Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid valve morphology: a roadmap towards standardization.
Journal
Nature reviews. Cardiology
ISSN: 1759-5010
Titre abrégé: Nat Rev Cardiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101500075
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 2023
01 2023
Historique:
accepted:
26
05
2022
pubmed:
22
6
2022
medline:
16
12
2022
entrez:
21
6
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Indications for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have expanded in many countries to include patients with aortic stenosis who are at low surgical risk, and a similar expansion to this cohort is anticipated elsewhere in the world, together with an increase in the proportion of patients with bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) morphology as the age of the patients being treated decreases. To date, patients with BAV have been excluded from major randomized trials of TAVI owing to anatomical considerations. As a consequence, BAV has been a relative contraindication to the use of TAVI in international guidelines. Although clinical experience and observational data are accumulating, BAV presents numerous anatomical challenges for successful TAVI, despite advances in device design. Furthermore, in those with BAV, substantial geographical variation exists in patient characteristics, clinical approach and procedural strategy. Therefore, in this Roadmap article, we summarize the existing evidence and provide consensus recommendations from an international group of experts on the application of TAVI in patients with BAV in advance of the anticipated growth in the use of this procedure in this challenging cohort of patients.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35726019
doi: 10.1038/s41569-022-00734-5
pii: 10.1038/s41569-022-00734-5
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
52-67Informations de copyright
© 2022. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Roberts, W. C. & Ko, J. M. Frequency by decades of unicuspid, bicuspid, and tricuspid aortic valves in adults having isolated aortic valve replacement for aortic stenosis, with or without associated aortic regurgitation. Circulation 111, 920–925 (2005).
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000155623.48408.C5
Sievers, H.-H. & Schmidtke, C. A classification system for the bicuspid aortic valve from 304 surgical specimens. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 133, 1226–1233 (2007).
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2007.01.039
Waksman, R. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients with symptomatic severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 13, 1019–1027 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.02.008
Vincent, F. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. Circulation 143, 1043–1061 (2021).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.120.048048
The Millennium Project. The real-time Delphi. http://www.millennium-project.org/rtd-general/ (2017).
Kochman, J., Rymuza, B. & Huczek, Z. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. Curr. Opin. Cardiol. 30, 594–602 (2015).
doi: 10.1097/HCO.0000000000000219
Popma, J. J. & Ramadan, R. CT Imaging of bicuspid aortic valve disease for TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 9, 1159–1163 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2016.02.028
Yoon, S.-H. et al. Bicuspid aortic valve morphology and outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 76, 1018–1030 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.07.005
Kong, W. K. F., Delgado, V. & Bax, J. J. Bicuspid aortic valve: what to image in patients considered for transcatheter aortic valve replacement? Circ. Cardiovasc. Imaging 10, e005987 (2017).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCIMAGING.117.005987
Sinning, C. et al. Bicuspid aortic valve and aortic coarctation in congenital heart disease — important aspects for treatment with focus on aortic vasculopathy. Cardiovasc. Diagn. Ther. 8, 780–788 (2018).
doi: 10.21037/cdt.2018.09.20
Tchetche, D. et al. Bicuspid aortic valve anatomy and relationship with devices: the BAVARD multicenter registry. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 12, e007107 (2019).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.118.007107
Boccalini, S. et al. Bicuspid aortic valve annulus: assessment of geometry and size changes during the cardiac cycle as measured with a standardized method to define the annular plane. Eur. Radiol. 31, 8116–8129 (2021).
doi: 10.1007/s00330-021-07916-8
Kawamori, H. et al. Computed tomography characteristics of the aortic valve and the geometry of SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 19, 1408–1418 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jex333
van Rosendael, P. J. et al. Comparison of quantity of calcific deposits by multidetector computed tomography in the aortic valve and coronary arteries. Am. J. Cardiol. 118, 1533–1538 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.08.021
Mazur, P. et al. Stenotic bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valves — micro-computed tomography and biological indices of calcification. Circ. J. 81, 1043–1050 (2017).
