Literature DB >> 29735584

Bioprosthetic aortic valve durability in the era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

Erwan Salaun1,2, Marie-Annick Clavel1, Josep Rodés-Cabau1, Philippe Pibarot1.   

Abstract

The main limitation of bioprosthetic valves is their limited durability, which exposes the patient to the risk of aortic valve reintervention. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is considered a reasonable alternative to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with intermediate or high surgical risk. TAVI is now rapidly expanding towards the lower risk populations. Although the results of midterm durability of the transcatheter bioprostheses are encouraging, their long-term durability remains largely unknown. The objective of this review article is to present the definition, mechanisms, incidence, outcome and management of structural valve deterioration of aortic bioprostheses with specific emphasis on TAVI. The structural valve deterioration can be categorised into three stages: stage 1: morphological abnormalities (fibrocalcific remodelling and tear) of bioprosthesis valve leaflets without hemodynamic valve deterioration; stage 2: morphological abnormalities and moderate hemodynamic deterioration (increase in gradient and/or new onset of transvalvular regurgitation); and stage 3: morphological abnormalities and severe hemodynamic deterioration. Several specifics inherent to the TAVI including valve oversizing, manipulation, delivery, positioning and deployment may cause injuries to the valve leaflets and increase leaflet mechanical stress, which may limit the long-term durability of transcatheter bioprostheses. The selection of the type of aortic valve replacement and bioprosthesis should thus take into account the ratio between the demonstrated durability of the bioprostheses versus the life expectancy of the patient. Pending the publication of robust data on long-term durability of transcatheter bioprostheses, it appears reasonable to select SAVR with a bioprosthesis model that has well-established long-term durability in patients with low surgical risk and long life expectancy. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aortic regurgitation; aortic stenosis; cardiac computer tomographic (CT) imaging; echocardiography; prosthetic heart valves

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29735584     DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2017-311582

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Heart        ISSN: 1355-6037            Impact factor:   5.994


  17 in total

1.  In vitro hemodynamic assessment of a novel polymeric transcatheter aortic valve.

Authors:  Megan Heitkemper; Hoda Hatoum; Lakshmi Prasad Dasi
Journal:  J Mech Behav Biomed Mater       Date:  2019-06-19

Review 2.  Accelerated Cardiac Aging in Patients With Congenital Heart Disease.

Authors:  Dominga Iacobazzi; Valeria Vincenza Alvino; Massimo Caputo; Paolo Madeddu
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-05-26

Review 3.  Early Leaflet Thickening, Durability and Bioprosthetic Valve Failure in TAVR.

Authors:  Brian C Case; Jaffar M Khan; Toby Rogers
Journal:  Interv Cardiol Clin       Date:  2021-10

4.  Patient-Specific Immersed Finite Element-Difference Model of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

Authors:  Jordan A Brown; Jae H Lee; Margaret Anne Smith; David R Wells; Aaron Barrett; Charles Puelz; John P Vavalle; Boyce E Griffith
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2022-10-20       Impact factor: 4.219

5.  Patient-specific in vitro testing for evaluating TAVR clinical performance-A complementary approach to current ISO standard testing.

Authors:  Brandon J Kovarovic; Oren M Rotman; Puja Parikh; Marvin J Slepian; Danny Bluestein
Journal:  Artif Organs       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 3.094

Review 6.  Transcatheter Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Dysfunction: What We Know So Far.

Authors:  Fadi Sawaya; Troels H Jørgensen; Lars Søndergaard; Ole De Backer
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2019-10-04

7.  Degenerated Suturless Perceval with (Paravalvular Leak and AS) Treated by Valve in Valve using S3 Edward Valve.

Authors:  Mohammed Ali Balghith
Journal:  Heart Views       Date:  2019-11-14

8.  Impact of pre-existing comorbidities on outcomes of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement - rationale and design of the international IMPACT registry.

Authors:  Farhad Bakhtiary; Ali El-Sayed Ahmad; Rüdiger Autschbach; Peter Benedikt; Nikolaos Bonaros; Michael Borger; Oliver Dewald; Richard Feyrer; Hans-Joachim Geißler; Jürg Grünenfelder; Ka Yan Lam; Rainer Leyh; Andreas Liebold; Markus Czesla; Arash Mehdiani; Francesco Pollari; Saad Salamate; Justus Strauch; Andreas Vötsch; Alberto Weber; Daniel Wendt; Beate Botta; Peter Bramlage; Andreas Zierer
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2021-03-25       Impact factor: 1.637

9.  Noncalcific Mechanisms of Bioprosthetic Structural Valve Degeneration.

Authors:  Matteo Marro; Alexander P Kossar; Yingfei Xue; Antonio Frasca; Robert J Levy; Giovanni Ferrari
Journal:  J Am Heart Assoc       Date:  2021-01-26       Impact factor: 5.501

10.  Durability of bioprosthetic aortic valves in patients under the age of 60 years - rationale and design of the international INDURE registry.

Authors:  Bart Meuris; Michael A Borger; Thierry Bourguignon; Matthias Siepe; Martin Grabenwöger; Günther Laufer; Konrad Binder; Gianluca Polvani; Pierluigi Stefano; Enrico Coscioni; Wouter van Leeuwen; Philippe Demers; Francois Dagenais; Sergio Canovas; Alexis Theron; Thierry Langanay; Jean-Christian Roussel; Olaf Wendler; Giovanni Mariscalco; Renzo Pessotto; Beate Botta; Peter Bramlage; Ruggero de Paulis
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2020-05-27       Impact factor: 1.637

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.