Surgical Treatment of Patients With Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment of patients developing infective endocarditis (IE) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to investigate the clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients with TAVI-IE treated with cardiac surgery and antibiotics (IE-CS) compared with patients treated with antibiotics alone (IE-AB). METHODS: Crude and inverse probability of treatment weighting analyses were applied for the treatment effect of cardiac surgery vs medical therapy on 1-year all-cause mortality in patients with definite TAVI-IE. The study used data from the Infectious Endocarditis after TAVI International Registry. RESULTS: Among 584 patients, 111 patients (19%) were treated with IE-CS and 473 patients (81%) with IE-AB. Compared with IE-AB, IE-CS was not associated with a lower in-hospital mortality (HRunadj: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.58-1.25) and 1-year all-cause mortality (HRunadj: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.64-1.22) in the crude cohort. After adjusting for selection and immortal time bias, IE-CS compared with IE-AB was also not associated with lower mortality rates for in-hospital mortality (HRadj: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.80-1.05) and 1-year all-cause mortality (HRadj: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.84-1.07). Results remained similar when patients with and without TAVI prosthesis involvement were analyzed separately. Predictors for in-hospital and 1-year all-cause mortality included logistic EuroSCORE I, Staphylococcus aureus, acute renal failure, persistent bacteremia, and septic shock. CONCLUSIONS: In this registry, the majority of patients with TAVI-IE were treated with antibiotics alone. Cardiac surgery was not associated with an improved all-cause in-hospital or 1-year mortality. The high mortality of patients with TAVI-IE was strongly linked to patients' characteristics, pathogen, and IE-related complications.

Infective Endocarditis Caused by Staphylococcus aureus After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Staphylococcus aureus (SA) has been extensively studied as causative microorganism of surgical prosthetic-valve infective endocarditis (IE). However, scarce evidence exists on SA IE after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS: Data were obtained from the Infectious Endocarditis After TAVR International Registry, including patients with definite IE after TAVR from 59 centres in 11 countries. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to microbiologic etiology: non-SA IE vs SA IE. RESULTS: SA IE was identified in 141 patients out of 573 (24.6%), methicillin-sensitive SA in most cases (115/141, 81.6%). Self-expanding valves were more common than balloon-expandable valves in patients presenting with early SA IE. Major bleeding and sepsis complicating TAVR, neurologic symptoms or systemic embolism at admission, and IE with cardiac device involvement (other than the TAVR prosthesis) were associated with SA IE (P < 0.05 for all). Among patients with IE after TAVR, the likelihood of SA IE increased from 19% in the absence of those risk factors to 84.6% if ≥ 3 risk factors were present. In-hospital (47.8% vs 26.9%; P < 0.001) and 2-year (71.5% vs 49.6%; P < 0.001) mortality rates were higher among patients with SA IE vs non-SA IE. Surgery at the time of index SA IE episode was associated with lower mortality at follow-up compared with medical therapy alone (adjusted hazard ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-0.96; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: SA IE represented approximately 25% of IE cases after TAVR and was associated with very high in-hospital and late mortality. The presence of some features determined a higher likelihood of SA IE and could help to orientate early antibiotic regimen selection. Surgery at index SA IE was associated with improved outcomes, and its role should be evaluated in future studies.

Perivalvular Extension of Infective Endocarditis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement.

BACKGROUND: Infective endocarditis (IE) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been associated with a dismal prognosis. However, scarce data exist on IE perivalvular extension (PEE) in such patients. METHODS: This multicenter study included 579 patients who had the diagnosis of definite IE at a median of 171 (53-421) days following TAVR. PEE was defined as the presence of an intracardiac abscess, pseudoaneurysm, or fistula. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients (18.1%) were diagnosed with PEE (perivalvular abscess, pseudoaneurysm, fistula, or a combination in 87, 7, 7, and 4 patients, respectively). A history of chronic kidney disease (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj], 2.08; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.27-3.41; P = .003) and IE secondary to coagulase-negative staphylococci (ORadj, 2.71; 95% CI: 1.57-4.69; P < .001) were associated with an increased risk of PEE. Surgery was performed at index IE episode in 34 patients (32.4%) with PEE (vs 15.2% in patients without PEE, P < .001). In-hospital and 2-year mortality rates among PEE-IE patients were 36.5% and 69.4%, respectively. Factors independently associated with an increased mortality were the occurrence of other complications (stroke post-TAVR, acute renal failure, septic shock) and the lack of surgery at index IE hospitalization (padj < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: PEE occurred in about one-fifth of IE post-TAVR patients, with the presence of coagulase-negative staphylococci and chronic kidney disease determining an increased risk. Patients with PEE-IE exhibited high early and late mortality rates, and surgery during IE hospitalization seemed to be associated with better outcomes.

