Supra-Annular Sizing for Prediction of THV Expansion in Bicuspid Aortic Valves: A MSCT Study

Biase, Chiara De; Agudze, Edem; Siddiqui, Saifullah; Agudze, Komla; Ghattas, Angie; Laperche, Clémence; Dubois, D.; Philippart, Raphaël; Monteil, Benoît; Dumonteil, Nicolas; Tchétché, Didier

doi:10.1080/24748706.2021.1915515

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The choice to follow this algorithm is based on the good outcomes reported by the BAVARD paper and to the positive correlation between the perimeter derived diameter at 4 mm before TAVI and the THV expansion at 4 mm at postprocedural MSCT. 34 As compared to the BAVARD Registry, we obtained similar results in terms of mean THV-annular ratio for each group, but a greater overall mean ratio, because of a higher prevalence of SEV in our cohort. Of note, we reported much lower rates of moderate-severe patient-prosthesis mismatch and ≥moderate PVL but a bit higher rate of PPI.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

“…The aleatory height of 4 mm was primarily defined to be reproducible and symmetric with the LVOT depth (minus 4 mm) used to define the landing zone in tricuspid valve anatomies. The choice to follow this algorithm is based on the good outcomes reported by the BAVARD paper and to the positive correlation between the perimeter derived diameter at 4 mm before TAVI and the THV expansion at 4 mm at postprocedural MSCT 34 . As compared to the BAVARD Registry, we obtained similar results in terms of mean THV‐annular ratio for each group, but a greater overall mean ratio, because of a higher prevalence of SEV in our cohort.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Three‐year clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid aortic disease: Comparison between self‐expanding and balloon‐expandable valves

Boiago,

Bellamoli,

De Biase

et al. 2024

Cathet Cardio Intervent

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionBicuspid aortic valve (BAV) stenosis is a complex anatomical scenario for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Favorable short‐term clinical outcomes have been reported with TAVI in this setting, but long‐term data are scarce.MethodsWe retrospectively included, in a single‐center registry, patients with BAV stenosis who underwent TAVI before 2020. We compared patients treated with self‐expanding valves (SEV) versus balloon‐expandable valves (BEV). The primary endpoint was a composite of all‐cause mortality, stroke and need for aortic valve (AV) reintervention at 3 years. Secondary endpoints included each component of the primary endpoint, cardiovascular mortality, permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) rate, mean gradient and ≥moderate paravalvular leak (PVL) rate.ResultsA total of 150 consecutive patients (SEV = 83, BEV = 67) were included. No significant differences were reported between SEV and BEV groups for the primary composite endpoint (SEV 35.9% vs. BEV 32%, p = 0.66), neither for clinical secondary endpoints (all‐cause mortality SEV 28.1% vs. BEV 28%, p = 0.988; cardiovascular mortality SEV 14.1% vs. BEV 20%, p = 0.399; stroke SEV 12.5% vs. BEV 6%, p = 0.342; need for AV reintervention SEV 0% vs. BEV 0%; PPI SEV 28.1% vs. BEV 24%, p = 0.620). A lower mean gradient persisted up to 3 years in the SEV group (SEV 8.8 ± 3.8 mmHg vs. BEV 10.7 ± 3.2 mmHg, p = 0.063), while no significant difference was found in the rate of ≥ moderate PVL (SEV 3/30 vs. BEV 0/25, p = 0.242).ConclusionsIn this single center registry, we observed favorable 3‐year clinical outcomes in nonselected BAV patients treated with different generation devices, without significant differences between patients receiving SEV or BEV.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 70%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%