Balloon-expanding transcatheter aortic valve implantation for degenerated Mitroflow bioprostheses: clinical and echocardiographic long-term outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to analyse the risks associated with valve-in-valve procedures for treating structural valve deterioration in Mitroflow bioprostheses, as well as to determine the impact of the original Mitroflow size on the patients' long-term outcomes. METHODS: Between January 2012 and September 2019, 21 patients (61.9% males; mean age 82.4 ± 5.4 years) were treated for Mitroflow deterioration with valve-in-valve procedures (12 transapical and 9 transfemoral). RESULTS: Mean EuroSCORE I and EuroSCORE II were 28.2% ± 13.6% and 10.5% ± 6.1%, respectively. Six patients presented an indexed aortic root diameter <14 mm/m2 and 7 patients a diameter of sinus of Valsalva <30 mm. Implanted transcatheter valve sizes were 20 mm in 6 cases, 23 mm in 14 cases and 26 mm in 1 patient. A Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 complication occurred in 23.8% of cases, including 3 coronary occlusions. In-hospital mortality was 9.5%. The 20 mm transcatheter valves presented significantly higher postoperative peak and mean aortic gradients than other sizes (54.1 ± 11.3 mmHg vs 29.9 ± 9.6 mmHg, P = 0.003; and 29.3 ± 7.7 mmHg vs 17.4 ± 5.9 mmHg, P = 0.015, respectively). There were 12 cases of patient-prosthesis mismatch (57.1%) and 3 cases (14.3%) of severe patient-prosthesis mismatch. Cumulative survival was 85.7% ± 7.6% at 1 year, 74.3% ± 10% at 2 years and 37.1% ± 14.1% at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Valve-in-valve procedures with balloon-expandable transcatheter valves associate a high risk of coronary occlusion in patients with indexed aortic root diameter <14 mm/m2 and low coronary ostia <12 mm. Valve-in valve procedures with 20 mm balloon-expandable transcatheter valves in ≤21 mm Mitroflow bioprosthesis leave significant residual transvalvular gradients that might obscure patients' long-term outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of transcatheter valve-in-valve replacement for Mitroflow bioprosthetic valve dysfunction.

OBJECTIVES: Bioprostheses with pericardial leaflets mounted externally on the stent pose a high risk for valve-in-valve (ViV) procedures. This study analyzed the efficacy and safety of ViV procedures for treating structural valve deterioration (SVD) in Mitroflow bioprostheses. METHODS: Between January 2012 and August 2017, 11 patients (mean age 80.3 ± 5.6 years) were treated for SVD of Mitroflow bioprostheses with transcatheter ViV procedures (six transapical [TA] and five transfemoral [TF]) using balloon expandable bioprostheses. RESULTS: All patients but one were in NYHA class III-IV. Mean STS PROM, euroSCORE I, and euroSCORE II were 8 ± 6.5%, 27.8 ± 11.5%, and 12 ± 5.9%, respectively. Two patients had a "porcelain aorta." The size of implanted valves were 23 mm in 10 cases and 26 mm in one case. One patient suffered a coronary occlusion during a TF approach. The mean volume of contrast used in TF implants was 163 ± 69.8 mL. No contrast media were used in TA procedures. There was one in-hospital death (10%). At 1 year of follow-up, peak and mean aortic gradients were 25.5 ± 5.8 mmHg and 15.5 ± 5.7 mmHg, respectively. One patient had mild paravalvular regurgitation. Cumulative survival was 90.9% at 1 year, 70.7% at 2 years, and 53% at 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: ViV procedures with balloon-expandable aortic valves provide good hemodynamic and clinical mid-term results for treating patients with a degenerated Mitroflow aortic bioprosthesis. Special care must be taken in small aortic roots, when the stented valve is in the supra-annular position to avoid coronary ostial obstruction.

Percutaneous closure of paravalvular leaks after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with Edwards SAPIEN prosthesis: a report of two cases.

Significant periprosthetic aortic regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve implantation with Edwards SAPIEN prosthesis has become a major concern of this technique given its association with impaired survival. We report the successful closure of such defects using vascular occlusion devices with significant improvement in clinical status of patients.

Effect of stent thrombosis on the risk-benefit balance of drug-eluting stents and bare metal stents.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To determine the difference in the risk of stent thrombosis between drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) and to assess the clinical implications. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of two cohorts of patients treated at our center with either > or =1 paclitaxeleluting stents (PES) (n=430) or > or =1 BMSs (n=1230) during 2003-2004 was carried out using propensity score methods to compare the adjusted risks of stent thrombosis, instent restenosis, cardiovascular death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), and target-lesion revascularization with the two stent types. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 46 months, there was a higher risk of stent thrombosis in PESs (hazard ratio [HR]=3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.2-7.1] though the risk of in-stent restenosis was lower (HR=0.3; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7]. There was no difference in the risk of cardiovascular death, AMI or target-lesion revascularization. With PESs, the risks of target-lesion revascularization (HR=0.33; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7) and in-stent restenosis (HR=0.32; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7) were reduced during the first year of follow-up. After this time, the risks of target-lesion revascularization (HR=1.8; 95% CI, 1-3.2) and very late stent thrombosis (HR=12.8; 95% CI, 3-55.1) both increased. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the balance of risks and benefits of PESs compared with BMSs is different in the early and late periods after stent implantation. The greatly increased risk of very late stent thrombosis in PESs could cancel out the clinical benefits associated with the reduction in in-stent restenosis observed in PESs relative to BMSs.

[Transradial approach to coronary angiography and angioplasty: initial experience and learning curve]. / Coronariografía y angioplastia coronaria por vía radial: experiencia incial curva de aprendizaje.

INTRODUCTION: The transradial approach has emerged as an attractive alternative to the femoral approach for coronary angiography and interventions. We describe our experience with the transradial approach and analyze the influence of the learning curve. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The transradial approach was attempted in patients with a good radial pulse and normal Allen test. When feasible and clinically indicated, we attempted ad hoc intervention. We divided the study population into two groups: Group A (the first 200 cases) and B (all other patients). We compared the radial group with a matched femoral control group. RESULTS: We attempted the transradial approach in 526 patients (77.6% male; age 63.5 +/- 11.51), and obtained a success rate of 93.7%. We found differences between group A and B in the success rate (91.0 vs 95.4%, p = 0,04), duration of procedure [23 (16-29) vs. 19 (15-24) minutes; p < 0.001], and fluoroscopy time [6.4 (4.2-10) vs. 5.0 (3.0-7.7) minutes; p < 0,001]. At 24 h of follow-up, we found small hematomas in 9.4%, bleeding in 4.9%, and radial artery obstruction in 2.8%, with no cases of arteriovenous fistula, pseudoaneurysm, or need for vascular surgery. We attempted intervention in 169 patients with 258 lesions, achieving angiographic success in 96.1%. We found no differences in the characteristics of the lesions and patients, or in the angiographic success rate of the radial and femoral PTCA groups. CONCLUSIONS: The transradial approach is a safe and effective alternative to femoral catheterization. There is a significant learning curve associated with the successful performance of transradial procedures.