scholarly journals TCT-687 One year outcomes of transfemoral transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with intermediate surgical risk: the italian OBSERVANT study

2014 ◽  
Vol 64 (11) ◽  
pp. B201
Author(s):  
Marco Barbanti ◽  
Paola D'Errigo ◽  
Claudio Grossi ◽  
Francesco Onorati ◽  
Stefano Rosato ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
One Year

scholarly journals Transcatheter Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Low-Risk Patients for the Treatment of Severe Aortic Stenosis

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 439 ◽  
Author(s):  
Polimeni ◽  
Sorrentino ◽  
De Rosa ◽  
Spaccarotella ◽  
Mongiardo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
Randomized Studies ◽  
One Year

Recently, two randomized trials, the PARTNER 3 and the Evolut Low Risk Trial, independently demonstrated that transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is non-inferior to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients at low surgical risk, paving the way to a progressive extension of clinical indications to TAVR. We designed a meta-analysis to compare TAVR versus SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019131125). Randomized studies comparing one-year outcomes of TAVR or SAVR were searched for within Medline, Scholar and Scopus electronic databases. A total of three randomized studies were selected, including nearly 3000 patients. After one year, the risk of cardiovascular death was significantly lower with TAVR compared to SAVR (Risk Ratio (RR) = 0.56; 95% CI 0.33–0.95; p = 0.03). Conversely, no differences were observed between the groups for one-year all-cause mortality (RR = 0.67; 95% CI 0.42–1.07; p = 0.10). Among the secondary endpoints, patients undergoing TAVR have lower risk of new-onset of atrial fibrillation compared to SAVR (RR = 0.26; 95% CI 0.17–0.39; p < 0.00001), major bleeding (RR = 0.30; 95% CI 0.14–0.65; p < 0.002) and acute kidney injury stage II or III (RR = 0.28; 95% CI 0.14–0.58; p = 0.0005). Conversely, TAVR was associated to a higher risk of aortic regurgitation (RR = 3.96; 95% CI 1.31–11.99; p = 0.01) and permanent pacemaker implantation (RR = 3.47; 95% CI 1.33–9.07; p = 0.01) compared to SAVR. No differences were observed between the groups in the risks of stroke (RR= 0.71; 95% CI 0.41–1.25; p = 0.24), transient ischemic attack (TIA; RR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.53–1.83; p = 0.96), and MI (RR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.43–1.29; p = 0.29). In conclusion, the present meta-analysis, including three randomized studies and nearly 3000 patients with severe aortic stenosis at low surgical risk, shows that TAVR is associated with lower CV death compared to SAVR at one-year follow-up. Nevertheless, paravalvular aortic regurgitation and pacemaker implantation still represent two weak spots that should be solved.

Abstract 15174: Failing Aortic Tissue Valves in Patients at High Surgical Risk: Comparison of Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-valve Procedures and Redo Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam Silaschi ◽  
Olaf Wendler ◽  
Liesa Castro ◽  
Moritz Seiffert ◽  
Edith Lubos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Pacemaker Implantation ◽  
Pressure Gradients ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
High Surgical Risk ◽  
Valve In Valve