doi: 10.1253/circj.CJ-16-1166
Naito, S., Petersen, J., Reichenspurner, H. & Girdauskas, E. The impact of coronary anomalies on the outcome in aortic valve surgery: comparison of bicuspid aortic valve versus tricuspid aortic valve morphotype. Interact. Cardiovasc. Thorac. Surg. 26, 617–622 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/icvts/ivx396
Johnson, A. D., Detwiler, J. H. & Higgins, C. B. Left coronary artery anatomy in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. Br. Heart J. 40, 489–493 (1978).
doi: 10.1136/hrt.40.5.489
Koenraadt, W. M. C. et al. Coronary anatomy in Turner syndrome versus patients with isolated bicuspid aortic valves. Heart 105, 701–707 (2019).
doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2018-313724
Messner, B. & Bernhard, D. Bicuspid aortic valve-associated aortopathy: where do we stand? J. Mol. Cell. Cardiol. 133, 76–85 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.yjmcc.2019.05.023
Verma, S. & Siu, S. C. Aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 1920–1929 (2014).
doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1207059
Rodríguez-Palomares, J. F. et al. Aortic flow patterns and wall shear stress maps by 4D-flow cardiovascular magnetic resonance in the assessment of aortic dilatation in bicuspid aortic valve disease. J. Cardiovasc. Magn. Reson. 20, 28 (2018).
doi: 10.1186/s12968-018-0451-1
Nistri, S. et al. Aortic root dilatation in young men with normally functioning bicuspid aortic valves. Heart 82, 19–22 (1999).
doi: 10.1136/hrt.82.1.19
Fedak, P. W. M. et al. Clinical and pathophysiological implications of a bicuspid aortic valve. Circulation 106, 900–904 (2002).
doi: 10.1161/01.CIR.0000027905.26586.E8
Hillebrand, M. et al. Diagnostic accuracy study of routine echocardiography for bicuspid aortic valve: a retrospective study and meta-analysis. Cardiovasc. Diagn. Ther. 7, 367–379 (2017).
doi: 10.21037/cdt.2017.05.03
Cramer, P. M. & Prakash, S. K. Misclassification of bicuspid aortic valves is common and varies by imaging modality and patient characteristics. Echocardiography 36, 761–765 (2019).
doi: 10.1111/echo.14295
Wassmuth, R., von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff, F., Gruettner, H., Utz, W. & Schulz-Menger, J. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging of congenital bicuspid aortic valves and associated aortic pathologies in adults. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 15, 673–679 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jet275
Mylotte, D. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 64, 2330–2339 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.09.039
Jilaihawi, H. et al. A bicuspid aortic valve imaging classification for the TAVR era. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 9, 1145–1158 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.12.022
Michelena, H. I. et al. International consensus statement on nomenclature and classification of the congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy, for clinical, surgical, interventional and research purposes. Ann. Thorac. Surg. 112, e203–e235 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2020.08.119
Michelena, H. I. et al. Summary: international consensus statement on nomenclature and classification of the congenital bicuspid aortic valve and its aortopathy, for clinical, surgical, interventional, and research purposes. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 162, 781–797 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.05.008
Hira, R. S. et al. Trends and outcomes of off-label use of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insights from the NCDR STS/ACC TVT registry. JAMA Cardiol. 2, 846 (2017).
doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2017.1685
Hayashida, K. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation for patients with severe bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 6, 284–291 (2013).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.000084
Li, Y.-M. et al. Characteristics and outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in China: a report from China aortic valve transcatheter replacement registry (CARRY). Chin. Med. J. 134, 2678–2684 (2021).
doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001882
Yoon, S.-H. et al. Clinical outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in Asian population. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 9, 926–933 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.01.047
Li, Y. et al. Prevalence and complications of bicuspid aortic valve in Chinese according to echocardiographic database. Am. J. Cardiol. 120, 287–291 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.04.025
Rao, R. S. et al. Single-center experience of 105-minimalistc transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement and its outcome. Indian. Heart J. 73, 301–306 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2021.01.023
Xiong, T.-Y. et al. Anatomical characteristics of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis in China. Chin. Med. J. 134, 2738–2740 (2021).
doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000001863
Mentias, A. et al. Transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 75, 2518–2519 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.02.069
Elbadawi, A. et al. Temporal trends and outcomes of transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 12, 1811–1822 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.06.037
Alperi, A. et al. Aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis outside randomized trials. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 77, 111–123 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.10.056
Hirji, S. A. et al. Benchmarking outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valves: an analysis of the Society of Thoracic Surgeons database. Presented at the STS 58th Annual Meeting (2022).
