Balloon Versus Self-Expandable Valve for the Treatment of Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis: Insights From the BEAT International Collaborative Registrys.
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Aortic Valve
/ abnormalities
Aortic Valve Stenosis
/ diagnostic imaging
Balloon Valvuloplasty
/ adverse effects
Bicuspid Aortic Valve Disease
/ diagnostic imaging
Europe
Feasibility Studies
Female
Heart Valve Prosthesis
Hemodynamics
Humans
Male
Prosthesis Design
Recovery of Function
Registries
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
/ adverse effects
Treatment Outcome
aortic valve
bicuspid valve
pacemaker
propensity score
surgeons
transcatheter aortic valve replacement
Journal
Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions
ISSN: 1941-7632
Titre abrégé: Circ Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101499602
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 2020
07 2020
Historique:
entrez:
11
7
2020
pubmed:
11
7
2020
medline:
22
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Large data comparing the performance of new-generation self-expandable versus balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in bicuspid aortic stenosis are lacking. We aim to compare the safety and performance of balloon-expandable and self-expandable transcatheter heart valves in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis. The BEAT (balloon versus self-expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid aortic valve stenosis) registry included 353 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation using new-generation Evolut R/PRO or Sapien 3 valves in bicuspid aortic valve. A total of 353 patients (n=242 [68.6%] treated with Sapien 3 and n=111 [68.6%] treated with Evolut R (n=70)/PRO [n=41]) were included. Mean age was 77.8±8.3 years and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 4.4±3.3%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 device success was similar between Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO (85.6% versus 87.2%; Our study confirms the feasibility of both Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO implantation in bicuspid aortic valve anatomy; a higher rate of moderate-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation was observed in the Evolut R/PRO group at 1-year follow-up in the matched cohort, although patients treated with balloon-expandable valve had a higher rate of annular rupture.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Large data comparing the performance of new-generation self-expandable versus balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves in bicuspid aortic stenosis are lacking. We aim to compare the safety and performance of balloon-expandable and self-expandable transcatheter heart valves in the treatment of bicuspid aortic stenosis.
METHODS
The BEAT (balloon versus self-expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid aortic valve stenosis) registry included 353 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation using new-generation Evolut R/PRO or Sapien 3 valves in bicuspid aortic valve.
RESULTS
A total of 353 patients (n=242 [68.6%] treated with Sapien 3 and n=111 [68.6%] treated with Evolut R (n=70)/PRO [n=41]) were included. Mean age was 77.8±8.3 years and mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 4.4±3.3%. Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 device success was similar between Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO (85.6% versus 87.2%;
CONCLUSIONS
Our study confirms the feasibility of both Sapien 3 and Evolut R/PRO implantation in bicuspid aortic valve anatomy; a higher rate of moderate-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation was observed in the Evolut R/PRO group at 1-year follow-up in the matched cohort, although patients treated with balloon-expandable valve had a higher rate of annular rupture.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32646304
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008714
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e008714Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn