David N Ranney1, Judson B Williams1, Andrew Wang2, Jeffrey G Gaca1. 1. Division of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter valve-in-valve (VIV) procedures are an alternative to standard surgical valve replacement in high risk patients. METHODS: Cases in which a commercially approved transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) device was used for a nonaortic VIV procedure between November 2013 and September 2015 are reviewed. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural details, patient survival, and symptom severity by NYHA class at follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: All patients were heart-team determined high risk for conventional redo surgery (mean STS PROM = 6.8 ± 2.2%). Five patients underwent VIV replacement in the nonaortic position, four for bioprosthetic mitral valve dysfunction, and one for bioprosthetic tricuspid valve dysfunction. Bioprosthetic failure was due to stenosis in three patients and regurgitation in two others. A balloon-expandable device was used for all patients (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA). Transcatheter VIV replacement was accomplished by the transapical (mitral) and transfemoral venous (tricuspid) approaches. Median postoperative length of stay was five days (range 3-12). No deaths occurred at a mean follow-up of 21 months. NYHA class at follow-up decreased from class IV at baseline to class I or II for all patients. No paravalvular leaks greater than trivial were encountered. Median mean gradient following mitral replacement was 6.5 mmHg (range 6-13 mmHg), and following tricuspid replacement was 4 mmHg. Postoperative complications included hematuria, epistaxis, acute kidney injury, and atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter VIV implantation in the nonaortic position for dysfunctional bioprostheses can be performed safely with favorable clinical outcomes using a balloon expandable TAVR device. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12745 (J Card Surg 2016;31:282-288).
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter valve-in-valve (VIV) procedures are an alternative to standard surgical valve replacement in high risk patients. METHODS: Cases in which a commercially approved transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) device was used for a nonaortic VIV procedure between November 2013 and September 2015 are reviewed. Clinical, echocardiographic, and procedural details, patient survival, and symptom severity by NYHA class at follow-up were assessed. RESULTS: All patients were heart-team determined high risk for conventional redo surgery (mean STS PROM = 6.8 ± 2.2%). Five patients underwent VIV replacement in the nonaortic position, four for bioprosthetic mitral valve dysfunction, and one for bioprosthetic tricuspid valve dysfunction. Bioprosthetic failure was due to stenosis in three patients and regurgitation in two others. A balloon-expandable device was used for all patients (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA). Transcatheter VIV replacement was accomplished by the transapical (mitral) and transfemoral venous (tricuspid) approaches. Median postoperative length of stay was five days (range 3-12). No deaths occurred at a mean follow-up of 21 months. NYHA class at follow-up decreased from class IV at baseline to class I or II for all patients. No paravalvular leaks greater than trivial were encountered. Median mean gradient following mitral replacement was 6.5 mmHg (range 6-13 mmHg), and following tricuspid replacement was 4 mmHg. Postoperative complications included hematuria, epistaxis, acute kidney injury, and atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter VIV implantation in the nonaortic position for dysfunctional bioprostheses can be performed safely with favorable clinical outcomes using a balloon expandable TAVR device. doi: 10.1111/jocs.12745 (J Card Surg 2016;31:282-288).
Authors: Ronen Gurvitch; Anson Cheung; Jian Ye; David A Wood; Alexander B Willson; Stefan Toggweiler; Ronald Binder; John G Webb Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: John G Webb; David A Wood; Jian Ye; Ronen Gurvitch; Jean-Bernard Masson; Josep Rodés-Cabau; Mark Osten; Eric Horlick; O Wendler; Eric Dumont; Ronald G Carere; Namal Wijesinghe; Fabian Nietlispach; Mark Johnson; Chrisopher R Thompson; Robert Moss; Jonathon Leipsic; Brad Munt; Samuel V Lichtenstein; Anson Cheung Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-04-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Danny Dvir; John Webb; Stephen Brecker; Sabine Bleiziffer; David Hildick-Smith; Antonio Colombo; Fleur Descoutures; Christian Hengstenberg; Neil E Moat; Raffi Bekeredjian; Massimo Napodano; Luca Testa; Thierry Lefevre; Victor Guetta; Henrik Nissen; José-María Hernández; David Roy; Rui C Teles; Amit Segev; Nicolas Dumonteil; Claudia Fiorina; Michael Gotzmann; Didier Tchetche; Mohamed Abdel-Wahab; Federico De Marco; Andreas Baumbach; Jean-Claude Laborde; Ran Kornowski Journal: Circulation Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Anson W Cheung; Ronen Gurvitch; Jian Ye; David Wood; Samuel V Lichtenstein; Christopher Thompson; John G Webb Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2011-01-26 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Anson Cheung; John G Webb; Daniel R Wong; Jian Ye; Jean-Bernard Masson; Ronald G Carere; Samuel V Lichtenstein Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2009-03 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Manuel Wilbring; Konstantin Alexiou; Sems Malte Tugtekin; Bjoern Sill; Peter Hammer; Torsten Schmidt; Gregor Simonis; Klaus Matschke; Utz Kappert Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 4.330
Authors: Anson Cheung; John G Webb; Marco Barbanti; Melanie Freeman; Ronald K Binder; Christopher Thompson; David A Wood; Jian Ye Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 24.094