Comparison of 1-year clinical results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using prostheses with two different frame designs in 124 patients in a single center_Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Authors：

ZHANG Peide ¹ , LI Fei ² , WANG Xu ² , XU Donghui ² , WANG Yuetang ² , WU Yongjian ² ,  WANG Wei ²

1. Department of Surgical ICU, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Disease, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100037, P.R.China;
2. Department of Structural Heart Disease, Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Disease, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, 100037, P.R.China;

Corresponding author：

WANG Wei, Email: drweiwangfuwai@163.com

Keywords：

Artifical stent valve; transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR); permanent pacemaker implantation; short-term prognosis; intervention treatment

DOI：

10.7507/1007-4848.202103089

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To compare and analyze the clinical effects of two kinds of frame design valves after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).Methods We retrospectively reviewed 124 patients who underwent TAVR and were followed up for 1 year. There were 71 males and 53 females aged 75.57±6.21 years. These patients were treated with Venus-A or Edwards Sapien aortic valves. The hemodynamics and cardiac function of these two kinds of transcatheter aortic valves (THV) were evaluated by echocardiography. The 30-day mortality and 1-year clinical effect of the patients were calculated.Results Eight-one patients used Venus-A valve and 43 patients used Edwards Sapien valve. The aortic valve transaortic pressure gradient was reduced and the rate of perivalvular leakage was low (both 2.6%) in both groups, and there was no statistical difference between the two groups. The implantation rate of permanent pacemaker was 17.3% and 11.6%, respectively. The 1-month survival (94.0% and 93.0%) and 1-year survival (94.0% and 91.0%) rates were not statistically different.Conclusion The two groups of THV with different stent structures have good short-term clinical effect and low implantation rate of permanent pacemaker.

Citation： ZHANG Peide, LI Fei, WANG Xu, XU Donghui, WANG Yuetang, WU Yongjian, WANG Wei. Comparison of 1-year clinical results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using prostheses with two different frame designs in 124 patients in a single center. Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 2021, 28(8): 895-900. doi: 10.7507/1007-4848.202103089 Copy

1.	Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: First human case description. Circulation, 2002, 106(24): 3006-3008.
2.	Didier R, Eltchaninoff H, Donzeau-Gouge P, et al. Five-year clinical outcome and valve durability after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. Circulation, 2018, 138(23): 2597-2607.
3.	Panico RA, Giannini C, De Carlo M, et al. Long-term results and durability of the CoreValve transcatheter aortic bioprosthesis: Outcomes beyond five years. EuroIntervention, 2019, 14(16): 1639-1647.
4.	Silaschi M, Conradi L, Wendler O, et al. The JUPITER registry: One-year outcomes of transapical aortic valve implantation using a second generation transcatheter heart valve for aortic regurgitation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2018, 91(7): 1345-1351.
5.	Schofer J, Colombo A, Klugmann S, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2014, 63(8): 763-768.
6.	Liu X, Tang Y, Luo F, et al. Transapical implantation of a self-expandable aortic valve prosthesis utilizing a novel designed positioning element. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2017, 89(1): E30-E37.
7.	Kochman J, Huczek Z, Scisło P, et al. Comparison of one- and 12-month outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severely stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (results from a multicenter registry). Am J Cardiol, 2014, 114(5): 757-762.
8.	Webb JG, Altwegg L, Masson JB, et al. A new transcatheter aortic valve and percutaneous valve delivery system. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009, 53(20): 1855-1858.
9.	Grube E, Laborde JC, Gerckens U, et al. Percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve self-expanding valve prosthesis in high-risk patients with aortic valve disease: The Siegburg first-in-man study. Circulation, 2006, 114(15): 1616-1624.
10.	Liao YB, Zhao ZG, Wei X, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expandable venus A-Valve and CoreValve devices: Preliminary experiences in China. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2017, 89(S1): 528-533.
11.	Nietlispach F, Wijesinghe N, Wood D, et al. Current balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve and delivery systems. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2010, 75(2): 295-300.
12.	Li F, Wang X, Wang Y, et al. Structural valve deterioration after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using J-valve: A long-term follow-up. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2020, 26(3): 158-165.
13.	Gaede L, Kim WK, Liebetrau C, et al. Pacemaker implantation after TAVI: Predictors of AV block persistence. Clin Res Cardiol, 2018, 107(1): 60-69.
14.	Monteiro C, Ferrari ADL, Caramori PRA, et al. Permanent pacing after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Incidence, predictors and evolution of left ventricular function. Arq Bras Cardiol, 2017, 109(6): 550-559.
15.	Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med, 2019, 380(18): 1695-1705.
16.	Leon MB, Mack MJ, Hahn RT, et al. Outcomes 2 years after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients at low surgical risk. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2021, 77(9): 1149-1161.
17.	Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve re- placement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2015, 385: 2477-2484.
18.	Muntané-Carol G, Urena M, Nombela-Franco L, et al. Arrhythmic burden in patients with new-onset persistent left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: 2-year results of the MARE study. Europace, 2021, 23(2): 254-263.
19.	Theron A, Lavagna F, Gaubert G, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch is an independent predictor of congestive heart failure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Arch Cardiovasc Dis, 2021: S1875-2136(21)00003-6.

