The Importance of Echocardiography in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Valvular heart diseases cause serious health problems in Turkey as well as in Western countries. According to a study conducted in Turkey, aortic stenosis (AS) is second after mitral valve disease among all valvular heart diseases. AS is frequently observed in elderly patients who have several cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidities. In symptomatic severe AS, surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR) is a definitive treatment. However, in elderly patients with left ventricular dysfunction and comorbidities, the risk of operative morbidity and mortality increases and outweighs the gain obtained from AVR surgery. As a result, almost one‐third of the patients with serious AS are considered ineligible for surgery. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an effective treatment in patients with symptomatic severe AS who have high risk for conventional surgery. Since being performed for the first time in 2002, with a procedure success rate reported as 95% and a mortality rate of 5%, TAVI has become a promising method. Assessment of vascular anatomy, aortic annular diameter, and left ventricular function may be useful for the appropriate selection of patients and may reduce the risk of complications. Cardiac imaging methods including 2D and 3D echocardiography and multidetector computed tomography are critical during the evaluation of suitable patients for TAVI as well as during and after the procedure. In this review, we describe the role of echocardiography methods in clinical practice for TAVI procedure in its entirety, i.e. from patient selection to guidance during the procedure, and subsequent monitoring.     

Contemporary review of severe aortic stenosis

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common form of valvular heart disease in the developed world, with a rising prevalence due to an ageing Australian population. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) offers a less invasive option for the treatment of severe AS, with evidence supporting TAVI compared with medical therapy in inoperable patients and superior with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in high‐risk patients. Equal outcomes have been observed in all‐comer intermediate‐risk populations. The Heart Team utilises a shared decision‐making approach between physicians and surgeons in risk‐stratifying patients and reduces the intrinsic bias that may occur if decisions are made in isolation. Geriatric assessment is useful for identifying preoperative frailty, a major risk factor for death post‐aortic valve intervention. In severe AS, a decision can be made collaboratively to pursue TAVI, SAVR, a Ross Procedure or conservative management. The learning curve associated with TAVI has improved markedly, with overall complication rates decreasing around the world. Contemporary changes in practice, such as conscious sedation without general anaesthesia, expedited recovery and early discharge, will likely improve cost‐effectiveness. In 2018, TAVI is a well‐established procedure in Australia that has revolutionised the management of severe AS. In the future, with an expanding elderly population, the number of patients to benefit from transcatheter therapies for severe AS is hypothesised to increase 4–10‐fold. Heart Team assessment is crucial in patients with severe AS to direct appropriate management.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Current status and future perspectives

Although surgical aortic valve replacement is the standard therapy for severe aortic stenosis(AS),about one third of patients are considered inoperable due to unacceptable surgical risk.Under medical treatment alone these patients have a very poor prognosis with a mortality rate of 50%at 2 years.Transcatheter aortic valve implantation(TAVI)has been used in these patients,and has shown robust results in the only randomized clinical trial of severe AS treatment performed so far.In this review,we will focus on the two commercially available systems:Edwards SAPIEN valve and CoreValve Revalving system.Both systems have demonstrated success rates of over 90%with 30-d mortality rates below 10%in the most recent transfemoral TAVI studies.Moreover,long-term studies have shown that the valves have good haemodynamic performance.Some studies are currently exploring the non-inferiority of TAVI procedures vs conventional surgery in high-risk patients,and long-term clinical results of the percutaneous valves.In this article we review the current status of TAVI including selection of patients,a comparison of available prostheses,results and complications of the procedure,clinical outcomes,and future perspectives.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patient with cardiogenic shock

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an established treatment option in patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, who are at high or intermediate risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. The vast majority of TAVI are performed on patients without acute decompensated heart failure. In this case report we present the successful TAVI in a patient with a cardiogenic shock.     

