| Literature DB >> 30072124 |
Ole De Backer1, Thomas Pilgrim2, Matheus Simonato3, G Burkhard Mackensen4, Claudia Fiorina5, Verena Veulemanns6, Alfredo Cerillo7, Joachim Schofer8, Nicolas Amabile9, Guy Achkouty10, Ulrich Schäfer10, Marcus-André Deutsch11, Jan-Malte Sinning12, Mohammed S Rahman13, Fadi J Sawaya14, David Hildick-Smith13, Jose Maria Hernandez15, Won-Keun Kim16, Thierry Lefevre17, Moritz Seiffert9, Sabine Bleiziffer11, Anna Sonia Petronio18, Nicolas Van Mieghem19, Maurizio Taramasso20, Lars Søndergaard21, Stephan Windecker2, Azeem Latib22, Danny Dvir4.
Abstract
Patients with pure native aortic valve regurgitation (NAVR) and increased surgical risk are often denied surgery. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the "off-label" use of transcatheter heart valves (THV) for the treatment of NAVR. A total of 254 high surgical risk patients with NAVR (age 74 ± 12 years, Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score 6.6 ± 6.2%) underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with early generation (43%) or newer generation (57%) devices at 46 different sites. Device success was significantly higher in patients treated with newer as compared with early generation THV (82% vs 47%, p <0.001). The difference was driven by lower rates of device malpositioning (9% vs 33%) and aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥ moderate (4% vs 31%) and translated into higher clinical efficacy at 30 days in patients treated with newer as compared with early generation THV (72% vs 56%, p = 0.041). Both THV under- and oversizing were associated with an increased risk of THV malpositioning. In conclusion, TAVI is a feasible treatment strategy in selected high-risk patients with NAVR but is associated with a considerable risk of THV malpositioning and residual AR. Although newer-generation THV are associated with better outcomes, novel devices for the treatment of NAVR are warranted.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30072124 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2018.05.044
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Am J Cardiol ISSN: 0002-9149 Impact factor: 2.778