Changes in outcomes over time in intermediate-risk patients treated for severe aortic stenosis.

BACKGROUND: The advent of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has changed the practice of treating patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Heart-Teams have improved their decision-making process to refer patients to the best and safest treatment. The evidence allowed centers to increase funding and TAVR volume and extend indications to different risk categories of patients. This study evaluates the outcomes of intermediate-risk patients treated for severe AS in an academic center. METHODS: Between 2012 and 2019, 812 patients with AS underwent TAVR or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). A propensity score-matching analytic strategy was used to balance groups and adjust for time periods. Outcomes were recorded according to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Guidelines; the primary outcome being 30-day mortality and the secondary outcomes being perioperative course and complications. RESULTS: No difference in mortality was seen but complications differed: more postoperative transient ischemic attacks, permanent pacemaker implantations, and perivalvular leaks in the transcatheter group, while more acute kidney injuries, atrial fibrillation, delirium, postoperative infections and bleeding, tamponade and need for reoperation in the surgical group as well as a longer hospital length-of-stay. However, over the years, morbidities/mortality decreased for all patients treated for AS. CONCLUSIONS: Data showed an improvement in morbidities/mortality for intermediate-risk patients treated with SAVR or TAVR. Increased funding allowed for a higher TAVR volume by increasing access to this technology. Also, the difference in complications could impact healthcare costs. By incorporating important metrics such as length-of-stay, readmission rates, and complications into decision-making, the Heart-Team can improve clinical outcomes, healthcare economics, and resource utilization.

Infective Endocarditis Following Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Comparison of Balloon- Versus Self-Expandable Valves.

BACKGROUND: No data exist about the characteristics of infective endocarditis (IE) post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) according to transcatheter valve type. We aimed to determine the incidence, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients with IE post-TAVR treated with balloon-expandable valve (BEV) versus self-expanding valve (SEV) systems. METHODS: Data from the multicenter Infectious Endocarditis After TAVR International Registry was used to compare IE patients with BEV versus SEV. RESULTS: A total of 245 patients with IE post-TAVR were included (SEV, 47%; BEV, 53%). The timing between TAVR and IE was similar between groups (SEV, 5.5 [1.2-15] months versus BEV, 5.3 [1.7-11.4] months; P=0.89). Enterococcal IE was more frequent in the SEV group (36.5% versus 15.4%; P<0.01), and vegetation location differed according to valve type (stent frame, SEV, 18.6%; BEV, 6.9%; P=0.01; valve leaflet, SEV, 23.9%; BEV, 38.5%; P=0.01). BEV recipients had a higher rate of stroke/systemic embolism (20.0% versus 8.7%, adjusted OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.04-5.82, P=0.04). Surgical explant of the transcatheter valve (SEV, 8.7%; BEV, 13.8%; P=0.21), and in-hospital death at the time of IE episode (SEV, 35.6%; BEV, 37.7%; P=0.74) were similar between groups. After a mean follow-up of 13±12 months, 59.1% and 54.6% of the SEV and BEV recipients, respectively, had died (P=0.66). CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of IE post-TAVR, including microorganism type, vegetation location, and embolic complications but not early or late mortality, differed according to valve type. These results may help to guide the diagnosis and management of IE and inform future research studies in the field.

The Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, But Minimalist) Clinical Pathway Facilitates Safe Next-Day Discharge Home at Low-, Medium-, and High-Volume Transfemoral Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Centers: The 3M TAVR Study.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to prospectively determine the safety and efficacy of next-day discharge using the Vancouver 3M (Multidisciplinary, Multimodality, but Minimalist) Clinical Pathway. BACKGROUND: Transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is an alternative to surgery in high- and intermediate-risk patients; however, hospital stays average at least 6 days in most trials. The Vancouver 3M Clinical Pathway is focused on next-day discharge, made possible by the use of objective screening criteria as well as streamlined peri- and post-procedural management guidelines. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from 6 low-volume (<100 TAVR/year), 4 medium-volume, and 3 high-volume (>200 TAVR/year) centers in Canada and the United States. The primary outcomes were a composite of all-cause death or stroke by 30 days and the proportion of patients successfully discharged home the day following TAVR. RESULTS: Of 1,400 screened patients, 411 were enrolled at 13 centers and received a SAPIEN XT (58.2%) or SAPIEN 3 (41.8%) valve (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California). In centers enrolling exclusively in the study, 55% of screened patients were enrolled. The median age was 84 years (interquartile range: 78 to 87 years) with a median STS score of 4.9% (interquartile range: 3.3% to 6.8%). Next-day discharge home was achieved in 80.1% of patients, and within 48 h in 89.5%. The composite of all-cause mortality or stroke by 30 days occurred in 2.9% (95% confidence interval: 1.7% to 5.1%), with neither component of the primary outcome affected by hospital TAVR volume (p = 0.51). Secondary outcomes at 30 days included major vascular complication 2.4% (n = 10), readmission 9.2% (n = 36), cardiac readmission 5.7% (n = 22), new permanent pacemaker 5.7% (n = 23), and >mild paravalvular regurgitation 3.8% (n = 15). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to the Vancouver 3M Clinical Pathway at low-, medium-, and high-volume TAVR centers allows next-day discharge home with excellent safety and efficacy outcomes.

Outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated bioprostheses, failed annuloplasty rings, and mitral annular calcification.

Aims: We sought to evaluate the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with degenerated bioprostheses [valve-in-valve (ViV)], failed annuloplasty rings [valve-in-ring (ViR)], and severe mitral annular calcification [valve-in-mitral annular calcification (ViMAC)]. Methods and results: From the TMVR multicentre registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of ViV, ViR, and ViMAC were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium (MVARC) criteria. A total of 521 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 9.0 ± 7.0% underwent TMVR (322 patients with ViV, 141 with ViR, and 58 with ViMAC). Trans-septal access and the Sapien valves were used in 39.5% and 90.0%, respectively. Overall technical success was excellent at 87.1%. However, left ventricular outflow tract obstruction occurred more frequently after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV (39.7% vs. 5.0% vs. 2.2%; P < 0.001), whereas second valve implantation was more frequent in ViR compared with ViMAC and ViV (12.1% vs. 5.2% vs. 2.5%; P < 0.001). Accordingly, technical success rate was higher after ViV compared with ViR and ViMAC (94.4% vs. 80.9% vs. 62.1%; P < 0.001). Compared with ViMAC and ViV groups, ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation ≥moderate (18.4% vs. 13.8% vs. 5.6%; P < 0.001) and subsequent paravalvular leak closure (7.8% vs. 0.0% vs. 2.2%; P = 0.006). All-cause mortality was higher after ViMAC compared with ViR and ViV at 30 days (34.5% vs. 9.9% vs. 6.2%; log-rank P < 0.001) and 1 year (62.8% vs. 30.6% vs. 14.0%; log-rank P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, patients with failed annuloplasty rings and severe MAC were at increased risk of mortality after TMVR [ViR vs. ViV, hazard ratio (HR) 1.99, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-3.12; P = 0.003; ViMAC vs. ViV, HR 5.29, 95% CI 3.29-8.51; P < 0.001]. Conclusion: The TMVR provided excellent outcomes for patients with degenerated bioprostheses despite high surgical risk. However, ViR and ViMAC were associated with higher rates of adverse events and mid-term mortality compared with ViV.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprosthetic Valves and Failed Annuloplasty Rings.

