Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

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/PMC11312932PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm13154461DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

redo-savr group
16
aortic valve
12
heart team
12
team decisions
12
redo-savr
9
failure surgical
8
surgical aortic
8
valve prostheses
8
valve replacement
8
viv-tavr
8

Similar Publications

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 PDF

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.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

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 PDF

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.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

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