Bauer, T. et al. Comparison of the effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves (from the German TAVI Registry). Am. J. Cardiol. 113, 518–521 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2013.10.023
Yoon, S.-H. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early- and new-generation devices in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 68, 1195–1205 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2016.06.041
Yoon, S.-H. et al. Outcomes in rranscatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 69, 2579–2589 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.017
Makkar, R. R. et al. Association between transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis and mortality or stroke. JAMA 321, 2193 (2019).
doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.7108
Forrest, J. K. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves from the STS/ACC TVT registry. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 13, 1749–1759 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.03.022
Forrest, J. K. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-risk patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. JAMA Cardiol. 6, 50–57 (2021).
Makkar, R. R. et al. Association between transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid vs tricuspid aortic stenosis and mortality or stroke among patients at low surgical risk. JAMA 326, 1034 (2021).
doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.13346
Williams, M. R. et al. The PARTNER 3 bicuspid registry for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in low-surgical-risk patients. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 15, 523 (2022).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2022.01.279
Mangieri, A. et al. Balloon versus self-expandable valve for the treatment of bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: insights from the BEAT international collaborative registrys. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 13, e008714 (2020).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.119.008714
Seeger, J. et al. Significant differences in debris captured by the sentinel dual-filter cerebral embolic protection during transcatheter aortic valve replacement among different valve types. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 11, 1683–1693 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.06.018
Fan, J. et al. Brain injury after transcatheter replacement of bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valves. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 76, 2579–2590 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2020.09.605
Lopez-Pais, J. et al. Impact of significant paravalvular leaks after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on anaemia and mortality. Heart https://doi.org/10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316941 (2020).
doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2020-316941
Jilaihawi, H. et al. A revised methodology for aortic-valvar complex calcium quantification for transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 15, 1324–1332 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/ehjci/jeu162
Popma, J. J. et al. Relationship of annular sizing using multidetector computed tomographic imaging and clinical outcomes after self-expanding corevalve transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 9, e003282 (2016).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.115.003282
Yoon, S.-H. et al. Outcomes in transcatheter aortic valve replacement for bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 69, 2579–2589 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.03.017
Kim, W.-K. et al. Determinants of paravalvular leakage following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis. Eur. Heart J. Cardiovasc. Imaging 22, 1387–1396 (2021).
Husser, O. et al. Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantations and new-onset conduction abnormalities with the SAPIEN 3 balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valve. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 9, 244–254 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.09.036
Siontis, G. C. M. et al. Predictors of permanent pacemaker implantation in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR: a meta-analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 64, 129–140 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2014.04.033
Zhou, D. et al. VitaFlow
doi: 10.1002/ccd.28226
Majmundar, M. et al. Meta-analysis of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve. Am. J. Cardiol. 145, 102–110 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2020.12.085
Hamdan, A. et al. Short membranous septum length in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis increases the risk of conduction disturbances. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 15, 339–347 (2021).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2020.10.002
Inohara, T. et al. Appropriateness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement: insight from the OCEAN-TAVI registry. Circ. Cardiovasc. Qual. Outcomes 13, e006146 (2020).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.119.006146
Dowling, C., Firoozi, S. & Brecker, S. J. First-in-human experience with patient-specific computer simulation of TAVR in bicuspid aortic valve morphology. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 13, 184–192 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.07.032
Baumgartner, H. et al. 2017 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur. Heart J. 38, 2739–2791 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx391
Vahanian, A. et al. 2021 ESC/EACTS guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease. Eur. Heart J. 43, 561–632 (2022).
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab395
Otto, C. M. et al. 2020 ACC/AHA guideline for the management of patients with valvular heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines. Circulation 143, e72–e227 (2021).