1. Cribier A, Eltchaninoff H, Bash A, et al. Percutaneous transcatheter implantation of an aortic valve prosthesis for calcific aortic stenosis: First human case description. Circulation, 2002, 106(24): 3006-3008.
2. Didier R, Eltchaninoff H, Donzeau-Gouge P, et al. Five-year clinical outcome and valve durability after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients. Circulation, 2018, 138(23): 2597-2607.
3. Panico RA, Giannini C, De Carlo M, et al. Long-term results and durability of the CoreValve transcatheter aortic bioprosthesis: Outcomes beyond five years. EuroIntervention, 2019, 14(16): 1639-1647.
4. Silaschi M, Conradi L, Wendler O, et al. The JUPITER registry: One-year outcomes of transapical aortic valve implantation using a second generation transcatheter heart valve for aortic regurgitation. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2018, 91(7): 1345-1351.
5. Schofer J, Colombo A, Klugmann S, et al. Prospective multicenter evaluation of the direct flow medical transcatheter aortic valve. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2014, 63(8): 763-768.
6. Liu X, Tang Y, Luo F, et al. Transapical implantation of a self-expandable aortic valve prosthesis utilizing a novel designed positioning element. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2017, 89(1): E30-E37.
7. Kochman J, Huczek Z, Scisło P, et al. Comparison of one- and 12-month outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with severely stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (results from a multicenter registry). Am J Cardiol, 2014, 114(5): 757-762.
8. Webb JG, Altwegg L, Masson JB, et al. A new transcatheter aortic valve and percutaneous valve delivery system. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2009, 53(20): 1855-1858.
9. Grube E, Laborde JC, Gerckens U, et al. Percutaneous implantation of the CoreValve self-expanding valve prosthesis in high-risk patients with aortic valve disease: The Siegburg first-in-man study. Circulation, 2006, 114(15): 1616-1624.
10. Liao YB, Zhao ZG, Wei X, et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expandable venus A-Valve and CoreValve devices: Preliminary experiences in China. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2017, 89(S1): 528-533.
11. Nietlispach F, Wijesinghe N, Wood D, et al. Current balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve and delivery systems. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv, 2010, 75(2): 295-300.
12. Li F, Wang X, Wang Y, et al. Structural valve deterioration after transcatheter aortic valve implantation using J-valve: A long-term follow-up. Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg, 2020, 26(3): 158-165.
13. Gaede L, Kim WK, Liebetrau C, et al. Pacemaker implantation after TAVI: Predictors of AV block persistence. Clin Res Cardiol, 2018, 107(1): 60-69.
14. Monteiro C, Ferrari ADL, Caramori PRA, et al. Permanent pacing after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: Incidence, predictors and evolution of left ventricular function. Arq Bras Cardiol, 2017, 109(6): 550-559.
15. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Thourani VH, et al. Transcatheter aortic-valve replacement with a balloon-expandable valve in low-risk patients. N Engl J Med, 2019, 380(18): 1695-1705.
16. Leon MB, Mack MJ, Hahn RT, et al. Outcomes 2 years after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients at low surgical risk. J Am Coll Cardiol, 2021, 77(9): 1149-1161.
17. Mack MJ, Leon MB, Smith CR, et al. 5-year outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgical aortic valve re- placement for high surgical risk patients with aortic stenosis (PARTNER 1): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet, 2015, 385: 2477-2484.
18. Muntané-Carol G, Urena M, Nombela-Franco L, et al. Arrhythmic burden in patients with new-onset persistent left bundle branch block after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: 2-year results of the MARE study. Europace, 2021, 23(2): 254-263.
19. Theron A, Lavagna F, Gaubert G, et al. Prosthesis-patient mismatch is an independent predictor of congestive heart failure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Arch Cardiovasc Dis, 2021: S1875-2136(21)00003-6.

Chinese Journal of Clinical Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery

Comparison of 1-year clinical results of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using prostheses with two different frame designs in 124 patients in a single center

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content