98%
921
2 minutes
20
To analyze Heart Team decisions and outcomes following failure of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) prostheses. Patients undergoing re-operations following index SAVR (Redo-SAVR) and those undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) following SAVR were included in this study. Patients who underwent index SAVR and/or Redo-SAVR for endocarditis were excluded. Data are presented as medians and 25th-75th percentiles, or absolute numbers and percentages. Outcomes were analyzed in accordance to the VARC-3 criteria. Between 01/2015 and 03/2021, 53 patients underwent Redo-SAVR, 103 patients ViV-TAVR. Mean EuroSCORE II was 5.7% (3.5-8.5) in the Redo-SAVR group and 9.2% (5.4-13.6) in the ViV group. In the Redo-SAVR group, 12 patients received aortic root enlargement (22.6%). Length of hospital and ICU stay was longer in the Redo-SAVR group ( < 0.001; < 0.001), PGmax and PGmean were lower in the Redo-SAVR group as compared to the ViV-TAVR group (18 mmHg (10-30) vs. 26 mmHg (19-38), < 0.001) (9 mmHg (6-15) vs. 15 mmHg (9-21), < 0.001). A higher rate of paravalvular leakage was seen in the ViV-TAVR group ( = 0.013). VARC-3 Early Safety were comparable between the two populations ( = 0.343). Survival at 1 year and 5 years was 82% and 36% in the ViV-TAVR cohort and 84% and 77% in the Redo-SAVR cohort. The variables were patient age (OR 1.061; [95% CI 1.020-1.104], = 0.004), coronary heart disease (OR 2.648; [95% CI 1.160-6.048], = 0.021), and chronic renal insufficiency (OR 2.711; [95% CI 1.160-6.048], = 0.021) showed a significant correlation to ViV-TAVR. Heart Team decisions are crucial in the treatment of patients with degenerated aortic bioprostheses and lead to a low mortality in both treatment paths thanks to patient-specific therapy planning. ViV-TAVR offers a treatment for elderly or intermediate-risk profile patients with comparable short-term mortality. However, this therapy is associated with increased pressure gradients and a high prevalence of paravalvular leakage. Redo-SAVR enables the surgical treatment of concomitant cardiac pathologies and allows anticipation for later VIV-TAVR by implanting the largest possible valve prostheses.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11312932 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm13154461 | DOI Listing |
J Cardiol
July 2025
First Department of Cardiology, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Hippokration General Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Background: With the aging population, degeneration of surgical aortic valves is an important clinical scenario. Currently, in most European countries, both redo surgery [redo-surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR)] and valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) are established alternatives for treating such patients. This meta-analysis aims to compare redo-SAVR and ViV-TAVI for treating a failing bioprosthetic aortic valve.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJ Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown)
March 2025
Division of Cardiac Surgery.
Objectives: Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) has gained popularity as a less invasive alternative to a redo surgical aortic valve replacement (redo-SAVR); which one is the preferred technique in these cases, however, remains a topic of debate, as the available data refer to retrospective studies with few patients or limited follow-up. The present metanalysis aimed to compare the short-term and long-term outcomes of the two techniques in the setting of a failed surgical bioprosthesis.
Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched on 10 November 2023 yielding 355 results (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023490612), of which 27 were suitable for meta-analysis.
J Clin Med
July 2024
Department of Cardiac Surgery, LMU University Hospital, Marchioninistrasse 15, 81377 Munich, Germany.
To analyze Heart Team decisions and outcomes following failure of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) prostheses. Patients undergoing re-operations following index SAVR (Redo-SAVR) and those undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR) following SAVR were included in this study. Patients who underwent index SAVR and/or Redo-SAVR for endocarditis were excluded.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJAMA Cardiol
July 2024
Department of Population Health Science and Policy, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Importance: The use of valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been rapidly expanding as an alternative treatment to redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for failed bioprosthetic valves despite limited long-term data.
Objective: To assess mortality and morbidity in patients undergoing intervention for failed bioprosthetic SAVR.
Design, Setting, And Participants: This was a retrospective population-based cohort analysis conducted between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020, with a median (IQR) follow-up time of 2.
Am J Cardiol
August 2024
Division of Cardiac Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Aortic stenosis is a common and significant valve condition requiring bioprosthetic heart valves with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) being strongly recommended for high-risk patients or patients over 75 years. This meta-analysis aimed to pool existing data on postprocedural clinical as well as echocardiographic outcomes comparing valve-in-valve (ViV)-TAVR to redo-surgical aortic valve replacement to assess the short-term and medium-term outcomes for both treatment methods. A systematic literature search on Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Medline (PubMed interface) electronic databases from inception to August 2023.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF