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)

Kochman, Janusz; Huczek, Zenon; Ścisło, Piotr; Dąbrowski, M; Chmielak, Zbigniew; Szymański, Piotr; Witkowski, Adam; Parma, Radosław; Ochała, Andrzej; Chodór, Piotr; Wilczek, Krzysztof; Reczuch, Krzysztof; Kübler, Piotr; Rymuza, Bartosz; Kołtowski, Łukasz; Ścibisz, Anna; Wilimski, Radosław; Grube, Eberhard; Opolski, Grzegorz

doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.05.063

Cited by 98 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, no significant difference was found in the proportion of TAV and BAV using D peak velocity on TTE between different time intervals after procedure. This finding, together with similar mid-term post-procedural hemodynamic and clinical outcomes with TAV group in other studies [18,19], indicates the presence of asymmetric bulky calcification, larger annulus size and possible raphes in BAV patients might not impair THV function. Of note, the number of available TTE follow-ups was small and decreased over time.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation during sequential follow-ups in patients with bicuspid aortic valve compared with tricuspid aortic valve

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[-0.25, 5.00] mm Hg, p = 0.57 at 1 month; p = 0.21 at 3 months; 0.96 ± 7.81 vs. 1.53 ± 5.85 mm Hg, p = 0.79 at 6 months; 2.25] vs. 3.00 [-0.50, 7.50] mm Hg, p = 0.07 at 1 year). Moreover, the incidence of ≥ mild PVL was not significantly different in patients with p = 0.14 at 1 month; 45.83% vs. 27.27%, p = 0.19 at 3 months; 30.00% vs. 23.53%, p = 0.89 at 6 months; 30.00% vs. 17.65%, p = 0.56 at 1 year). Conclusions: TAVI is effective and applicable in BAV anatomy with sustained and acceptable mid--term prosthesis hemodynamic performance. (Cardiol J 2017; 24, 4: 350-357)

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 66%

Hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation during sequential follow-ups in patients with bicuspid aortic valve compared with tricuspid aortic valve

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As noted, the proportion of patients with a BAV (15 of 40, 37.5%) in this study was much higher than those of previous studies in Europe (3.0% to 9.2%) (Himbert et al, 2012;Hayashida et al, 2013;Bauer et al, 2014;Costopoulos et al, 2014;Kochman et al, 2014). This phenomenon has also been observed in almost every center that performs TAVI in China, and in some centers as many as 50% of the patients who underwent TAVI had a BAV.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 53%

“…Valve-related dysfunction requiring repeat procedure 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1.00 Many studies and some case reports have demonstrated a positive effect of TAVI when used on BAV patients whose condition is inoperable or has a high surgical risk (Wijesinghe et al, 2010;Himbert et al, 2012;Hayashida et al, 2013;Bauer et al, 2014;Costopoulos et al, 2014;Kochman et al, 2014). However, experience from Asian populations, especially from China, is scarce.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, BAV is the most common congenital heart disease, occurring in 0.5% to 2.0% of the general population (Roberts, 1970;Nistri et al, 2005;Tutar et al, 2005), and has been observed in about 50% of aortic valves resected during surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) (Roberts and Ko, 2005). Although several groups have reported the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of TAVI for patients with a BAV (Wijesinghe et al, 2010;Himbert et al, 2012;Hayashida et al, 2013;Bauer et al, 2014;Costopoulos et al, 2014;Kochman et al, 2014), global experience of the procedure is lacking, especially in China.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a severe stenotic bicuspid aortic valve in a Chinese population

Liu

Jiang

Zhou

et al. 2015

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in patients with a severe stenotic bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) in a Chinese population. While several groups have reported the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of TAVI for patients with a BAV, worldwide experience of the technique is still limited, especially in China. Methods: From March 2013 to November 2014, high surgical risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis (AS) who had undergone TAVI at our institution were selected for inclusion in our study. Results were compared between a BAV group and a tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) group. Results: Forty patients were included in this study, 15 (37.5%) of whom were identified as having a BAV. In the BAV group, the aortic valve area was smaller ((0.47±0.13) vs. (0.59±0.14) cm 2 ), the ascending aortic diameter was larger ((40.4±4.4) vs. (36.4±4.3) mm), and the concomitant aortic regurgitation was lower. No significant differences were found between the groups in the other baseline characteristics. No differences were observed either in the choice of access or valve size. The procedural success achieved in this study was 100%. There were no differences between groups in device success (86.7% vs. 88.0%), 30-d mortality (6.7% vs. 8.0%), or 30-d combined end point (13.3% vs. 12.0%). The incidences of new pacemaker implantation, paravalvular regurgitation and other complications, recovery of left ventricle ejection fraction and heart function were similar in both groups. Conclusions: Patients with a severely stenotic BAV can be treated with TAVI, and their condition after treatment should be similar to that of people with a TAV.

show abstract

“…Use of newer‐generation valves that incorporate features to reduce PVL may be particularly advantageous in the setting of bicuspid AS. Second, the rate of valve embolization could be higher, although the same observational studies suggest that embolization with conversion to open chest surgery occurs rarely in bicuspid AS (2.2–4.0%) 36, 37. Third, the rate of prosthesis–patient mismatch could be higher because the abnormal aortic valve morphology could prevent full expansion of the transcatheter valve 38.…”

Section: Do Clinical Trials Of Tavr In Low‐risk Patients Herald the Ementioning

confidence: 99%

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate‐ and Low‐Risk Patients

Rogers

Thourani

Waksman

2018

JAHA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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)

Cited by 98 publications

References 21 publications

Hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation during sequential follow-ups in patients with bicuspid aortic valve compared with tricuspid aortic valve

Hemodynamic changes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation during sequential follow-ups in patients with bicuspid aortic valve compared with tricuspid aortic valve

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with a severe stenotic bicuspid aortic valve in a Chinese population

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Intermediate‐ and Low‐Risk Patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About