BACKGROUND: Significant postprocedural aortic regurgitation (AR) is observed in 10% to 20% of cases after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The prognostic value and the predictors of such a complication in balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expandable (SE) TAVR remain unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAVR was performed in 3195 consecutive patients at 34 hospitals. Postprocedural transthoracic echocardiography was performed in 2769 (92%) patients of the eligible population, and these patients constituted the study group. Median follow-up was 306 days (Q1-Q3=178-490). BE and SE devices were implanted in 67.6% (n=1872) and 32.4% (n=897). Delivery was femoral (75.3%) or nonfemoral (24.7%). A postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was observed in 15.8% and was more frequent in SE (21.5%) than in BE-TAVR (13.0%, P=0.0001). Extensive multivariable analysis confirmed that the use of a SE device was one of the most powerful independent predictors of postprocedural AR≥grade 2. For BE-TAVR, 8 independent predictors of postprocedural AR≥grade 2 were identified including femoral delivery (P=0.04), larger aortic annulus (P=0.0004), and smaller prosthesis diameter (P=0.0001). For SE-TAVR, 2 independent predictors were identified including femoral delivery(P=0.0001). Aortic annulus and prosthesis diameter were not predictors of postprocedural AR for SE-TAVR. A postprocedural AR≥grade 2, but not a postprocedural AR=grade 1, was a strong independent predictor of 1-year mortality for BE (hazard ratio=2.50; P=0.0001) and SE-TAVR (hazard ratio=2.11; P=0.0001). Although postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was well tolerated in patients with AR≥grade 2 at baseline (1-year mortality=7%), it was associated with a very high mortality in other subgroups: renal failure (43%), AR<grade 2 at baseline (31%), low transaortic gradient (35%), or nonfemoral delivery (45%). CONCLUSIONS: Postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was observed in 15.8% of successful TAVR and was the strongest independent predictor of 1-year mortality. The use of the SE device was a powerful independent predictor of postprocedural AR≥grade 2.
BACKGROUND: Significant postprocedural aortic regurgitation (AR) is observed in 10% to 20% of cases after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The prognostic value and the predictors of such a complication in balloon-expandable (BE) and self-expandable (SE) TAVR remain unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAVR was performed in 3195 consecutive patients at 34 hospitals. Postprocedural transthoracic echocardiography was performed in 2769 (92%) patients of the eligible population, and these patients constituted the study group. Median follow-up was 306 days (Q1-Q3=178-490). BE and SE devices were implanted in 67.6% (n=1872) and 32.4% (n=897). Delivery was femoral (75.3%) or nonfemoral (24.7%). A postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was observed in 15.8% and was more frequent in SE (21.5%) than in BE-TAVR (13.0%, P=0.0001). Extensive multivariable analysis confirmed that the use of a SE device was one of the most powerful independent predictors of postprocedural AR≥grade 2. For BE-TAVR, 8 independent predictors of postprocedural AR≥grade 2 were identified including femoral delivery (P=0.04), larger aortic annulus (P=0.0004), and smaller prosthesis diameter (P=0.0001). For SE-TAVR, 2 independent predictors were identified including femoral delivery(P=0.0001). Aortic annulus and prosthesis diameter were not predictors of postprocedural AR for SE-TAVR. A postprocedural AR≥grade 2, but not a postprocedural AR=grade 1, was a strong independent predictor of 1-year mortality for BE (hazard ratio=2.50; P=0.0001) and SE-TAVR (hazard ratio=2.11; P=0.0001). Although postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was well tolerated in patients with AR≥grade 2 at baseline (1-year mortality=7%), it was associated with a very high mortality in other subgroups: renal failure (43%), AR<grade 2 at baseline (31%), low transaortic gradient (35%), or nonfemoral delivery (45%). CONCLUSIONS: Postprocedural AR≥grade 2 was observed in 15.8% of successful TAVR and was the strongest independent predictor of 1-year mortality. The use of the SE device was a powerful independent predictor of postprocedural AR≥grade 2.
Authors: Masahiko Asami; Thomas Pilgrim; Stefan Stortecky; Dik Heg; Eva Roost; Stephan Windecker; Lukas Hunziker Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2019-03-30 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Sabine Bleiziffer; Johan Bosmans; Stephen Brecker; Ulrich Gerckens; Peter Wenaweser; Corrado Tamburino; Axel Linke Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2017-05-08 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Ted E Feldman; Michael J Reardon; Vivek Rajagopal; Raj R Makkar; Tanvir K Bajwa; Neal S Kleiman; Axel Linke; Dean J Kereiakes; Ron Waksman; Vinod H Thourani; Robert C Stoler; Gregory J Mishkel; David G Rizik; Vijay S Iyer; Thomas G Gleason; Didier Tchétché; Joshua D Rovin; Maurice Buchbinder; Ian T Meredith; Matthias Götberg; Henrik Bjursten; Christopher Meduri; Michael H Salinger; Dominic J Allocco; Keith D Dawkins Journal: JAMA Date: 2018-01-02 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Beth Ripley; Tatiana Kelil; Michael K Cheezum; Alexandra Goncalves; Marcelo F Di Carli; Frank J Rybicki; Mike Steigner; Dimitrios Mitsouras; Ron Blankstein Journal: J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr Date: 2015-12-12