Literature DB >> 28963771

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for stenotic bicuspid aortic valves: Systematic review and meta analyses of observational studies.

Gautam Reddy1, Zhen Wang1, Rick A Nishimura1, Kevin L Greason1, Sung-Han Yoon2, Raj R Makkar2, David R Holmes1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analyses of observational studies of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis (BcAV).
BACKGROUND: TAVR for BcAV stenosis has been associated with an increased incidence of paravalvular leaks, valve malposition, pacemaker placement and all-cause mortality. The conclusions drawn have been limited by small sample sizes. The use of TAVR for BcAV stenosis remains controversial.
METHODS: We searched multiple databases from the inception of the databases through September 30, 2016 for studies of TAVR for BcAV stenosis. We included all observational studies with more than one patient and at least 1 month of outcomes.
RESULTS: We analyzed 13 observational studies with 758 patients. Meta analyses showed device success rate of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 90.2% to 98.5%] and an early safety event in 16.9% [95% CI 12.2% to 22%]. At 30 days, moderate to severe paravalvular leak was seen in 12.2% [95% CI 3.1% to 24.8%] and new pacemaker implantation in 17.9% [95% CI 14.2% to 22%]. All-cause mortality was 3.7% [95% CI 2.1% to 5.6%], which should be viewed in the context of an STS PROM of 5.0%.
CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that TAVR for BcAV is not associated with excess mortality. The incidence of paravalvular leaks and pacemaker implant is increased compared to tricuspid aortic valve cohorts undergoing TAVR, and operators should weigh these potential complications against the clinical benefit provided by TAVR for BcAV patients at high risk for surgical valve replacement.
© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic stenosis; bicuspid valve; meta analysis; transcatheter valve

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28963771     DOI: 10.1002/ccd.27340

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv        ISSN: 1522-1946            Impact factor:   2.692


  11 in total

Review 1.  Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valves.

Authors:  Amisha Patel; Martin B Leon
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2018-11       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 2.  Narrative review of the contemporary surgical treatment of unicuspid aortic valve disease.

Authors:  Maria von Stumm; Tatjana Sequeira-Gross; Johannes Petersen; Shiho Naito; Lisa Müller; Christoph Sinning; Evaldas Girdauskas
Journal:  Cardiovasc Diagn Ther       Date:  2021-04

Review 3.  Should All Low-risk Patients Now Be Considered for TAVR? Operative Risk, Clinical, and Anatomic Considerations.

Authors:  Saima Siddique; Hemal Gada; Mubashir A Mumtaz; Amit N Vora
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2019-11-28       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 4.  Comparing outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with stenotic bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Napatt Kanjanahattakij; Benjamin Horn; Wasawat Vutthikraivit; Sylvia Marie Biso; Mary Rodriguez Ziccardi; Marvin Louis Roy Lu; Pattara Rattanawong
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2018-07-18       Impact factor: 2.882

5.  Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis.

Authors:  Tamunoinemi Bob-Manuel; Mark R Heckle; Ikechukwu A Ifedili; Jiajing Wang; Uzoma N Ibebuogu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2019-03

Review 6.  Moderate Aortic Stenosis and Reduced Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction: Current Evidence and Challenges Ahead.

Authors:  Ernest Spitzer; Ben Ren; Herbert Kroon; Lennart van Gils; Olivier Manintveld; Joost Daemen; Felix Zijlstra; Peter P de Jaegere; Marcel L Geleijnse; Nicolas M Van Mieghem
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-08-17

7.  One-Year Mortality in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Stenotic Bicuspid versus Tricuspid Aortic Valves: A Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.

Authors:  Raymundo A Quintana; Dominique J Monlezun; Adrian DaSilva-DeAbreu; Uday G Sandhu; Derick Okwan-Duodu; Jonanlis Ramírez; Ali E Denktas; Hani Jneid; David Paniagua
Journal:  J Interv Cardiol       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Comparison of the results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve.

Authors:  Piotr A Chodór; Krzysztof Wilczek; Karolina Chodór-Rozwadowska; Roman Przybylski; Jan Głowacki; Tomasz Niklewski; Łukasz Włoch; Mariusz Gąsior; Marian Zembala; Zbigniew Kalarus
Journal:  Postepy Kardiol Interwencyjnej       Date:  2021-03-27       Impact factor: 1.426

9.  Challenges When Expanding Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation to Younger Patients.

Authors:  Ole De Backer; Lars Søndergaard
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2018-05-11

10.  Transcatheter and surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve.

Authors:  Annastiina Husso; Juhani Airaksinen; Tatu Juvonen; Mika Laine; Sebastian Dahlbacka; Marko Virtanen; Matti Niemelä; Timo Mäkikallio; Mikko Savontaus; Markku Eskola; Peter Raivio; Antti Valtola; Fausto Biancari
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2020-10-24       Impact factor: 5.460

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.