Acute coronary occlusion following TAVI

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has nowadays replaced open heart surgery as an alternative therapeutic tool in selected patients. Thirty‐five percent of patients with severe degenerative aortic valve stenosis (AS) remain untreated because of the existing comorbidities that increase their perioperative risk. TAVI is a relatively new technique that has “come to stay” in the everyday clinical practice considering, that is the only alternative to surgery and appears to have excellent long term results. Herein, we describe a vascular complication immediately after the implantation of the Edwards SAPIEN (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) prosthesis, followed by ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation 10 years after valve‐in‐valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation for failing aortic valve homograft root replacement

Valve‐in‐valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV‐TAVI) is an established therapy for a degenerated surgical bioprosthesis. TAVI‐in‐TAVI following ViV‐TAVI has not been previously performed. We report a high‐risk patient presenting with severe left ventricular failure secondary to undiagnosed critical aortic stenosis due to degeneration of the implanted transcatheter heart valve more than a decade after initial ViV‐TAVI for a failing stentless aortic valve homograft. Successful TAVI‐in‐TAVI reversed the clinical and echocardiographic changes of decompensated heart failure with no evidence of coronary obstruction.     

Advanced age and the clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implan-tation

Aortic valve stenosis （AS） is common in the elderly. Although surgical replacement of the valve has been the gold standard of management, many patients have been excluded from surgery because they were very old, frail, or had co-morbidities that increased operative risks. In the last decade, transcatheter aortic valve implantation （TAVI） has emerged as a new treatment option suitable for these patients. This article reviews the available literature on the role of TAVI in elderly patients with severe aortic stenosis. Published studies showed that elderly individuals who underwent TAVI experienced better in-hospital recovery, and similar short and mid-term mortality compared to those underwent surgical treatment of AS. However, long-term outcomes of TAVI in elderly patients are still unknown. The available data in the literature on the ef-fect of advanced age on clinical outcomes of TAVI are limited, but the data that are available suggest that TAVI is a beneficial and tolerable procedure in very old patients. Some of the expected complications after TAVI are reported more in the oldest patients such as vascular in-jures. Other complications were comparable in TAVI patients regardless of their age group. However, very old patients may need closer monitoring to avoid further morbidities and mortality.     

Impact des techniques interventionnelles dans le traitement de la valvulopathie aortique après revascularisation myocardique chirurgicale préalable

IntroductionPatients with a history of coronary artery bypass and aortic valve disease constitute a high-risk group for conventional redo surgery. The transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may be an alternative for high-risk patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of TAVI in the treatment of aortic valve disease after previous surgical coronary artery revascularization.Patients and methodsThis is a single-center retrospective, observational study, including 87 patients undergoing surgery for surgical heart valve replacement or TAVI from January 2007 to December 2013.ResultsThe introduction of transcatheter aortic valve implantation techniques has doubled the number of redo patients treated for aortic valve disease. From 2010 to 2013, the patients treated by conventional surgery diminished by 30%, with improved postoperative outcomes. This study allowed us to notice differences in patient's in terms of operative risk factors. For the same reasons no comparison was possible between 2 subgroup of patients. Hospital mortality was 6.4% for conventional aortic surgery and 20% for transcatheter aortic valve treatment.ConclusionSurgery remains the standard treatment for aortic valve disease even in redo patients, but TAVI becomes a very interesting tool as it may represent a tailored approach for our patients.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): Valve design and evolution

The efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in high surgical risk and inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) is rapidly gaining credibility with an ever-expanding body of supporting evidence. The potential of TAVI to be a treatment option for a significant cohort of patients with aortic stenosis has fuelled a drive for the optimum device and resulted in exponential advances in the technology with a focus on adverse event minimization and procedural simplification. Consequently, a plethora of new transcatheter valve choices are now available for clinical study or in the pipeline. The evaluation of past, current and emerging devices allows for an appreciation of the design considerations involved in this process and an insight to the future direction of the technology.     

Coronary artery disease and TAVI: Current evidence on a recurrent issue

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is a frequent finding in patients with aortic stenosis (AS). Concomitant coronary artery bypass and aortic valve replacement is considered the gold standard treatment in surgical candidates. However, limited evidence is available regarding the role of coronary revascularization in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). How to evaluate CAD severity in patients with AS, whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) needs to be performed and what is the timing for revascularization to minimize procedural risks, remains matters of debate. The aim of this review is to summarize epidemiology, diagnostic tools and possible options for CAD management in patients undergoing TAVI with specific focus on the pros and the cons of the different timing of PCI.     

