioprosthesis

Transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation is an emerging treatment option for high‐risk patients with failing aortic bioprostheses. The presence of the prosthesis stents is thought to prevent coronary artery obstruction, a known complication of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in the native aortic valve. The Sorin Mitroflow aortic bioprosthesis (Sorin Group, Saluggia, Italy) has a particular design in that the pericardial leaflets are mounted outside the valve stent. As a consequence, the pericardial leaflets of this prosthesis may be displaced well away from the stents during the deployment of transcatheter valves. This might explain why both the cases of coronary occlusion following valve‐in‐valve implantation reported to date occurred in patients with a malfunctioning Mitroflow bioprosthesis. We describe a patient with a malfunctioning 25 mm Mitroflow bioprosthesis successfully treated by percutaneous transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation, and discuss the role that balloon aortic valvuloplasty plays in the performance of this delicate procedure. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Valve‐in‐valve implantation with a 23‐mm balloon‐expandable transcatheter heart valve for the treatment of a 19‐mm stentless bioprosthesis severe aortic regurgitation using a strategy of “extreme” underfilling

We report a case of valve‐in‐valve (ViV) implantation by transfemoral approach with a 23‐mm balloon‐expandable prosthesis inside a stentless 19‐mm acutely degenerated bioprosthesis, using a strategy of “extreme” underfilling. A 74‐year‐old patient presented to our institution in cardiogenic shock. An initial transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) showed severe central aortic regurgitation (AR) due to a torn leaflet. She was deemed inoperable and considered for urgent transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Given the fairly small true internal diameter, a strategy of 3‐cc underfilling of a 23‐mm transcatheter heart valve (THV) was planned. However, the final implantation was performed with 5‐cc underfilling due to the incapacity to deliver the entire amount of fluid contained in the inflation syringe. TEE guidance confirmed the successful positioning and deployment of the prosthesis, with no AR and a mean gradient of 25 mm Hg. While implantation of a smaller prosthesis (20 mm) was debated during the Heart Team discussion, the risk of valve embolization due to inadequate anchoring inside the stentless prosthesis led to the selection of a 23‐mm THV. At 6‐month follow‐up, the patient was in NYHA class I, with no AR and a mean gradient of 28 mm Hg. We report for the first time the use of in vivo THV with 5‐cc underfilling with no acute or short‐term structural failure, and the first ViV implantation by transfemoral approach with a 23‐mm balloon‐expandable prosthesis inside a stentless 19‐mm bioprosthesis. The current report presents the challenges related to ViV implantation inside a small stentless bioprosthesis and offers practical ways to overcome them. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Hybrid trans‐apical atrioventricular valve‐in‐valve implantation in Fontan circulation

Trans‐apical approach has been proved successful in failing surgical bio‐prosthesis in both mitral and aortic position in adult patients. Recently, valve‐in‐valve treatments have been applied even in patients with complex congenital heart disease. Here, we report the case of a 32 years old lady with left atrial isomerism, complete AV septal defect, interrupted inferior vena cava with azygos continuation who underwent Kawashima procedure with atrial Fontan. Severe systemic atrioventricular valve regurgitation necessitated a 33 mm Perimount valve implantation and conversion to lateral tunnel Fontan. After only 4 years there was severe valve stenosis and the patient underwent successful trans‐apical transcatheter implantation of a 29 mm Sapien valve.     

First‐in‐man case report of the use of an Edwards‐Sapien valve to treat a regurgitant CoreValve aortic valve prosthesis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an alternative to conventional aortic valve replacement for patients at high surgical risk, with favorable procedural outcomes. Aortic regurgitation remains an off‐label indication. Recent case reports describe the successful use of a second CoreValve inside a malpositioned first CoreValve. In the current case, we report for the first time a valve‐in‐valve procedure for the treatment of a severely insufficient CoreValve prosthesis using the Edwards‐Sapien prosthesis. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Series of transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantations in high‐risk patients with degenerated bioprostheses in aortic and mitral position

