-
Heart Views : the Official Journal of... 2022Transcatheter aortic valve in valve (Aviv) replacement has been shown to be an effective therapeutic option in patients with failed aortic bioprosthetic valves. This... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Transcatheter aortic valve in valve (Aviv) replacement has been shown to be an effective therapeutic option in patients with failed aortic bioprosthetic valves. This review intended to evaluate contemporary 1-year outcomes of Aviv in recent studies.
METHODS
A systematic review on outcomes of Aviv was performed using the best available evidence from studies obtained using a MEDLINE, Cochrane database, and SCOPUS search. Endpoints of interest were survival, coronary artery obstruction, prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), stroke, pacemaker implantation, and structural valve deterioration.
RESULTS
A total of 3339 patients from 23 studies were included. Mean age was 68-80 years, 20%-50% were female, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons score ranged from 5.7 to 31.1. Thirty-day all-cause mortality ranged from 2% to 8%, and 1-year all-cause mortality ranged from 8% to 33%. Coronary artery obstruction risk after Aviv ranged from 0.6% to 4%. One-year stroke ranged from 2% to 8%. Moderate-severe PPM occurred in 11%-58%, and pacemaker rate at 1 year ranged from 5% to 12%.
CONCLUSION
Transcatheter aortic ViV has emerged as an effective therapeutic option to treat patients with failed bioprostheses. The acceptable complication rate and favorable 1-year outcomes make Aviv an appropriate alternative to redo surgical aortic valve replacement.
PubMed: 35757448
DOI: 10.4103/heartviews.heartviews_25_22 -
Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic... Jul 2022The long-term results in studies comparing octogenarian patients who received either isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (i-SAVR) or coronary artery bypass... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The impact of coronary artery bypass grafting added to aortic valve replacement on long-term outcomes in octogenarian patients: a reconstructed time-to-event meta-analysis.
The long-term results in studies comparing octogenarian patients who received either isolated surgical aortic valve replacement (i-SAVR) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in addition to SAVR are still debated. We performed a reconstructed time-to-event data meta-analysis of studies comparing i-SAVR and CABG+SAVR to evaluate the impact of CABG and to analyse the time-varying effects on long-term outcome. We performed a systematic review of the literature from January 2000 through November 2021, including studies comparing i-SAVR and CABG+SAVR, which reported at least 3-year follow-up and that plotted Kaplan-Meier curves of overall survival. The primary endpoint was overall long-term survival; secondary endpoints were in-hospital/30-day mortality and postoperative outcomes. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) and odds ratio) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for primary and secondary endpoints, respectively. Random-effect model was used in all analyses. Sixteen retrospective studies were included (5382 patients, i-SAVR = 2568 and CABG+SAVR = 2814). I-SAVR showed a lower incidence of in-hospital mortality compared to CABG+SAVR (odds ratio = 0.73; 95% CI= 0.60-0.89; P = 0.002). Landmark analyses showed a significantly higher all-cause mortality within 1 year from surgery in CABG+SAVR (HR = 1.17; 95% CI = 1.01-1.36; P = 0.03); after 1 year, no significant difference was observed (HR = 0.95; 95% CI = 0.87-1.04; P = 0.35). Landmark analysis was confirmed by time-varying trend of HR. Late survival of octogenarians did not differ significantly between the 2 interventions. Interestingly, CABG added to SAVR was associated with both higher in-hospital and within 1-year mortality after surgery, whereas this difference was statistically non-significant at long-term follow-up.
Topics: Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Coronary Artery Bypass; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Octogenarians; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35723556
DOI: 10.1093/icvts/ivac164 -
Current Cardiology Reviews 2023The development of atrioventricular bioprosthesis has witnessed an increasing drive toward clinical translation over the last few decades. A significant challenge in the...
BACKGROUND
The development of atrioventricular bioprosthesis has witnessed an increasing drive toward clinical translation over the last few decades. A significant challenge in the clinical translation of an atrioventricular bioprosthesis from bench to bedside is the appropriate choice of a large animal model to test the safety and effectiveness of the device.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review of pre-clinical in vivo studies that would enable us to synthesize a recommended framework. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and MetaAnalyses) guidelines were followed to identify and extract relevant articles.
