Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement with the Self-Expandable Core Valve Evolut Prosthesis Using the Cusp-Overlap vs. Tricusp-View.
TAVI
TAVR
aortic stenosis
conduction disturbance
cusp-overlap view
permanent pacemaker implantation
self-expandable valves
three-cusp view
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 Mar 2022
12 Mar 2022
Historique:
received:
20
12
2021
revised:
31
01
2022
accepted:
10
03
2022
entrez:
25
3
2022
pubmed:
26
3
2022
medline:
26
3
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Despite the rapid increase in experience and technological improvement, the incidence of conduction disturbances in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the self-expandable CoreValve Evolut valve remains high. Recently, a cusp-overlap view (COP) implantation technique has been proposed for TAVR with self-expandable valves offering an improved visualization during valve expansion compared to the three-cusp view (TCV). This study aims to systematically analyze procedural outcomes of TAVR patients treated with the CoreValve Evolut valve using a COP compared to TCV in a high-volume center. The primary endpoint was technical success according the 2021 VARC-3 criteria. A total of 122 consecutive patients (61 pts. TCV: April 2019 to November 2020; 61 pts. COP: December 2020 to October 2021) that underwent TAVR with the CoreValve Evolut prosthesis were included in this analysis. Although there was no difference in the primary endpoint technical success between TCV and COP patients (93.4% vs. 90.2%, OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.16, 2.4,
Identifiants
pubmed: 35329887
pii: jcm11061561
doi: 10.3390/jcm11061561
pmc: PMC8953752
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
J Am Heart Assoc. 2020 May 5;9(9):e016700
pubmed: 32362173
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1695-1705
pubmed: 30883058
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jan 25;14(2):224-226
pubmed: 33358647
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2009 Jan;22(1):1-23; quiz 101-2
pubmed: 19130998
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019 Aug 27;74(8):1086-1106
pubmed: 31439219
J Interv Cardiol. 2021 Apr 28;2021:9991528
pubmed: 34007249
Eur Heart J. 2021 May 14;42(19):1825-1857
pubmed: 33871579
Circulation. 2021 Feb 2;143(5):e35-e71
pubmed: 33332149
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2022 Jan 24;15(2):150-161
pubmed: 35057985
Eur Heart J. 2021 Sep 14;42(35):3427-3520
pubmed: 34455430
Curr Cardiol Rep. 2021 Oct 1;23(11):154
pubmed: 34599425
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2020 May 11;13(9):1071-1082
pubmed: 32305398
J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2015 Jan;28(1):1-39.e14
pubmed: 25559473
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018 Aug 27;11(16):1663-1665
pubmed: 30139479
Circulation. 2017 Jun 20;135(25):e1159-e1195
pubmed: 28298458
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2017 Oct 1;52(4):616-664
pubmed: 29156023
J Cardiol. 2021 Jul;78(1):44-50
pubmed: 33563507
N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 28;374(17):1609-20
pubmed: 27040324
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed). 2021 Jul 2;:
pubmed: 34226165
JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2021 Jan 25;14(2):115-134
pubmed: 33478630
N Engl J Med. 2019 May 2;380(18):1706-1715
pubmed: 30883053
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2021 May;32(5):1411-1420
pubmed: 33682218