Objectives: We report our experience with transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantations in patients with degenerated bioprostheses in aortic and mitral position. Background: Xenograft degeneration is a potential problem after biological valve replacement. Reoperation remains the gold standard with very good short‐ and long‐term results. In selected patients not suitable for surgery however, interventional techniques for valve implantation and repair may be valuable alternative treatment options with regard to the good results of transcatheter valve implantation for native aortic valve stenosis. Methods: Five patients presented with significant xenograft degeneration 15.4 ± 5.2 years after aortic (n = 4) and mitral (n = 1) valve replacement. Mean patient age was 82.0 ± 6.5 years and predicted operative mortality was 55.8% ± 18.9% (logistic EuroSCORE). Transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation was performed successfully through a transapical access in all patients. A 23‐mm Edwards Sapien valve was deployed into the degenerated valve prosthesis. Results: Mean transvalvular gradients were reduced from 31.2 ± 17.4 to 19.0 ± 12.4 mm Hg in aortic and from 9 to 3 mm Hg in mitral position without significant regurgitation in any of these patients. Two patients died within 30 days due to low cardiac output and acute hemorrhage, respectively, one of whom presented with a EuroSCORE of 88.9%. Conclusions: With growing need for reoperative valve replacement in elderly patients with disproportional operative risks, transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation in aortic and mitral position offers an alternative treatment option. Although valve function after transcatheter implantation was good in all patients, two high risk patients died in the postoperative period due to their significant comorbidities, underscoring the bail‐out character of this procedure. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Urgent trans‐axillary valve‐in‐valve procedure using the Edwards 16‐F expandable introducer

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation could represent an alternative option to conventional surgery in high‐risk patients with degeneration of aortic bioprosthesis. Herein, we report the performance of a valve‐in‐valve procedure in urgent conditions and via the left axillary artery in a patient with patent left internal mammary artery coronary graft. A 23‐mm Edwards Sapien^® transcatheter valve was deployed within a 23‐mm Edwards Magna Ease bioprosthesis through the novel Edwards 16‐F expandable introducer. In this non‐elective case, the expandable introducer allowed a safe procedure, reduced the risk of subclavian injury, and preserved the left internal mammary artery graft flow. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Assessment of trans‐aortic pressure gradient using a coronary pressure wire in patients with mechanical aortic and mitral valve prostheses

Accurate evaluation of trans‐aortic valvular pressure gradients is challenging in cases where dual mechanical aortic and mitral valve prostheses are present. Non‐invasive Doppler echocardiographic imaging has its limitations due to multiple geometric assumptions. Invasive measurement of trans‐valvular gradients with cardiac catheterization can provide further information in patients with two mechanical valves, where simultaneous pressure measurements in the left ventricle and ascending aorta must be obtained. Obtaining access to the left ventricle via the mitral valve after a trans‐septal puncture is not feasible in the case of a concomitant mechanical mitral valve, whereas left ventricular apical puncture technique is associated with high procedural risks. Retrograde crossing of a bileaflet mechanical aortic prosthesis with standard catheters is associated with the risk of catheter entrapment and acute valvular regurgitation. In these cases, the assessment of trans‐valvular gradients using a 0.014? diameter coronary pressure wire technique has been described in a few case reports. We present the case of a 76‐year‐old female with rheumatic valvular heart disease who underwent mechanical aortic and mitral valve replacement in the past. She presented with decompensated heart failure and echocardiographic findings suggestive of elevated pressure gradient across the mechanical aortic valve prosthesis. The use of a high‐fidelity 0.014? diameter coronary pressure guidewire resulted in the detection of a normal trans‐valvular pressure gradient across the mechanical aortic valve. This avoided a high‐risk third redo valve surgery in our patient. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Implantation of two self‐expanding aortic bioprosthetic valves during the same procedure—Insights into valve‐in‐valve implantation (“Russian doll concept”)

Transcatheter aortic value implantation has gained acceptance as a treatment for elderly patients considered high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. There are still, however, many unresolved clinical and technical issues. The occurrence of transcatheter aortic valve‐in‐valve implantation has been reported anecdotally. Aside from a single case report, there is little literature on this topic. This study was conducted to evaluate the procedural, imaging, and clinical outcomes of patients who underwent transcatheter valve‐in‐valve implantation with two self‐expanding aortic valve bioprostheses during the same procedure. We discuss also the potential valve of on‐line quantitative angiography for assessing the depth of valve implantation and the need to implant a second valve. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Treatment of a degenerative stenosed CoreValve® aortic bioprosthesis by transcatheter valve‐in‐valve insertion

Background : Transcatheter aortic valve insertion (TAVI) is an emerging therapy in patients at high risk for open heart surgery. The long‐term durability of the bioprosthesis is unknown. This is the first report of a severely degeneratively stenosed 2nd generation 26 mm CoreValve^® aortic bioprosthesis which occurred five and a half years after TAVI. Methods and Results : A 92‐year‐old patient presented with decompensated heart failure NYHA class IV, pulmonary edema, and severe pulmonary hypertension. Echocardiography revealed critical AV‐stenosis due to heavily calcified bioprosthetic valve leaflets. Due to high surgical risk with an EuroSCORE of 64.97% and a STS‐mortality score of 27.0%, we decided to attempt a valve‐in‐valve insertion of a 3rd generation CoreValve^® prosthesis of the same size. Following the delicate retrograde passage of the calcified valve with a preformed stiff wire, balloon valvuloplasty of the severely stenosed CoreValve^® prosthesis under rapid right ventricular pacing was complicated by two balloon catheter ruptures. Insertion of the 3rd generation CoreValve^® prosthesis of the same size was quite complex but finally it was successfully completed. There was mild periprosthetic regurgitation and significant decrease in transaortic pressure without residual transvalvular gradient immediately after TAVI. Echocardiography and clinical follow‐up at 72 hr after TAVI confirmed excellent valve function with a decrease in systolic pulmonary artery pressure from 70 mm Hg to 35 mm Hg, increase in LV‐EF from 35% to 45%, and improvement of functional status from NYHA IV to NYHA II. The patient was discharged in good medical conditions at day eight. Conclusion : Degenerative stenosis of a CoreValve^® bioprothesis may be observed during long‐term follow‐up after successful TAVI for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis. A second valve‐in‐valve insertion appears feasible but may require particular interventional approaches. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Valve‐in‐valve using an Edwards Sapien XT into a JenaValve in a patient with a low originating left coronary artery and a heavily calcified aorta

