Background: Transcatheter aortic valve (TAV)-in-TAV is an attractive treatment for degenerated TAV. The risk of coronary artery occlusion due to sequestration of the sinus of Valsalva (SOV) in TAV-in-TAV has been reported, but the risk in Japanese patients is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the proportion of Japanese patients who are expected to experience difficulty with the second TAV implantation (TAVI) and evaluate the possibility of reducing the risk of coronary artery occlusion.Methods and Results: Patients (n=308) with an implanted SAPIEN 3 were divided into 2 groups: a high-risk group, which included patients with a TAV-sinotubular junction (STJ) distance <2 mm and a risk plane above the STJ (n=121); and a low-risk group, which included all other patients (n=187). The preoperative SOV diameter, mean STJ diameter, and STJ height were significantly larger in the low-risk group (P<0.05). The cut-off value for predicting the risk of SOV sequestration due to TAV-in-TAV in the difference between the mean STJ diameter and area-derived annulus diameter was 3.0 mm (sensitivity 70%; specificity 68%; area under the curve 0.74).Conclusions: Japanese patients may have a higher risk for sinus sequestration caused by TAV-in-TAV. The risk of sinus sequestration should be assessed before the first TAVI in young patients who are likely to require TAV-in-TAV, and whether TAVI is the best aortic valve therapy must be carefully decided.
Background
Although rapid ventricular pacing (RVP) is commonly performed for preparation of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). It has been reported that multiple and / or prolonged RVP is associated with adverse clinical outcomes of TAVI. Retrograde Inoue-Balloon was designed for balloon aortic valvuloplasty (BAV) without RVP to prevent slip of balloon by way of central waist during biphasic inflation.
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to evaluate safety and feasibility of Retrograde Inoue-Balloon for TAVI preparation.
Methods
From December 2013 to December 2019, 427 consecutive patients who performed TAVI for severe aortic valve stenosis, were retrospectively enrolled in Iwate Medical University. Of them, 227 (53%) patients (mean age 83±5 years, male 41%), underwent retrograde BAV before prosthetic valve implantation, comprised this study population. Retrograde BAV procedures were divided into two groups; patients used Inoue-Balloon without RVP and those did conventional balloon with RVP. The primary endpoint was defined as combined adverse events of 30-day mortality, cerebral infarction, and critical complications after BAV (aortic dissection, aortic rupture and cardiopulmonary arrest). The secondary endpoint was set as prolonged hypotension after BAV.
Result
Inoue-Balloon (IB) and conventional balloon (CB) were used for 73 patients (32%) and 154 (68%) patients, respectively. Both balloons were succeeded to through and expand of aortic valve in all cases. In the CB group, cardiopulmonary arrest occurred in 2.0% after BAV, cerebral infarction was observed in 3.9%, and 30-day death in 3.3%. On the other hand, no major complications were observed except one aortic dissection in the IB group. In logistic regression analysis adjusted by sex and age, the incidence of combined adverse events was significantly lower in the IB group (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.009–0.917, P=0.037). Furthermore, the IB group had significantly a lower incidence of prolonged hypotension following BAV compared with CB group (4.1% vs 19.5%, p=0.002).
Conclusion
Balloon aortic valvuloplasty using retrograde Inoue-balloon without rapid ventricular pacing is safe and feasible, and may improve clinical outcomes of TAVI.
Funding Acknowledgement
Type of funding source: None
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.