In Process Citation

IntroductionTranscatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) and unacceptably high surgical risk.MethodsWe present our first two years’ experience with TAVI. A total of 76 AS patients were evaluated for TAVI and 23 of them underwent a TAVI procedure. These patients had a mean EuroSCORE of 22.4% and a mean age of 81.5 years, and were prospectively followed for a mean of 12.9 ± 11 months.ResultsThe percutaneous aortic valve was successfully implanted in 100% of the patients. Mortality at 30 days was 4%. The most common complications were access site-related bleeding and transfusion (22%), followed by new permanent pacemaker implantation (9%). After a mean follow-up of 12.9 months, survival was 87%. In a maximum follow-up of 30 months there were no cases of prosthesis dysfunction or cardiovascular death.ConclusionsTwo years after the introduction of a TAVI program in our center, the procedure has established itself as a safe and effective alternative for patients with severe AS and unacceptably high surgical risk.     

Initial German Experience With Transapical Implantation of a Second-Generation Transcatheter Heart Valve for the Treatment of Aortic Regurgitation

ObjectivesThis analysis reports on the initial German multicenter experience with the JenaValve (JenaValve Technology GmbH, Munich, Germany) transcatheter heart valve for the treatment of pure aortic regurgitation.BackgroundExperience with transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe aortic regurgitation is limited due to the risk of insufficient anchoring of the valve stent within the noncalcified aortic annulus.MethodsTransapical TAVI with a JenaValve for the treatment of severe aortic regurgitation was performed in 31 patients (age 73.8 ± 9.1 years) in 9 German centers. All patients were considered high risk for surgery (logistic EuroSCORE [European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation] 23.6 ± 14.5%) according to a local heart team consensus. Procedural results and clinical outcomes up to 6 months were analyzed.ResultsImplantation was successful in 30 of 31 cases (aortic annulus diameter 24.7 ± 1.5 mm); transcatheter heart valve dislodgement necessitated valve-in-valve implantation in 1 patient. Post-procedural aortic regurgitation was none/trace in 28 of 31 and mild in 3 of 31 patients. During follow-up, 2 patients underwent valvular reinterventions (surgical aortic valve replacement for endocarditis, valve-in-valve implantation for increasing paravalvular regurgitation). All-cause mortality was 12.9% and 19.3% at 30 days and 6 months, respectively. In the remaining patients, a significant improvement in New York Heart Association class was observed and persisted up to 6 months after TAVI.ConclusionsAortic regurgitation remains a challenging pathology for TAVI. After initial demonstration of feasibility, this multicenter study revealed the JenaValve transcatheter heart valve as a reasonable option in this subset of patients. However, a significant early noncardiac mortality related to the high-risk population emphasizes the need for careful patient selection.     

Next-Generation Transcatheter Heart Valves: Current Trials in Europe and the USA

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has proven to be a viable alternative for patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who are at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement. At the same time, there is increasing evidence that moderate-to-severe periprosthetic aortic regurgitation after TAVI is associated with dramatically increased mortality and morbidity. The issue of proper positioning of the valve, including the ability to reposition and recapture the device, must be dealt with before the use of TAVI can be extended to younger, healthier patients. The next generation of transcatheter heart valves will most likely address repositionability to facilitate accurate placement with additional features that minimize paravalvular leakage. Upcoming devices promise to improve outcomes and usability of current TAVI systems.     