Willson, A. B. et al. 3-dimensional aortic annular assessment by multidetector computed tomography predicts moderate or severe paravalvular regurgitation after transcatheter aortic valve replacement: a multicenter retrospective analysis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59, 1287–1294 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.12.015
Blanke, P. et al. Oversizing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, a commonly used term but a poorly understood one: dependency on definition and geometrical measurements. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 8, 67–76 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2013.12.020
Dvir, D. et al. Multicenter evaluation of transcatheter aortic valve replacement using either SAPIEN XT or CoreValve: degree of device oversizing by computed-tomography and clinical outcomes. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 86, 508–515 (2015).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.25823
Buchanan, K. D. et al. Successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement in an oversized 800 mm
doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2018.03.023
Xiong, T.-Y. et al. Understanding the interaction between transcatheter aortic valve prostheses and supra-annular structures from post-implant stent geometry. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 12, 1164–1171 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2019.02.051
Xiong, T.-Y. et al. Supra-annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement candidates with bicuspid aortic valve. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 11, 1789–1790 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2018.06.002
Iannopollo, G. et al. Supra-annular sizing of transcatheter aortic valve prostheses in raphe-type bicuspid aortic valve disease: the LIRA method. Int. J. Cardiol. 317, 144–151 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2020.05.076
Petronio, A. S. et al. Bicuspid aortic valve sizing for transcatheter aortic valve implantation: development and validation of an algorithm based on multi-slice computed tomography. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 14, 452–461 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2020.01.007
Liu, X. et al. Supra-annular structure assessment for self-expanding transcatheter heart valve size selection in patients with bicuspid aortic valve. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 91, 986–994 (2018).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.27467
Blackman, D. et al. Expert consensus on sizing and positioning of SAPIEN 3/ultra in bicuspid aortic valves. Cardiol. Ther. 10, 277–288 (2021).
doi: 10.1007/s40119-021-00223-9
Weir-McCall, J. R. et al. Annular versus supra-annular sizing for transcatheter aortic valve replacement in bicuspid aortic valve disease. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 14, 407–413 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2020.01.008
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03495050 (2018).
Tchétché, D. New evidence in treating bicuspid TAVI patients: insights from Bivolut-X registry. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vswpEwlRdQ8 (2020).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02541877 (2015).
Mangieri, A. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the ACURATE neo in bicuspid and tricuspid aortic valve stenosis: a propensity-matched analysis of a European experience. EuroIntervention 14, e1269–e1275 (2018).
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-18-00281
Makkar, R. Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement with balloon-expandable Sapien3 valve in bicuspid aortic stenosis: an analysis of the STS/ACC TVT registry. https://www.crtonline.org/presentation-detail/outcomes-of-transcatheter-aortic-valve-replacement (2019).
Blackman, D. J. et al. Clinical outcomes of the lotus valve in patients with bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: an analysis from the RESPOND study. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 93, 1116–1123 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.28120
Sá, M. P. B. O. et al. Balloon versus self-expandable transcatheter aortic valve implantation for bicuspid aortic valve stenosis: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 98, E746–E757 (2021).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.29538
Frangieh, A. H. & Kasel, A. M. TAVI in bicuspid aortic valves ‘made easy’. Eur. Heart J. 38, 1177–1181 (2017).
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehx167
Kim, W.-K. et al. Incidence and outcome of peri-procedural transcatheter heart valve embolization and migration: the TRAVEL registry (transcatheter heart valve embolization and migration). Eur. Heart J. 40, 3156–3165 (2019).
doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehz429
Halim, S. A. et al. Outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid aortic valve disease: a report from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology transcatheter valve therapy registry. Circulation 141, 1071–1079 (2020).
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.119.040333
Liao, Y.-B. et al. Meta-analysis of the effectiveness and safety of transcatheter aortic valve implantation without balloon predilation. Am. J. Cardiol. 117, 1629–1635 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.02.036
Xu, Y.-N. et al. Balloon sizing during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: comparison of different valve morphologies. Herz 45, 192–198 (2020).
doi: 10.1007/s00059-018-4714-2
Perlman, G. Y., Blanke, P. & Webb, J. G. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in bicuspid aortic valve stenosis. EuroIntervention 12, Y42–Y45 (2016).
doi: 10.4244/EIJV12SYA10
Pislaru, S. V., Nkomo, V. T. & Sandhu, G. S. Assessment of prosthetic valve function after TAVR. JACC Cardiovasc. Imaging 9, 193–206 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2015.11.010
Giannini, F. et al. Looking for optimal implantation height in bicuspid aortic valve patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a case series. Cardiovasc. Revasc. Med. 21, 25–27 (2020).
doi: 10.1016/j.carrev.2020.01.019
Eggebrecht, H. et al. Risk of stroke after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI): a meta-analysis of 10,037 published patients. EuroIntervention 8, 129–138 (2012).
doi: 10.4244/EIJV8I1A20
Xiong, T.-Y., Martucci, G., Alosaimi, H. & Piazza, N. Ad hoc percutaneous paravalvular leak closure after transcatheter aortic valve replacement facilitated by integrated multimodality imaging. EuroIntervention 14, e526–e527 (2018).
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-01106
Gurvitch, R. et al. Multislice computed tomography for prediction of optimal angiographic deployment projections during transcatheter aortic valve implantation. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 1157–1165 (2010).
doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.09.010
Sarkar, K., Ussia, G. P. & Tamburino, C. Trans catheter aortic valve implantation with core valve revalving system in uncoiled (horizontal) aorta. overcoming anatomical and technical challenges for successful deployment. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 78, 964–969 (2011).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.23133
Noble, S. & Roffi, M. Retrograde aortic valve crossing of the corevalve prosthesis using the buddy balloon technique. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 84, 897–899 (2014).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.25215
Choudhury, T., Solomonica, A. & Bagur, R. The ACURATE neo transcatheter aortic valve system. Expert. Rev. Med. Devices 15, 693–699 (2018).
doi: 10.1080/17434440.2018.1526675
Hiratzka, L. F. et al. Surgery for aortic dilatation in patients with bicuspid aortic valves. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 67, 724–731 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2015.11.006
Rylski, B. et al. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with ascending aortic dilatation: safety of the procedure and mid-term follow-up. Eur. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 46, 228–233 (2014).
doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezt594
Jacobzon, E., Wolak, A., Fink, D. & Silberman, S. Delayed aortic dissection and valve thrombosis after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 93, E391–E393 (2019).
doi: 10.1002/ccd.27994
Fuchs, A. et al. Subclinical leaflet thickening and stent frame geometry in self-expanding transcatheter heart valves. EuroIntervention 13, e1067–e1075 (2017).
doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-17-00373
Lv, W.-Y. et al. Progression of the ascending aortic diameter after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: based on computed tomography images. J. Invasive Cardiol. 31, E234–E241 (2019).
He, Y.-X. et al. Ascending aortic dilatation rate after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in patients with bicuspid and tricuspid aortic stenosis: a multidetector computed tomography follow-up study. World J. Emerg. Med. 10, 197–204 (2019).
doi: 10.5847/wjem.j.1920-8642.2019.04.001
Gunning, P. S., Saikrishnan, N., Yoganathan, A. P. & McNamara, L. M. Total ellipse of the heart valve: the impact of eccentric stent distortion on the regional dynamic deformation of pericardial tissue leaflets of a transcatheter aortic valve replacement. J. R. Soc. Interface 12, 20150737 (2015).
doi: 10.1098/rsif.2015.0737
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02825134 (2021).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02628899 (2022).
US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03635424 (2022).
Kochman, J. et al. 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). Am. J. Cardiol. 114, 757–762 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.05.063
Himbert, D. et al. Feasibility and outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in high-risk patients with stenotic bicuspid aortic valves. Am. J. Cardiol. 110, 877–883 (2012).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.04.064
Costopoulos, C. et al. Comparison of results of transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with severely stenotic bicuspid versus tricuspid or nonbicuspid valves. Am. J. Cardiol. 113, 1390–1393 (2014).
doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2014.01.412
Mack, M. J. et al. Outcomes following transcatheter aortic valve replacement in the United States. JAMA 310, 2069–2077 (2013).
doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.282043