Literature DB >> 29887473

Aortic valve anatomy and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valves.

C De Biase1, A Mastrokostopoulos2, R Philippart2, L M Desroche2, S Blanco2, K Rehal2, N Dumonteil2, D Tchetche3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Aortic stenosis (AS) in bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) remains a challenge for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). BAV is a condition encountered in young adults as well as elderly patients. Frequently we face in clinical practice elderly patients with BAV and severe AS, but there is little evidence concerning TAVI in this population. The aim of our study was to compare anatomic features and outcomes of bicuspid and tricuspid patients with AS undergoing TAVI.
METHODS: 83 consecutive BAV patients undergoing TAVI were matched, in a 1:2 ratio, to 166 tricuspid patients. Multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) and transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) were assessed at baseline. Primary endpoint was all-cause mortality and early safety at 30 days according to Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria 2 (VARC-2). Secondary endpoint included device success.
RESULTS: BAV patients presented more aortic root calcifications, smaller diameter of left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) and dilated aorta. We did not observe any statistically significant difference concerning all-cause mortality and early safety at 30 days. However higher intra-procedural TAV-in-TAV bailout procedure was observed in the BAV cohort, with consequent reduction of device success rate.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BAV present more complex anatomy at baseline as compared to tricuspid AS patients. These anatomical features lead to more frequent TAV-in-TAV bailout procedure and lower device success rate, but are not associated with higher mortality rate at 30 days. Our findings support the feasibility of TAVI in BAV, but larger studies with longer follow-up and a focus on sizing are required.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29887473     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2018.01.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cardiol        ISSN: 0167-5273            Impact factor:   4.164


  5 in total

Review 1.  Current results and remaining challenges of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement expansion in intermediate and low risk patients.

Authors:  Alfonso Ielasi; Azeem Latib; Maurizio Tespili; Francesco Donatelli
Journal:  Int J Cardiol Heart Vasc       Date:  2019-05-15

2.  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

3.  Patients With Bicuspid Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Yi Zhang; Tian-Yuan Xiong; Yi-Ming Li; Yi-Jun Yao; Jing-Jing He; Hao-Ran Yang; Zhong-Kai Zhu; Fei Chen; Yuanweixiang Ou; Xi Wang; Qi Liu; Xi Li; Yi-Jian Li; Yan-Biao Liao; Fang-Yang Huang; Zhen-Gang Zhao; Qiao Li; Xin Wei; Yong Peng; Sen He; Jia-Fu Wei; Wen-Xia Zhou; Ming-Xia Zheng; Yun Bao; Xuan Zhou; Hong Tang; Wei Meng; Yuan Feng; Mao Chen
Journal:  Front Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2022-03-16

4.  Procedural and clinical outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cheng-Hao Jacky Chen; Henry Jiang; Owen Martin; Ashley R Wilson-Smith
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2022-07

5.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Bicuspid Aortic Valve with Aortic Stenosis: a Meta-Analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis.

Authors:  Jeffrey Shi Kai Chan; Sukhdeep Singh; Peter Eriksen; Lok Him Tsui; Amer Harky
Journal:  Braz J Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2022-03-10
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.