Objectives: Transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation (ViV) is an innovative treatment for failed tissue valves (TV) in patients at high surgical risk. However, direct comparative data with standard repeat surgical aortic valve replacement (RE-SAVR) is scarce. We aimed to compare outcomes after ViV to conventional RE-SAVR in two European centers with established interventional programs. Methods: Retrospectively we explored in-hospital databases for patients ≥60 years, treated for degenerated TV. Patients with endocarditis and combined procedures were excluded. Primary endpoints were adjudicated according to VARC-2 criteria. Results: Between 2002 and 2015, 130 patients were treated for isolated failure of aortic TV’s (ViV: n=71, RE-SAVR: n=59). In ViV, Edwards Sapien valve (ESV) was most frequently used (n=36) but implanted into larger TV’s (CoreValve TV size: 22.2±1.3mm vs. ESV TV size: 24.1±2.0mm, p<0.01). Both age and logistic EuroSCORE I were higher in ViV compared to RE-SAVR (78.6±7.5 vs. 72.9±6.5 ys, p<0.01; 25.1±18.9 vs. 16.8±9.4%, p<0.01). Thirty-day mortality was not significantly different with 4.2% (3/71) after ViV vs. 5.1% (3/59) post RE-SAVR (p=1.0). Device success was achieved in 54.9% (n=39) in ViV and all RE-SAVR patients (p<0.01). Perioperative stroke was not observed after ViV and in 2 patients after RE-SAVR (3.4%, p=0.2). Intensive-care stay was longer after RE-SAVR (3.4±2.9d vs. 1.9±1.8d, p<0.01). Following ViV, 22.5% (n=16) of patients had mild aortic regurgitation, vs. 11.3% (n=8; p=0.25) after RE-SAVR. Mean transvalvular pressure gradients at discharge were higher post ViV (19.3±7.3 vs.12.2±5.6mmHg, p<0.01). Rate of permanent pacemaker implantation was lower after ViV (9.9% vs. 27.1%, p<0.01). Survival at 90- and 180-days was 93.8% and 91.8% vs. 94.4% and 94.4% after ViV and RE-SAVR respectively (p=0.87). Conclusion: Despite a higher risk profile, early mortality was not different between the two treatment arms. Although ViV resulted in elevated postoperative transvalvular pressure gradients and therefore a lower rate of device success, mortality after 180-days was similar to RE-SAVR. At present, both techniques serve as complementary approaches and allow individualized patient care.

Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis and Noncardiac Surgery

2020 ◽  
pp. 108925322096957
Author(s):  
Stephanie K. Whitener ◽  
Loren R. Francis ◽  
Jeffrey D. McMurray ◽  
George B. Whitener
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Severe Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Noncardiac Surgery ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Unique Challenge ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
Increased Risk

The patient with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis presenting for elective noncardiac surgery poses a unique challenge. These patients are not traditionally offered surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve replacement given their lack of symptoms; however, they are at increased risk for postsurgical complications given the severity of their aortic stenosis. The decision to proceed with elective noncardiac surgery should be based on individual and surgical risk factors. However, severity of aortic stenosis is not accounted for in current surgical risk factor assessment scoring; therefore, extensive communication with patients and surgical teams is necessary to minimize a patient’s risk. A clear intraoperative plan should be designed to manage the unique hemodynamics of these patients, and a discussion should address postoperative placement.

Myval transcatheter heart valve system in the treatment of severe symptomatic aortic stenosis

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samin K Sharma ◽  
Ravinder S Rao ◽  
Manik Chopra ◽  
Anmol Sonawane ◽  
John Jose ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Stenosis ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Heart Valve ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
Transcatheter Aortic Valve ◽  
Transcatheter Heart Valve

The transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an established treatment for patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) at prohibitive risk for surgery. It is an alternative treatment to surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with AS at intermediate- and high-surgical risk. Although regulatory authorities extend the indications of TAVR to treat patients at low-surgical risk, the limitations of earlier-generation transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems accelerate the development of improved newer generation of THV systems. Myval™ THV (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Vapi, Gujarat, India) is a newer-generation, balloon-expandable TAVR system with features that facilitate accurate positioning of the bioprosthetic valve and favorable procedural and clinical outcomes. This review summarizes existing preclinical and clinical data on Myval THV for the intervention of symptomatic native AS and lays out the plan for future research program.

scholarly journals Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement for Low Surgical Risk Patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (14) ◽  
pp. 1399-1401 ◽  
Author(s):  
Islam Y. Elgendy ◽  
Ahmed N. Mahmoud ◽  
Mohamed M. Gad ◽  
Ayman Elbadawi ◽  
Fernando Rivero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Aortic Valve ◽  
Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement ◽  
Surgical Risk ◽  
Risk Patients
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document