Intentional Oversizing of Valve in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Is Bigger Better? A Large, Single-Center Experience.

Complications Outcomes Pacemaker implantation Paravalvular leak Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Journal

Structural heart : the journal of the Heart Team
ISSN: 2474-8714
Titre abrégé: Struct Heart
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101743256

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
May 2024
Historique:
received: 02 08 2023
revised: 18 12 2023
accepted: 21 12 2023
medline: 27 5 2024
pubmed: 27 5 2024
entrez: 27 5 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

The current clinical practice standard is 10% to 20% oversizing of self-expanding valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to determine whether >20% oversizing of self-expanding valves (Medtronic Evolut) would lead to better valve performance with similar or better outcomes. From October 2011 to December 2016, we approached all transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with a conscious attempt at large oversizing (>20%). The most common valve used, excluding those used in valve-in-valve patients, was the 29-mm Evolut R (29%). We used a retrospective chart review to compare moderate oversizing (group 1; 10% to 20%) with large oversizing (group 2; >20%). Of 556 patients, 45% were male; the overall mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 5.8 ± 3.8. Eighty-five (15%) patients needed a pacemaker, and 21 (3.8%) developed significant paravalvular leak. Mean oversizing was 20.3% ± 6.0%, with 41.4% of patients included in group 1 and 54.5% in group 2. Incidences of complications in group 2 vs. group 1 were as follows: a) paravalvular leak (2.0 vs. 6.1%; odds ratio = 0.31, These data suggest that, in current self-expanding valves, >20% oversizing delivers a significantly lower prevalence of paravalvular leak without an increase in other complications. Since paravalvular leak is associated with increased mortality, >20% oversizing may represent a superior prosthesis choice.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
The current clinical practice standard is 10% to 20% oversizing of self-expanding valves in transcatheter aortic valve replacement. We aimed to determine whether >20% oversizing of self-expanding valves (Medtronic Evolut) would lead to better valve performance with similar or better outcomes.
Methods UNASSIGNED
From October 2011 to December 2016, we approached all transcatheter aortic valve replacement patients with a conscious attempt at large oversizing (>20%). The most common valve used, excluding those used in valve-in-valve patients, was the 29-mm Evolut R (29%). We used a retrospective chart review to compare moderate oversizing (group 1; 10% to 20%) with large oversizing (group 2; >20%).
Results UNASSIGNED
Of 556 patients, 45% were male; the overall mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 5.8 ± 3.8. Eighty-five (15%) patients needed a pacemaker, and 21 (3.8%) developed significant paravalvular leak. Mean oversizing was 20.3% ± 6.0%, with 41.4% of patients included in group 1 and 54.5% in group 2. Incidences of complications in group 2 vs. group 1 were as follows: a) paravalvular leak (2.0 vs. 6.1%; odds ratio = 0.31,
Conclusions UNASSIGNED
These data suggest that, in current self-expanding valves, >20% oversizing delivers a significantly lower prevalence of paravalvular leak without an increase in other complications. Since paravalvular leak is associated with increased mortality, >20% oversizing may represent a superior prosthesis choice.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38799807
doi: 10.1016/j.shj.2023.100278
pii: S2474-8706(23)00229-4
pmc: PMC11121734
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

100278

Informations de copyright

© 2023 The Author(s).

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

T. Bajwa, R. Jain, and D. P. O’Hair are consultants for Medtronic. The other authors had no conflicts to declare.

Auteurs

Khawaja Afzal Ammar (KA)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Alexandria Graeber (A)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Abdur Rahman Ahmad (AR)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Jodi Zilinski (J)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Daniel P O'Hair (DP)

Boulder Heart at Boulder Community Health, Boulder, Colorado, USA.

Renuka Jain (R)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Suhail Q Allaqaband (SQ)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Tanvir Bajwa (T)

Aurora Cardiovascular and Thoracic Services, Aurora Sinai/Aurora St. Luke's Medical Centers, Advocate Aurora Health, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Milwaukee Clinical Campus, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA.

Classifications MeSH