Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Background: Data on outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using balloon-expandable valves (BEVs) or self-expandable valves (SEVs) as well as the impact of center valve preference on these outcomes are limited.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of TAVR procedures using third-generation BEVs and SEVs stratified by center valve preference.

Methods: In a multicenter registry (n = 17), 13 centers exhibited valve preference (66.6%-90% of volume) and were included. Outcomes were compared between BEVs and SEVs stratified by center valve preference.

Results: In total, 7,528 TAVR procedures (3,854 with SEVs and 3,674 with BEVs) were included. The mean age was 81 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.2. Baseline characteristics were similar between BEVs and SEVs. Need for pacemaker implantation was higher with SEVs at BEV- and SEV-dominant centers (17.8% vs 9.3% [P < 0.001] and 12.7% vs 10.0% [P = 0.036], respectively; HR: 1.51; P for interaction = 0.021), risk for cerebrovascular accident was higher with SEVs at BEV-dominant but not SEV-dominant centers (3.6% vs 1.1% [P < 0.001] and 2.2% vs 1.4% [P = 0.162]; HR: 2.08; P for interaction < 0.01). Aortic regurgitation greater than mild was more frequent with SEVs at BEV-dominant centers and similar with BEVs regardless of center dominance (5.2% vs 2.8% [P < 0.001] and 3.4% vs 3.7% [P = 0.504], respectively). Two-year mortality was higher with SEVs at BEV-dominant centers but not at SEV-dominant centers (21.9% vs 16.9% [P = 0.021] and 16.8% vs 16.5% [P = 0.642], respectively; HR: 1.20; P for interaction = 0.032).

Conclusions: Periprocedural outcomes, aortic regurgitation greater than mild, and 2-year mortality are worse when TAVR is performed using SEVs at BEV-dominant centers. Outcomes are similar regardless of valve type at SEV-dominant centers. The present results stress the need to account for this factor when comparing BEV and SEV outcomes. (The Aortic+Mitral Transcatheter [AMTRAC] Valve Registry; NCT04031274).

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcin.2022.05.004DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

center valve
16
valve preference
12
bevs sevs
12
transcatheter aortic
8
tavr procedures
8
sevs stratified
8
stratified center
8
sevs
6
valve
5
bevs
5

Similar Publications

TMVR for the Treatment of Mitral Regurgitation: A State-of-the-Art Review.

Circ Cardiovasc Interv

September 2025

Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele-Milan, Italy (F.T., G.A., M.G., K.S., D.D., G.S., M.C.).

Mitral regurgitation is the most common valve disease worldwide. Despite its wide success in inoperable or high-risk surgical patients, transcatheter edge-to-edge repair remains limited by some anatomic features and the not negligible rate of significant residual regurgitation. Transcatheter mitral valve replacement has emerged as a viable alternative that promises to overcome these issues, but its development has been progressing slowly.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Mitral regurgitation (MR) may rarely worsen after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) due to mechanical interference from the transcatheter heart valve (THV). Standard surgical approaches in these cases are often challenging due to anatomical constraints. Thus, there is a need for the development of effective alternatives to address this issue.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) commonly occurs following surgical repair of degenerative mitral regurgitation (DMR) and is associated with unfavorable outcomes. This study aimed to identify preoperative risk factors for acute POAF in patients undergoing mitral valve repair for DMR, with a specific focus on the role of preoperative echocardiography.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted involving 1127 DMR patients who underwent mitral valve repair between 2017 and 2022.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Rapid Atrial Pacing After TAVI for Pacemaker Prediction.

Rev Cardiovasc Med

August 2025

Heart Rhythm Management Centre, Postgraduate Program in Cardiac Electrophysiology and Pacing, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel - Vrije Universiteit Brussel, European Reference Networks Guard-Heart, 1090 Brussels, Belgium.

Despite continued advancements in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) techniques, the incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains substantial. Established predictors of PPI include advanced age, pre-existing electrocardiographic conduction abnormalities, prosthetic valve type, implantation depth, and anatomical parameters, such as membranous septum length, which are currently under active investigation. In routine clinical practice, the management strategy often involves the temporary placement of a transvenous pacemaker lead, followed by a period of observation.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF