When Is It Best to Fracture a Bioprosthesis in TAVR?

At present, surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) uses bioprostheses. However, when these fail, we are presented with a great challenge, seeing as repeat SAVR involves a higher risk. In this context, valve-in-valve (V-in-V TAVR) has surged as a very attractive alternative. 

¿Cuándo es el mejor momento para realizar una fractura de la bioprótesis en el TAVI?

Bioprosthesis fracture (BPF) is a new interesting strategy that has shown lower gradient and larger effective orifice area (especially in small valves). However, it still involves certain risk. 

This analysis looked at STS/ACC registry V-in-V patients treated with SAPIEN 3 or SAPIEN ULTRA undergoing BPF before or after V-in-V TAVR. 

2975 patients were included, and 619 received BPF before or after TAVR (20.8%).

There were no differences between groups. Mean age was 73, 70% were men, 82% were hypertensive, 32% diabetic, 14% had prior pacemaker, and 65 ml/min eGFR. Prior CABG, cardiac failure and cardiogenic shock was higher among patients not receiving BPF. 

STS Score was 5.3%.

Read also: Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization: Are Periprocedural Complications Significant?

95% pr procedures were transfemoral, implantation success rate was 99%, and SAPIEN 3 was used most often (84%).

BPF was more frequent after TAVR (75%); 23% was done before TAVR and 2% before and after TAVR. BPF was successful in 512 patients (83%), and it was more frequent in patients with 21 mm bioprosthesis (30% vs.15% p<0.01).

At hospital level, patients receiving BPF presented higher all-cause mortality (2.26 0.91 2.51 1.3-4.84 p<0.01) and life threatening bleeding 3.39 (1.36 2.55 (1.44-4.5) <0.01), with no differences as regards vascular complications, stroke, definite pacemaker implantation, atrial fibrillation, heart obstruction, ring fracture, dialysis, aortic dissection and cardiac piercing. 

Read also: Survival in Patients with Tricuspid Regurgitation According to Clinical and Echocardiographic Variables (Clusters).

At 30 days, hemodynamic assessment was carried out by Eco-Doppler, which showed that when BPF was prior V-in-V there were no hemodynamic differences vs. the rest. However, in post V-in-V BPF patients, there was larger effective orifice area (1.6 cm2 vs 1.4 cm2; P < 0.01) and lower gradient (18.3 mm Hg vs 22.6 mm Hg; P < 0.01). 

Conclusion

Bioprosthesis fracture in V-in-V with SAPIEN 3 or SAPIEN ULTRA was associated to high inhospital mortality and bleeding and modest echocardiographic hemodynamic improvement. Appropriate bioprosthesis fracture timing is associated to safety and efficacy. 

Dr. Carlos Fava - Consejo Editorial SOLACI

Dr. Carlos Fava.
Member of the Editorial Board of SOLACI.org.

Original Title: Outcomes of Bioprosthetic Valve  Fracture in Patients Undergoing Valve-in-Valve TAVR. 

Reference: Adnan K. Chhatriwalla, et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2023;16:530–539).


Subscribe to our weekly newsletter

Get the latest scientific articles on interventional cardiology

More articles by this author

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...

Cardiac Remodeling After Percutaneous ASD Closure: Should It Be Immediate or Progressive?

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is a common congenital heart disease that generates a left-to-right shunt, leading to right-side chamber overload and a risk of...

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

Is it really necessary to monitor all patients after TAVR?

Conduction disorders (CD) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are a frequent complication and may lead to the need for permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI)....

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...