Coronary obstruction during transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a potentially life‐threatening complication. Most of the widely used transcatheter heart valves require a certain distance between the basal aortic annular plane and the origins of the coronary arteries. We report the case of a successful valve‐in‐valve procedure with an Edwards SAPIEN XT valve into a JenaValve as a bail‐out procedure in a patient with a low originating left coronary artery and a heavily calcified aorta. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Simultaneous transapical aortic and mitral valve‐in‐valve implantation for double prostheses dysfunction: Case report and technical insights

Transcatheter “Valve‐in‐Valve” implantation (ViV) has shown promising results in high‐risk patients suffering from structural valve deterioration (SVD) of a previously implanted heart valve bioprosthesis. We present a case of a 68‐year‐old woman with a history of three previous cardiac operations on the aortic and mitral valve. At the time of admission she was severely symptomatic due to a simultaneous SVD of a 23 mm aortic and of a 29 mm mitral St. Jude Biocor bioprosthesis. Because of the history of several cardiac operations and to her comorbidities, the patient was considered with an extremely high surgical risk profile and was therefore scheduled for double concomitant mitral and aortic ViV. Through a trans‐apical approach, the patient underwent 23 and 29 mm Edwards Sapien XT implantation in the aortic and mitral bioprosthesis, respectively. The procedure was uneventful as well as the following hospital stay. At 6‐months follow‐up the patient is in NYHA class I. Echocardiography shows that the aortic bioprosthesis has no leak and the mean gradient is 20 mm Hg while the mitral valve has mild leak and maximum and mean gradients are 21 and 10 mm Hg, respectively. The three main technical aspects that should be carefully considered in double concomitant ViV are: sequence of valve deployment (whether to implant the mitral or the aortic valve first), choice of access and valve sizing. In conclusion, double simultaneous trans‐apical mitral and aortic ViV is technically feasible. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Percutaneous closure of acute aorto‐right ventricular fistula following transcatheter bicuspid aortic valve replacement

We report a case of acute aorto‐right ventricular fistula following transcatheter bicuspid aortic valve replacement and subsequent percutaneous closure. The diagnosis and treatment of this rare complication is illustrated through multi‐modality imaging. We hypothesize that the patient's heavily calcified bicuspid aortic valve anatomy led to asymmetric deployment of the transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) prosthesis, traumatizing the right sinus of Valsalva at the distal edge of the TAVR stent and ultimately fistulized to the right ventricle. The patient acutely decompensated with heart failure five days after TAVR and underwent emergent intervention. The aorto‐right ventricular fistula was closed using an 18‐mm septal occluder device with marked clinical recovery. Transcatheter closure is a viable treatment option for acute aorto‐right ventricular fistula. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Local delivery of sirolimus nanoparticles for the treatment of in‐stent restenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a possible, although off‐label, alternative to conventional aortic valve replacement for high‐surgical‐risk patients with severe, non‐calcified aortic regurgitation (AR). To date, feasibility has only been demonstrated with the Medtronic CoreValve prosthesis (MCV). This prosthesis needs the aortic sinuses to have enough width to avoid coronary obstruction. We report a case of MCV implantation for severe AR where the narrow aortic root theoretically precluded the technique. Good procedural outcome was achieved thanks to a strategy of implantation with planned positioning of the prosthesis leaflets away from the coronary arteries. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Compassionate use of the self‐expandable medtronic corevalve prosthesis for the treatment of pure aortic regurgitation in a patient at prohibitive risk for surgical valve replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a viable treatment option for high‐ and prohibitive‐risk patients with severe, calcified pure or predominant aortic valve stenosis, but not for pure aortic valve regurgitation. In fact, the use of TAVI for this indication is even considered unlikely due to the lack of calcium which appears essential for anchoring the stent‐valve and prevents dislocation. We report a case of a patient with severe, symptomatic pure aortic regurgitation, and a history of two previous open‐heart surgeries who was successfully treated by compassionate use implantation of an oversized Medtronic CoreValve prosthesis as an ultima ratio treatment option. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