BACKGROUND: Limited data exist regarding transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) for patients with failed mitral valve replacement and repair. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the outcomes of TMVR in patients with failed mitral bioprosthetic valves (valve-in-valve [ViV]) and annuloplasty rings (valve-in-ring [ViR]). METHODS: From the TMVR multicenter registry, procedural and clinical outcomes of mitral ViV and ViR were compared according to Mitral Valve Academic Research Consortium criteria. RESULTS: A total of 248 patients with mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score of 8.9 ± 6.8% underwent TMVR. Transseptal access and the balloon-expandable valve were used in 33.1% and 89.9%, respectively. Compared with 176 patients undergoing ViV, 72 patients undergoing ViR had lower left ventricular ejection fraction (45.6 ± 17.4% vs. 55.3 ± 11.1%; p < 0.001). Overall technical and device success rates were acceptable, at 92.3% and 85.5%, respectively. However, compared with the ViV group, the ViR group had lower technical success (83.3% vs. 96.0%; p = 0.001) due to more frequent second valve implantation (11.1% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.008), and lower device success (76.4% vs. 89.2%; p = 0.009) due to more frequent reintervention (16.7% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.03). Mean mitral valve gradients were similar between groups (6.4 ± 2.3 mm Hg vs. 5.8 ± 2.7 mm Hg; p = 0.17), whereas the ViR group had more frequent post-procedural mitral regurgitation moderate or higher (19.4% vs. 6.8%; p = 0.003). Furthermore, the ViR group had more frequent life-threatening bleeding (8.3% vs. 2.3%; p = 0.03), acute kidney injury (11.1% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.03), and subsequent lower procedural success (58.3% vs. 79.5%; p = 0.001). The 1-year all-cause mortality rate was significantly higher in the ViR group compared with the ViV group (28.7% vs. 12.6%; log-rank test, p = 0.01). On multivariable analysis, failed annuloplasty ring was independently associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 2.70; 95% confidence interval: 1.34 to 5.43; p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: The TMVR procedure provided acceptable outcomes in high-risk patients with degenerated bioprostheses or failed annuloplasty rings, but mitral ViR was associated with higher rates of procedural complications and mid-term mortality compared with mitral ViV.

Valve-in-Valve Implantation of a Sapien 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve for Reduction of Paravalvular Regurgitation Despite Optimal Placement of the First Transcatheter Heart Valve.

Valve-in-valve implantation is generally successful in reducing paravalvular regurgitation (PVR) in cases in which the first transcatheter heart valve is deployed in a suboptimal location. We describe a case of severe PVR 2 months after implantation of a 26-mm Sapien XT valve (Edwards Lifesciences Inc, Irvine, CA) in the optimal location. Valve-in-valve implantation of a Sapien 3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences Inc), and enough left ventricular outflow tract tissue at the inflow edge the Sapien XT to appose the sealing cuff of the Sapien 3 combined for successful PVR treatment. To our knowledge, this is the first case of PVR reduction with valve-in-valve despite the original valve being appropriately sized and placed.

Association Between Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Subsequent Infective Endocarditis and In-Hospital Death.

IMPORTANCE: Limited data exist on clinical characteristics and outcomes of patients who had infective endocarditis after undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). OBJECTIVE: To determine the associated factors, clinical characteristics, and outcomes of patients who had infective endocarditis after TAVR. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Infectious Endocarditis after TAVR International Registry included patients with definite infective endocarditis after TAVR from 47 centers from Europe, North America, and South America between June 2005 and October 2015. EXPOSURE: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement for incidence of infective endocarditis and infective endocarditis for in-hospital mortality. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Infective endocarditis and in-hospital mortality after infective endocarditis. RESULTS: A total of 250 cases of infective endocarditis occurred in 20 006 patients after TAVR (incidence, 1.1% per person-year; 95% CI, 1.1%-1.4%; median age, 80 years; 64% men). Median time from TAVR to infective endocarditis was 5.3 months (interquartile range [IQR], 1.5-13.4 months). The characteristics associated with higher risk of progressing to infective endocarditis after TAVR was younger age (78.9 years vs 81.8 years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.97 per year; 95% CI, 0.94-0.99), male sex (62.0% vs 49.7%; HR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13-2.52), diabetes mellitus (41.7% vs 30.0%; HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.02-2.29), and moderate to severe aortic regurgitation (22.4% vs 14.7%; HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.28-3.28). Health care-associated infective endocarditis was present in 52.8% (95% CI, 46.6%-59.0%) of patients. Enterococci species and Staphylococcus aureus were the most frequently isolated microorganisms (24.6%; 95% CI, 19.1%-30.1% and 23.3%; 95% CI, 17.9%-28.7%, respectively). The in-hospital mortality rate was 36% (95% CI, 30.0%-41.9%; 90 deaths; 160 survivors), and surgery was performed in 14.8% (95% CI, 10.4%-19.2%) of patients during the infective endocarditis episode. In-hospital mortality was associated with a higher logistic EuroSCORE (23.1% vs 18.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.03 per 1% increase; 95% CI, 1.00-1.05), heart failure (59.3% vs 23.7%; OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.74-6.45), and acute kidney injury (67.4% vs 31.6%; OR, 2.70; 95% CI, 1.42-5.11). The 2-year mortality rate was 66.7% (95% CI, 59.0%-74.2%; 132 deaths; 115 survivors). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients undergoing TAVR, younger age, male sex, history of diabetes mellitus, and moderate to severe residual aortic regurgitation were significantly associated with an increased risk of infective endocarditis. Patients who developed endocarditis had high rates of in-hospital mortality and 2-year mortality.

