Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus isolated redo surgical aortic valve replacement

被引:9
作者
Yousef, Sarah [1 ]
Serna-Gallegos, Derek [1 ,2 ]
Iyanna, Nidhi [3 ]
Kliner, Dustin [2 ]
Brown, James A. [1 ,2 ]
Toma, Catalin [2 ]
Makani, Amber [2 ]
West, David [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Yisi [2 ]
Thoma, Floyd W. [2 ]
Ahmad, Danial [1 ,2 ]
Yoon, Pyongsoo [1 ,2 ]
Chu, Danny [1 ,2 ]
Kaczorowski, David [1 ,2 ]
Bonatti, Johannes [1 ,2 ]
Sultan, Ibrahim [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Pittsburgh, Dept Cardiothorac Surg, Div Cardiac Surg, Pittsburgh, PA 15232 USA
[2] Univ Pittsburgh, Heart & Vasc Inst, Med Ctr, Pittsburgh, PA 15232 USA
[3] Univ Pittsburgh, Sch Med, Pittsburgh, PA 15232 USA
关键词
surgical aortic valve replacement; transcath- eter aortic valve replacement; aortic stenosis; valve-in-valve; IMPLANTATION; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.jtcvs.2023.06.014
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare outcomes of patients undergoing valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV TAVR) versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). Methods: This was a retrospective study using institutional databases of transcatheter (2013-2022) and surgical (2011-2022) aortic valve replacements. Patients who underwent ViV TAVR were compared with patients who underwent redo isolated SAVR. Clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier survival estimation and Cox regression were performed. Cumulative incidence functions were generated for heart failure readmissions. Results: A total of 4200 TAVRs and 2306 isolated SAVRs were performed. Of these, there were 198 patients who underwent ViV TAVR and 147 patients who underwent redo SAVR. Operative mortality was 2% in each group, but observed to expected operative mortality in the redo SAVR group was higher than in the ViV TAVR group (1.2 vs 0.32). Those who underwent redo SAVR were more likely to require transfusions and reoperation for bleeding, to have new-onset renal failure requiring dialysis, and to require a permanent pacemaker postoperatively than those in the ViV group. Mean gradient was significantly lower in the redo SAVR group than in the ViV group at 30 days and 1 year. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates at 1 year were comparable, and on multivariable Cox regression, ViV TAVR was not significantly associated with an increased hazard of death compared with redo SAVR (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.65-2.99; P = .40). Competing-risk cumulative incidence estimates for heart-failure readmissions were higher in the ViV cohort. Conclusions: ViV TAVR and redo SAVR were associated with comparable mortality. Patients who underwent redo SAVR had lower postoperative mean gradients and greater freedom from heart failure readmissions, but they also had more postoperative complications than the VIV group, despite their lower baseline risk profiles.
引用
收藏
页码:1003 / 1010
页数:8
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]   Valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus redo surgical aortic valve replacement: A systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Ahmed, Adham ;
Levy, Kenneth H. .
JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2021, 36 (07) :2486-2495
[2]   Isolated aortic valve replacement in North America comprising 108,687 patients in 10 years: Changes in risks, valve types, and outcomes in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database [J].
Brown, James M. ;
O'Brien, Sean M. ;
Wu, Changfu ;
Sikora, Jo Ann H. ;
Griffith, Bartley P. ;
Gammie, James S. .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2009, 137 (01) :82-90
[3]   Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Failed Bioprosthetic Surgical Valves [J].
Dvir, Danny ;
Webb, John G. ;
Bleiziffer, Sabine ;
Pasic, Miralem ;
Waksman, Ron ;
Kodali, Susheel ;
Barbanti, Marco ;
Latib, Azeem ;
Schaefer, Ulrich ;
Rodes-Cabau, Josep ;
Treede, Hendrik ;
Piazza, Nicolo ;
Hildick-Smith, David ;
Himbert, Dominique ;
Walther, Thomas ;
Hengstenberg, Christian ;
Nissen, Henrik ;
Bekeredjian, Raffi ;
Presbitero, Patrizia ;
Ferrari, Enrico ;
Segev, Amit ;
de Weger, Arend ;
Windecker, Stephan ;
Moat, Neil E. ;
Napodano, Massimo ;
Wilbring, Manuel ;
Cerillo, Alfredo G. ;
Brecker, Stephen ;
Tchetche, Didier ;
Lefevre, Thierry ;
De Marco, Federico ;
Fiorina, Claudia ;
Petronio, Anna Sonia ;
Teles, Rui C. ;
Testa, Luca ;
Laborde, Jean-Claude ;
Leon, Martin B. ;
Kornowski, Ran .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2014, 312 (02) :162-170
[4]   Contemporary trends and in-hospital outcomes of mechanical and bioprosthetic surgical aortic valve replacement in the United States [J].
Hiltner, Emily ;
Erinne, Ikenna ;
Singh, Anjuli ;
Chen, Chunguang ;
Kassotis, John ;
Russo, Mark ;
Sethi, Ankur .
JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2022, 37 (07) :1980-1988
[5]   Outcomes of tissue versus mechanical aortic valve replacement in patients 50 to 70 years of age [J].
Huckaby, Lauren, V ;
Sultan, Ibrahim ;
Gleason, Thomas G. ;
Chen, Shangzhen ;
Thoma, Floyd ;
Navid, Forozan ;
Kilic, Arman .
JOURNAL OF CARDIAC SURGERY, 2020, 35 (10) :2589-2597
[6]   Mechanical versus Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Replacement in Middle-Aged Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis [J].
Jiang, Yefan ;
Wang, Song ;
Bian, Jinhui ;
Chen, Si ;
Shao, Yongfeng .
JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR DEVELOPMENT AND DISEASE, 2023, 10 (02)
[7]   Contemporary Outcomes of Repeat Aortic Valve Replacement: A Benchmark for Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Procedures [J].
Kaneko, Tsuyoshi ;
Vassileva, Christina M. ;
Englum, Brian ;
Kim, Sunghee ;
Yammine, Maroun ;
Brennan, Matthew ;
Suri, Rakesh M. ;
Thourani, Vinod H. ;
Jacobs, Jeffrey P. ;
Aranki, Sary .
ANNALS OF THORACIC SURGERY, 2015, 100 (04) :1298-1304
[8]   Meta-Analysis of Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Implantation Versus Redo Aortic Valve Surgery for Bioprosthetic Aortic Valve Dysfunction [J].
Neupane, Saroj ;
Singh, Hemindermeet ;
Laemmer, Johannes ;
Othman, Hussein ;
Yamasaki, Hiroshi ;
Rosman, Howard S. ;
Bossone, Eduardo ;
Mehta, Rajendra H. ;
Eggebrecht, Holger .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY, 2018, 121 (12) :1593-1600
[9]   Challenges in valve-in-valve therapy [J].
Noorani, Alia ;
Radia, Rahee ;
Bapat, Vinayak .
JOURNAL OF THORACIC DISEASE, 2015, 7 (09) :1501-1508
[10]  
Otto CM, 2021, CIRCULATION, V143, pe72, DOI [10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.018, 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000923, 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000932, 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.11.035]