RESULTS
Sheep was the most common choice of animal, with nine out of the 12 included studies being conducted on sheep. There were acute and chronic studies based on our search criteria. An average of ~20 and 5 animals were used for chronic and acute studies. One out of three acute studies and eight out of nine chronic studies were on stented heart valve bioprosthesis. All analyses were conducted on the implantation of atrioventricular valves with trileaflet, except for one chronic study on unileaflet valves and one chronic and acute study on bileaflet valves.
CONCLUSION
Understanding the variance in past pre-clinical study designs may increase the appropriate utilization of large animal models. This synthesized evidence provides a pre-clinical in vivo studies framework for future research on an atrioventricular bioprosthesis.
Topics: Humans; Animals; Sheep; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Mitral Valve; Prosthesis Design; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Bioprosthesis
PubMed: 35718960
DOI: 10.2174/1573403X18666220617115216 -
Journal of the American Heart... Jun 2022Background There is a concern that resheathing/repositioning of transcatheter heart valves during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may lead to an increased... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Background There is a concern that resheathing/repositioning of transcatheter heart valves during transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) may lead to an increased risk of periprocedural complications. We aimed to evaluate the short- and long-term impact on clinical outcomes of resheathing for repositioning of transcatheter heart valves during TAVI procedures. Methods and Results We conducted a systematic search of Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases to identify studies comparing outcomes between patients requiring resheathing/repositioning during TAVI and those who did not. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to estimate the association of resheathing compared with no resheathing with clinical outcomes after TAVI. Seven studies including 4501 participants (pooled mean age, 80.9±7.4 years; 54% women; and 1374 [30.5%] patients requiring resheathing/repositioning) were included in this study. No significant differences between the 2 groups were identified with regards to safety: 30-day mortality (n=3125; odds ratio [OR], 0.74 [95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41-1.33]; =0%), stroke (n=4121; OR, 1.09 [95% CI, 0.74-1.62]; =0%), coronary obstruction (n=3000; OR, 2.35 [95% CI, 0.17-33.47]; =75%), major vascular complications (n=3125; OR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.66-1.33]; =0%), major bleeding (n=3125; OR, 1.13 [95% CI, 0.94-2.01]; =39%), acute kidney injury (n=3495; OR, 1.30 [95% CI, 0.64-2.62]; =44%), and efficacy outcomes: device success (n=1196; OR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.51-1.14]; =0%), need for a second valve (n=3170; OR, 2.86 [95% CI, 0.96-8.48]; =62%), significant (moderate or higher) paravalvular leak (n=1151; OR, 1.53 [95% CI, 0.83-2.80]; =0%), and permanent pacemaker implantation (n=1908; OR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.68-1.57]; =58%). One-year mortality was similar between groups (n=1972; OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.68-1.47]; =0%). Conclusions Resheathing of transcatheter heart valves during TAVI is associated with similar periprocedural risk compared with no resheathing in several patient-important outcomes. These data support the safety of current self-expanding transcatheter heart valves with resheathing features. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Unique identifier: CRD42021273715.
Topics: Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Humans; Male; Postoperative Complications; Risk Factors; Stroke; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35699176
DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.024707 -
Clinical Cardiology Jul 2022Either a mechanical or bioprosthetic valve is used in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement (MVR). However, the optimal mitral prosthesis remains controversial.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Either a mechanical or bioprosthetic valve is used in patients undergoing mitral valve replacement (MVR). However, the optimal mitral prosthesis remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was thus to compare outcomes between mechanical mitral valve replacement (MVRm) and bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement (MVRb) for MVR patients. We searched Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from January 1, 2000 to October 31, 2021 for studies that directly compared surgical outcomes of MVRm and MVRb. A total of 22 studies with 35 903 patients were included in the meta-analysis (n = 23 868 MVRm and n = 12 035 MVRb). The MVRm group displayed lower long-term all causes mortality (HR, 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.77-0.91; p < .0001; I² = 51%), and fewer mitral reoperation (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.23-0.50; p < .00001; I² = 74%) than MVRb group. However, the MVRm group was associated with a greater risk of major bleeding events (HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 1.14-1.29; p < .00001; I² = 0%), stroke and systemic embolism (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.10-1.32; p < .0001; I² = 0%) in matched or adjusted data. No significant difference was observed between MVRm and MVRb on operative mortality in matched/adjusted group (risk ratios: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.66-1.05; p = .12; I² = 0%). The results were consistent with patients aged under 70 years old. Patients who received a MVRm is associated with 16% lower risk of long-term mortality and 66% lower risk of mitral reoperation, but 20% greater risk of stroke or systemic embolism, 21% greater risk of major bleeding compared with MVRb in matched/adjusted studies group, which were consistent to patients younger than the age of 70 years who underwent MVR.