Recent developments and controversies in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Interventional cardiology has been revolutionised by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), which has become established as the benchmark treatment for severe aortic stenosis in patients at high risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). Increased procedural familiarity and progression in device technology has enabled improvements to be made in complication rates, which have led to a commensurate expansion in the use of TAVI; it is now a viable alternative to AVR in patients at intermediate surgical risk, and has been used in cohorts such as those with bicuspid aortic valves or pure, severe aortic regurgitation. Given the rapid expansion in the use of TAVI, including cohorts of younger patients with fewer co‐morbidities, attention must be paid to further reducing remaining complications, such as cardiac tamponade or stroke. To this end, novel techniques and devices have been devised and trialled, with varying levels of success. Furthermore, significant work has gone into refining the technique with exploration of alternative imaging modalities, as well as alternative access routes to provide greater options for patients with challenging vascular anatomy. Whilst significant progress has been made with TAVI, areas of uncertainty remain such as the management of concomitant coronary artery disease and the optimum post‐procedure antiplatelet regimen. As such, research in this field continues apace, and is likely to continue as use of TAVI becomes more widespread. This review provides a summary of the existing evidence, as well as an overview of recent developments and contentious issues in the field of TAVI.     

Successful transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a Hodgkin lymphoma patient with severe aortic stenosis

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has emerged as an acceptable treatment modality for patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) who are deemed unsuitable for conventional surgical aortic valve replacement. TAVI not only provides the treatment of AS, but also makes some other diseases treatable by relieving hemodynamic distress resulting from AS. In this case report, we presented a 74-year-old patient with Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) that had been left untreated due to the development of acute pulmonary edema caused by severe degenerative AS during chemotherapy. This is the first report of the use of TAVI in a patient with HL.     

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is a life-threatening condition when left untreated. Aortic valve replacement (AVR) is the gold standard treatment for the majority of patients; however, transcatheter aortic valve implantation/replacement (TAVI/TAVR) has emerged as the preferred treatment for high-risk or inoperable patients. The concept of transcatheter heart valves originated in the 1960s and has evolved into the current Edwards Sapien and Medtronic CoreValve platforms available for clinical use. Complications following TAVI, including cerebrovascular events, perivalvular regurgitation, vascular injury, and heart block have decreased with experience and evolving technology, such that ongoing trials studying TAVI in lower risk patients have become tenable. The multidisciplinary team involving the cardiac surgeon and cardiologist plays an essential role in patient selection, procedural conduct, and perioperative care.     

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.     

Infective endocarditis following transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has recently emerged as a less invasive alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in high risk patients. Although several procedures have been performed worldwide, infective endocarditis (IE) has been reported to be a rare TAVI complication, nevertheless if IE occurs it represents a life-threatening condition and treatment is challenging. TAVI-IE are thus normally treated conservatively by targeted antibiotic therapy with a high reported mortality (40%). Surgical explant represent the definitive strategy but, the intervention is at a high risk (risk of complication 87%, with an in hospital mortality of about 47%). In the present paper, we report the case of a 71-year-old patient affected by an early endocarditis after TAVI (TAVI-IE) treated at our Institution by surgical explant. The case highlights a paradox: if TAVI procedures are indicated over traditional surgical valve replacement in treatment of high surgical risk patients, what should be the best management when TAVI-IE occurs in these same population of patients?     

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.     

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Aortic stenosis is the most important valvular heart disease affecting the elderly population. Surgical aortic valve replacement is the mainstay of treatment, although a substantial number of patients are considered high risk for surgery. Many of these patients do not undergo surgery and have poor outcomes from medically treated symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) provides a promising treatment option for some of these patients. Several devices are under investigation. The Edwards Sapien valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) and the CoreValve (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN) have the largest human experience to date. Initial data suggest that these devices have an acceptable safety profile and provide excellent hemodynamic relief of aortic stenosis. The Edwards Sapien valve is currently under investigation in the United States in the PARTNER (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valve) trial in high-risk surgical or inoperable patients; TAVI is available for clinical use in both Canada and Europe. TAVI is not used in low- or intermediate-risk surgical patients; however, future studies may prove its applicability in these subsets. The major complications of TAVI include access site-related problems and device malpositioning/migration. There are several new-generation prosthetic valves and delivery systems designed to be low profile and repositionable. Technical advances and refinement of the implantation methods may make TAVI even safer and ultimately a better treatment option, not only for patients with high surgical risk but also for those with moderate or low risk.