Impact of coronary artery disease on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease (CAD) negatively impacts prognosis of patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement and revascularization is generally recommended at the time of surgery. Implications of CAD and preprocedural revascularization in the setting of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are not known. METHOD: Patients who underwent successful TAVI from January 2005 to December 2007 were retrospectively divided into five groups according to the extent of CAD assessed with the Duke Myocardial Jeopardy Score: no CAD, CAD with DMJS 0, 2, 4, and > or =6. Study endpoints included 30-day and 1-year survival, evolution of symptoms, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), and mitral regurgitation (MR) and need of revascularization during follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-six patients were included, among which 104 (76.5%) had coexisting CAD. Thirty-day mortality in the five study groups was respectively 6.3, 14.6, 7.1, 5.6, and 17.7% with no statistically significant difference between groups (P = 0.56). Overall survival rate at one year was 77.9% (95% CL: 70.9, 84.9) with no difference between groups (P = 0.63). Symptoms, LVEF, and MR all significantly improved in the first month after TAVI, but the extent of improvement did not differ between groups (P > 0.08). Revascularization after TAVI was uncommon. CONCLUSION: The presence of CAD or nonrevascularized myocardium was not associated with an increased risk of adverse events in this initial cohort. On the basis of these early results, complete revascularization may not constitute a prerequisite of TAVI. This conclusion will require re-assessment as experience accrues in patients with extensive CAD.

Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation for failed bioprosthetic heart valves.

BACKGROUND: The majority of prosthetic heart valves currently implanted are tissue valves that can be expected to degenerate with time and eventually fail. Repeat cardiac surgery to replace these valves is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Transcatheter heart valve implantation within a failed bioprosthesis, a "valve-in-valve" procedure, may offer a less invasive alternative. METHODS AND RESULTS: Valve-in-valve implantations were performed in 24 high-risk patients. Failed valves were aortic (n=10), mitral (n=7), pulmonary (n=6), or tricuspid (n=1) bioprostheses. Implantation was successful with immediate restoration of satisfactory valve function in all but 1 patient. No patient had more than mild regurgitation after implantation. No patients died during the procedure. Thirty-day mortality was 4.2%. Mortality was related primarily to learning-curve issues early in this high-risk experience. At baseline, 88% of patients were in New York Heart Association functional class III or IV; at the last follow-up, 88% of patients were in class I or II. At a median follow-up of 135 days (interquartile range, 46 to 254 days) and a maximum follow-up of 1045 days, 91.7% of patients remained alive with satisfactory valve function. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation is a reproducible option for the management of bioprosthetic valve failure. Aortic, pulmonary, mitral, and tricuspid tissue valves were amenable to this approach. This finding may have important implications with regard to valve replacement in high-risk patients.

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation: follow-up to 3 years.

BACKGROUND: We performed the first human case of successful transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation on a beating heart in October 2005, and therefore we have the longest follow-up on transapical aortic valve implantation in humans. We now report clinical and echocardiographic outcomes of transapical aortic valve implantation in 71 patients. METHODS: Between October 2005 and February 2009, 71 patients (44 female) underwent transcatheter transapical aortic valve implantation with either 23- or 26-mm Edwards Lifesciences transcatheter bioprostheses. All patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis were declined for conventional aortic valve replacement owing to unacceptable operative risks and were not candidates for transfemoral aortic valve implantation because of poor arterial access. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-ups were performed before discharge, at 1 and 6 months, and then yearly. The mean follow-up was 12.9 +/- 11.5 months with a total of 917.3 months of follow-up. RESULTS: Mean age was 80.0 +/- 8.1 years and predicted operative mortality was 34.5% +/- 20.4% by logistic EuroSCORE and 12.1% +/- 7.7% by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Calculator. Valves were successfully implanted in all patients. Twelve patients died within 30 days (30-day mortality: 16.9% in all patients, 33% in the first 15 patients, and 12.5% in the remainder), and 10 patients died subsequently. Overall survival at 24 and 36 months was 66.3% +/- 6.4% and 58.0% +/- 9.5%, respectively. Among 59 patients who survived at least 30 days, 24- and 36-month survivals were 79.8% +/- 6.4% and 69.8% +/- 10.9%, respectively. Late valve-related complications were rare. New York Heart Association functional class improved significantly from preoperative 3.3 +/- 0.8 to 1.8 +/- 0.8 at 24 months. The aortic valve area and mean gradient remained stable at 24 months (1.6 +/- 0.3 cm(2) and 10.3 +/- 5.9 mm Hg, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our outcome suggests that transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation provides sustained clinical and hemodynamic benefits for up to 36 months in selected high-risk patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis.