Topics: Aged; Biological Products; Bioprosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Hemorrhage; Humans; Mitral Valve; Reoperation; Retrospective Studies; Stroke; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35665516
DOI: 10.1002/clc.23854 -
Current Cardiology Reviews 2022Paravalvular Leak (PVL) refers to the retrograde flow of blood in the space between an implanted cardiac valve and native tissue. These are unfortunately but luckily...
BACKGROUND
Paravalvular Leak (PVL) refers to the retrograde flow of blood in the space between an implanted cardiac valve and native tissue. These are unfortunately but luckily relatively uncommon complications of prosthetic valve replacement that, especially when moderate or severe, have important clinical consequences.
OBJECTIVE
Addressing PVL requires a multidisciplinary team to properly diagnose this process and choose the corrective option most likely to result in success.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was undertaken to formulate this narrative review.
RESULTS
This review highlights the complex nature of PVL and the promising contemporary treatments available.
CONCLUSION
Clinicians should be adept at recognizing PVL and characterizing it using multimodality imaging. Using the many available tools and a multidisciplinary approach should lead to favorable outcomes in patients with PVL.
Topics: Humans; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Insufficiency; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Retrospective Studies; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35546743
DOI: 10.2174/1573403X18666220511113310 -
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders May 2022With advancements in cancer treatment, the life expectancy of oncology patients has improved. Thus, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be considered as a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
With advancements in cancer treatment, the life expectancy of oncology patients has improved. Thus, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may be considered as a feasible option for oncology patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS). We aim to evaluate the difference in short- and long-term all-cause mortality in cancer and non-cancer patients treated with TAVR for severe AS.
METHODS
Medline, PubMed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant studies. Patients with cancer who underwent treatment with TAVR for severe AS were included and compared to an identical population without cancer. The primary endpoints were short- and long-term all-cause mortality.
RESULTS
Of 899 studies included, 8 met inclusion criteria. Cancer patients had significantly higher long-term all-cause mortality after TAVR when compared to patients without cancer (risk ratio [RR] 1.43; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-1.62; P < 0.01). Four studies evaluated short-term mortality after TAVR and demonstrated no difference in it in patients with and without cancer (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.47-1.08; P = 0.11).
CONCLUSION
Patients with cancer and severe AS have higher long-term all-cause mortality after TAVR. However, we found no difference in short-term all-cause mortality when comparing patients with and without cancer. The decision to perform TAVR in cancer patients should be individualized based on life expectancy and existing co-morbidities.
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Neoplasms; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35538411
DOI: 10.1186/s12872-022-02651-4 -
Heart and Vessels Oct 2022In aged population, the early and long-term outcomes of coronary revascularization (CABG) added to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) compared to isolated SAVR... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The early and long-term outcomes of coronary artery bypass grafting added to aortic valve replacement compared to isolated aortic valve replacement in elderly patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
In aged population, the early and long-term outcomes of coronary revascularization (CABG) added to surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) compared to isolated SAVR (i-SAVR) are conflicting. To address this limitation, a meta-analysis comparing the early and late outcomes of SAVR plus CABG with i-SAVR was performed. Electronic databases from January 2000 to November 2021 were screened. Studies reporting early-term and long-term comparison between the two treatments in patients over 75 years were analyzed. The primary endpoints were in-hospital/30-day mortality and overall long-term survival. The pooled odd ratio (OR) and hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for in-early outcome and long-term survival, respectively. Random-effect model was used in all analyses. Forty-four retrospective observational studies reporting on 74,560 patients (i-SAVR = 36,062; SAVR + CABG = 38,498) were included for comparison. The pooled analysis revealed that i-SAVR was significantly associated with lower rate of early mortality compared to SAVR plus CABG (OR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.66-0.75; p < 0.0001) and with lower incidence of postoperative acute renal failure (OR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.91; p = 0.02), need for dialysis (OR = 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.86; p = 0.002) and prolonged mechanical ventilation (OR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.42-0.77; p < 0.0001). Twenty-two studies reported data of long-term follow-up. No differences were reported between the two groups in long-term survival (HR = 0.95; 95% CI 0.87-1.03; p = 0.23). CABG added to SAVR is associated with worse early outcomes in terms of early mortality, postoperative acute renal failure, and prolonged mechanical ventilation. Long-term survival was comparable between the two treatments.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Aged; Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Coronary Artery Bypass; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Risk Factors; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35532809
