Failing Surgical Bioprosthesis: A Challenge on the Rise

Courtesy of Dr. Carlos Fava.

The gold standard for failing aortic bioprosthesis has traditionally been surgery. However, since the first valve in valve (TAV-in-SAV) report in 2007, by Wenaweser, transcatheter valve implantation has emerged as a valid alternative. Even so, at present there is not enough scientific evidence in this regard.

Degeneración de las válvulas biológicas aórticas: un desafío cada vez más frecuente

The present study analyzed 205 patients presenting failing aortic bioprosthesis. 126 (61.5%) were reoperated (redo-SAVR) and 798 received TAV-in-SAV.


Read also: How Is Renal Function Affected by Endoprosthesis Implantation?”


Those receiving TAV-in-SAV were older, had more comorbidities, more cardiac failure and had higher STS and EurosSCORElog. After propensity score matching, the sample population was homogenized to 78 pares.

 

Mortality at 30 days and one year was numerically inferior in the TAV-in-SAV group, though it had no statistical significance (6.4% vs. 3.9% and 13.1% vs. 12.3%). Neither were there differences in stroke, AMI or need for definite pacemaker. The need for dialysis driven by acute kidney failure was numerically lower in the TAV-in-SAV group (11.5% vs. 3.8% p=0.13). Outcomes were similar across the population.

 

Hospitalization was lower in the TAV-in-SAV group (p=0.001).


Read also: TAVR in Patients with Pure vs. Mixed Aortic Stenosis: Benefits and Evolution”.


Gradients at 30 days were higher in the TAV-in-SAV group (18.1 mmHg vs. 14.3 mmHg p=0.01). This was at the expense of the Edwards valves (21.3 mmHg gradient), not with the CoreValves (15.4 mmHg) that showed no difference with redo-SAVR. The presence of >20 mmHg gradient was twice as high with the Edwards compared against the CoreValve and redo-SAVR (51.9% vs. 22.6% and 17.1%).

 

Conclusion

Patients presenting failing aortic bioprosthesis due to severe aortic stenosis treated with redo-SAVR or TAV-in-SAV have similar evolution at 30 days and one year.

 

Commentary

This group currently presents a great challenge and is being researched at the moment.

 

This retrospective study showed similar evolution in both groups, but with less hospitalization days in the TAV-in-SAV. However, a nine-day hospital stay is still high.

 

It is important to choose the right transcatheter valve, since one of these presented higher post-implantation gradients. This will certainly improve with experience and the development of new devices.

 

Gentileza del Dr. Carlos Fava.

 

Original title: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation versus redo surgery for failing surgical aortic bioprostheses. A multicenter propensity score analysis.

Reference: Marco Spaziano, et al. EuroIntervention 2017;13:1149-1156.


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

We are interested in your opinion. Please, leave your comments, thoughts, questions, etc., below. They will be most welcome.

More articles by this author

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...

TAVR in Young Low-Risk Patients

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has established itself as an effective strategy for the treatment of severe aortic stenosis across different risk groups. While previous...

TAVR and Atrial Fibrillation: What Anticoagulants Should We Use?

The prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in TAVR patients ranges from 15 to 30%, depending on series. This arrhythmia has been associated to higher...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

TCT 2024 | FAVOR III EUROPA

The study FAVOR III EUROPA, a randomized trial, included 2,000 patients with chronic coronary syndrome, or stabilized acute coronary syndrome, and intermediate lesions. 1,008...

TCT 2024 | TRISCEND II

This randomized study included 400 patients; 267 were treated with EVOQUE valve and 133 with optimal medical treatment (OMT). After one-year follow-up, there were no...

TCT 2024 – ACCESS-TAVI: Comparing Percutaneous Access Closure Strategies After TAVI

Vascular access complications following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain common. However, few studies compare vascular access closure methods.  Based on the CHOICE-CLOSURE and MASH...