Transcatheter valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation: 16-month follow-up.

Off-pump transcatheter, transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation into a failed surgically implanted aortic valve was successfully performed in an 85-year-old man. He was discharged on postoperative day 5, and remained well at his 16-month follow-up. Echocardiography at 12 months showed normal prosthetic valve function without displacement, recoil, or regurgitation. Transcatheter transapical valve-in-valve aortic valve implantation is feasible and could be a viable approach for selected patients.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: impact on clinical and valve-related outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an alternative to open heart surgery in patients with aortic stenosis. However, long-term data on a programmatic approach to aortic valve implantation remain sparse. METHODS AND RESULTS: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was performed in 168 patients (median age, 84 years) in the setting of severe aortic stenosis and high surgical risk. Access was transarterial (n=113) or, in the presence of small iliofemoral artery diameter, transapical (n=55). The overall success rate was 94.1% in this early experience. Intraprocedural mortality was 1.2%. Operative (30-day) mortality was 11.3%, lower in the transarterial group than the transapical group (8.0% versus 18.2%; P=0.07). Overall mortality fell from 14.3% in the initial half to 8.3% in the second half of the experience, from 12.3% to 3.6% (P=0.16) in transarterial patients and from 25% to 11.1% (P=0.30) in transapical patients. Functional class improved over the 1-year postprocedure period (P<0.001). Survival at 1 year was 74%. The bulk of late readmission and mortality was not procedure or valve related but rather was due to comorbidities. Paravalvular regurgitation was common but generally mild and remained stable at late follow-up. At a maximum of >3 years and a median of 221 days, structural valve failure was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation can result in early and sustained functional improvement in high-risk aortic stenosis patients. Late outcome is determined primarily by comorbidities unrelated to aortic valve disease.

Transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation in a human.

We describe a human transcatheter transapical mitral valve implant within a mitral bioprosthesis (valve-in-valve). A high-risk, 80-year-old man with symptomatic bioprosthetic mitral stenosis was positioned for anterior minithoracotomy. Left ventricular apical access was obtained. After balloon valvuloplasty, a cuffed, 26-mm Cribier-Edwards transcatheter valve (Edwards Lifesciences LLC, Irvine, CA) was deployed within the mitral xenograft, using rapid ventricular pacing. The transcatheter valve functioned properly postoperatively; however, the patient died of multiple organ dysfunction.

Transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation: 1-year outcome in 26 patients.

BACKGROUND: We reported the first case of successful transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation in a human subject in 2005 and have now completed a 12-month follow-up on our first 26 patients. This is, to date, the longest follow-up of patients undergoing transapical aortic valve implantation. METHODS: Between October 2005 and January 2007, 26 patients (13 female) underwent transcatheter transapical aortic valve implantation with either 23- or 26-mm Edwards Lifesciences transcatheter bioprostheses. All patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis were declined for conventional aortic valve replacement because of unacceptable operative risks and were not candidates for transfemoral aortic valve implantation because of poor arterial access. Clinical and echocardiographic follow-up was performed before discharge and at 1, 6, and 12 months. Data from the 17 patients who survived over 12 months were used for comparisons of the baseline and follow-up results. RESULTS: The mean age was 80 +/- 9 years, and the predicted operative mortality was 37% +/- 20% by using logistic EuroSCORE and 11% +/- 6% by using the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Risk Calculator. Valves were successfully implanted in all patients. Six patients died within 30 days (30-day mortality, 23%), and 3 patients died from noncardiovascular causes after 30 days (late mortality, 12%). Among patients who survived at least 30 days, 12-month survival was 85%. There were no late valve-related complications. New York Heart Association functional class improved significantly. The aortic valve area and mean gradient remained stable at 12 months (1.6 +/- 0.3 cm(2) and 9.6 +/- 4.8 mm Hg, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our 1-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes suggest that transapical transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a viable alternative to conventional aortic valve replacement in selected high-risk patients.