DOI: 10.1007/s00380-022-02073-4 -
Hellenic Journal of Cardiology : HJC =... 2022The ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve is a self-expanding device suitable for both transfemoral and transapical approach, but specific groups of patients are... (Review)
Review
The ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve is a self-expanding device suitable for both transfemoral and transapical approach, but specific groups of patients are under-represented in clinical trials. We aim to provide a comprehensive systematic review on TAVI with ACURATE neo in those special populations. TAVI in bicuspid aortic valve, TAVI in patients with small aortic annulus, TAVI for pure aortic regurgitation and valve-in-valve procedures, were systematically reviewed. The primary endpoint was device success as defined by VARC-2 criteria. The secondary endpoints were safety and performance outcomes according to VARC-2 consensus document.ACURATE neo exhibited similar outcomes in bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic valve except for pre and post-dilatation rates in one observational study. Lower mean aortic gradient and higher pre-dilatation rates with comparable safety outcomes were described for ACURATE neo when compared to Lotus and Evolut-R for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. 2 studies compared ACURATE in small aortic annuli. ACURATE neo showed lower transvalvular gradients and lower patient prosthesis mismatch rates compared to Sapien 3 and when compared to Evolut R/ Evolut PRO/ Portico, results were similar except for pre-dilatation rates. 3 studies investigated ACURATE neo for pure aortic regurgitation and one for valve-in-valve procedure and demonstrated safety and efficacy, with the exception of malposition events in patients designated for higher valve deployment in the valve-in-valve implantation study.ACURATE neo valve may be a feasible and safe option for patients with bicuspid anatomy, small aortic annulus, previously implanted bioprosthetic aortic valve and pure aortic regurgitation. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Available at https://osf.io/aus26 (DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/AUS26).
Topics: Aortic Valve; Aortic Valve Insufficiency; Aortic Valve Stenosis; Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease; Heart Valve Prosthesis; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Prosthesis Design; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35508295
DOI: 10.1016/j.hjc.2022.04.005 -
Sex-Related Differences in Transcatheter Mitral Valve Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Cardiology 2022Inequalities in postoperative outcomes between males and females are well described with females often experiencing inferior outcomes after heart valve surgery. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Inequalities in postoperative outcomes between males and females are well described with females often experiencing inferior outcomes after heart valve surgery. The recent literature has demonstrated equivalent or improved outcomes for females after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Transcatheter mitral valve repair (TMVr) and replacement (TMVR) is a relatively newer field with significantly less literature comparing sex differences. This systematic review and meta-analysis looks to provide a comprehensive summary of the published literature comparing outcomes between males and females undergoing transcatheter MV interventions.
METHODS
PubMed, MEDLINE, and Scopus were systematically searched for all studies comparing outcomes between males and females undergoing TMVr and TMVR. A total of 2,178 English manuscript titles and abstracts were reviewed. Articles were excluded if data were not provided regarding sex differences, transcatheter MV intervention, full-length text was not accessible, or if insufficient data was provided. A total of 2,170 articles were excluded, and 8 articles were included in this study.
RESULTS
Pooled estimates of outcomes demonstrated rates of acute kidney injury (OR 1.28 [95% CI, 1.14-1.44; p < 0.0001]) favored females, while rates of major bleeding favored males (OR 0.85 [95% CI 0.76-0.96; p = 0.01]). Rates of mortality, postoperative MI, and stroke did not differ significantly.
CONCLUSION
A trend has emerged in heart valve interventions with males tending to have improved outcomes after surgical intervention and females experiencing equivalent or improved outcomes after transcatheter interventions. This meta-analysis identified increased rates of acute kidney injury for males, increased rates of major bleeding for females, and otherwise comparable morbidity and mortality in males and females undergoing TMVr.
Topics: Acute Kidney Injury; Cardiac Catheterization; Female; Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation; Humans; Male; Mitral Valve; Mitral Valve Insufficiency; Sex Characteristics; Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35443246
DOI: 10.1159/000524378