First report of a simultaneous transcatheter mitral valve‐in‐valve and aortic valve replacement in a left ventricular assist device patient

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement is standard of care for patients with severe aortic stenosis at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. Although not intended for treatment of primary aortic insufficiency, several transcatheter aortic valve prostheses have been used to treat patients with severe aortic insufficiency (AI), including patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD), in whom significant AI is not uncommon. Similarly, transcatheter valve replacements have been used for valve‐in‐valve treatment, in the pulmonary, aortic, and mitral positions, either via a retrograde femoral approach or antegrade transseptal approach (mitral valve‐in‐valve). In this case report, we report an LVAD patient with severe aortic insufficiency and severe bioprosthetic mitral prosthetic stenosis, in whom we successfully performed transfemoral aortic valve replacement and transfemoral mitral valve‐in‐valve replacement via a transseptal approach. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for treatment of failing homograft with preexisting mechanical mitral prosthesis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is increasingly used to treat bioprosthetic degeneration. Valve‐in‐valve technique has been performed successfully to treat homograft, stentless, and stented bioprosthetic dysfunction. The presence of a prosthesis in the mitral position can make the transcatheter aortic valve implantation procedure challenging due to proximity of the mitral and aortic annuli. We describe the case of a 66‐year‐old who underwent the first successful implantation of Edwards Sapien device in a failing homograft in the presence of a mechanical mitral valve prosthesis. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation in a dysfunctional Trifecta® bioprothesis after high‐pressure balloon fracturing

A percutaneous pulmonary valve‐in‐valve (PPVIV) implantation in small surgical tissue valves may be limited due to the valve's initial diameter. Fracturing of the valve's integrity by high‐pressure balloons may enhance the diameter and facilitate subsequent PPVIV with a large valve. To the best of our knowledge, the Trifecta® valve seemed not to be accessible for fracturing. We report a case of successful 19‐mm Trifecta valve fracturing, followed by PPVIV using a 26‐mm Edwards SAPIEN 3 valve in pulmonary position. By repetitively using a high‐pressure balloon 5 mm larger than the labeled valve size, we were able to fracture the valve's integrity and implant a 26‐mm valve thereafter. Therefore, Trifecta valve appears to be suitable for valve ring fracturing and subsequent PPVIV in certain patients.     

Transcatheter aortic valve‐in‐valve implantation of a corevalve in a degenerated stenotic sapien heart valve prosthesis

Treatment options for re‐stenotic aortic valve prosthesis implanted by transcatheter technique have not been evaluated systematically. We describe the case of a 75‐year‐old dialysis patient who was treated by transcatheter aortic valve implantation 3.5 years ago and now presented with severe stenosis of the percutaneous heart valve. The patient was initially treated with a trans‐apical implantation of an Edwards Sapien 26 mm balloon expandable valve. The patient remained asymptomatic for 3 years when he presented with increasing shortness of breath and significant calcification of the valve prosthesis on transesophageal echocardiography. Valve‐in‐valve percutaneous heart valve implantation using a 26‐mm CoreValve prosthesis was performed under local anesthesia. The prosthesis was implanted without prior valvuloplasty. Pacing with a frequency of 140/min was applied during placement of the valve prosthesis. Positioning was done with great care using only fluoroscopic guidance with the aim to have the ventricular strut end of the CoreValve prosthesis 5 mm higher than the ventricular strut end of the Edwards Sapien prosthesis. After placement of the CoreValve prosthesis within the Edwards Sapien valve additional valvuloplasty with rapid pacing was performed in order to further expand the CoreValve prosthesis. The final result was associated with a remaining mean gradient of 5 mm Hg and no aortic regurgitation. In conclusion, implantation of a CoreValve prosthesis for treatment of a restenotic Edwards Sapien prosthesis is feasible and is associated with a good functional result. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Bioprosthetic aortic valve leaflet disruption with high energy electrocautery to prevent coronary artery obstruction during valve‐in‐valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is well‐established for the treatment of bioprosthetic aortic valve stenosis (AS) in high surgical risk patients. Coronary artery obstruction from displacement of the bioprosthetic valve leaflets during valve‐in‐valve (VIV) TAVR is a rare, but potentially fatal, complication. Recently, the bioprosthetic aortic scallop intentional laceration to prevent iatrogenic coronary artery obstruction (BASILICA) procedure was developed as a method for disrupting bioprosthetic leaflets in patients undergoing VIV TAVR at high risk for coronary obstruction. This case describes a successful VIV TAVR utilizing a simplified concept of the BASILICA technique in a patient where the full procedure could not be completed.