Transfemoral Implantation of Transcatheter Heart Valves After Deterioration of Mitral Bioprosthesis or Previous Ring Annuloplasty

Urgent Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Replacement With Venoarterial Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support: Case Report and Review of the Literature

Critical mitral valve stenosis due to a failed bioprosthetic valve is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, with the transcatheter Valve-in-Valve (ViV) approach becoming a popular treatment option. We present a case of cardiogenic shock secondary to a stenotic mitral bio-prosthetic valve. The Heart team was consulted; the patient was a high-risk surgical candidate for valve replacement. He required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation as a bridge to definitive therapy. The patient underwent a successful urgent transcatheter mitral ViV procedure with a trans-septal approach. Follow-up echocardiography showed significant improvement in mitral valve dynamics. Recently emerging transcatheter approaches for mitral ViV implantation after balloon valvuloplasty into a failed mitral valve prosthesis are technically feasible in high-risk patient populations and should be considered over re-operative mitral valve surgery.

Emergent transcatheter mitral valve implantation: Early and mid-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) may be attractive to treat high-risk patients with mitral bioprosthesis or annuloplasty ring failure or severe mitral annular calcification.

AIM

To report the outcomes of patients after valve-in-valve/ring/mitral annular calcification TMVI using balloon expandable transcatheter aortic valves, according to the degree of urgency of the procedure.

METHODS

All patients who underwent TMVI in our centre from 2010 to 2021 were classified into three groups: elective, urgent or emergent/salvage TMVI.

RESULTS

A total of 157 patients were included: 129 (82.2%) had elective, 21 (13.4%) urgent and 7 (4.4%) had emergent/salvage TMVI. Patients with emergent/salvage TMVI had a higher EuroSCORE II: elective, 7.3%; urgent, 9.7%; emergent/salvage, 54.5% (P<0.0001). The indication for TMVI was bioprosthesis failure in all of the emergent/salvage group, in 13 of the urgent group (61.9%) and in 62 of the elective group (48.1%). Overall, the technical success rate of TMVI was 86%, and was similar in the three groups (elective, 86.1%; urgent, 95.2%; emergent/salvage, 71.4%). The cumulative survival rate at 2-year follow-up was lower in the emergent/salvage group than in the elective or urgent group (42.9% vs 71.2% for the elective group; 76.2% for the urgent group; log-rank test, P=0.012). The excess mortality in the emergent/salvage group occurred during the first month postprocedure. Thereafter, the 30-day landmark analysis did not show any more statistical difference between the three groups (log-rank test, P=0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergent/salvage TMVI was associated with high early mortality, but 1-month survivors had similar outcomes to patients with elective/urgent TMVI. The degree of urgency of the procedure should not prevent TMVI in high-risk patients.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implantations Using Inverted J-Valve

Background

As bioprosthetic valves are being widely used, the incidence of structural valve deterioration increases, as well as the need for reoperation. Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations are being increasingly adopted as an alternative to redo-surgical mitral replacement for patients with high surgical risks. This study reports a series of transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations using inverted J-valves.

Methods

From April 2019 to September 2021, 17 symptomatic high-risk patients with mitral bioprosthetic valve dysfunction underwent transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations using inverted J-valves at our institution.

Results

The median age was 70 years, with 76.5% being female. The median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality (STS PROM) was 17.2% (8.7–82.24%). All patients had successful transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations except for one intraoperative death due to left ventricle rupture. Four patients underwent simultaneous transcatheter aortic valve implantation, two of which had valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation. There was no major complication except one case of bleeding. Thirty-day mortality was 11.8% (2/17), and 90-days mortality was 23.5% (4/17). Percentages of patients with New York Heart Association class III/IV symptoms decreased from 100 (17/17) to 20% (3/15) at 30-days. Median mitral inflow velocity was 1.95 mm/s at 30 days, compared to 2.7 mm/s at baseline. Median mitral valve effective orifice area increases from 1.5 mm at baseline to 1.85 mm at 30 days.

Conclusion

Transcatheter transapical valve-in-valve implantations with J-valve can be a plausible solution to failed mitral bioprosthesis with acceptable results for high-risk patients.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement in High-Surgical Risk Patients: A Single-Center Experience and Outcome

Background

Re-operative mitral valve (MV) replacement is a high-risk procedure, therefore, transcatheter MV replacement (TMVR) is a promising therapeutic option.

Aim

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of TMVR in patients with high surgical risk with degenerated mitral bioprostheses (TMViV), failed surgical rings (TMViR), and mitral annular calcification (TMViMAC).

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study that enrolled patients with high surgical risk who underwent TMVR from February 2017 to September 2020. The TMVR procedure was performed using Edwards SAPIEN-3 valves through the transseptal approach.

Results

Sixty-four patients aged 62.7 ± 16.1 years with an STS score of 9.2 ± 3.7% underwent TMVR [35 (55%) TMViV, 16 (25%) TMViR, and 13 (20%) TMViMAC]. Mitral stenosis was more frequent in TMViV, mitral regurgitation was more frequent in TMViR, and combined mitral stenosis and regurgitation were more frequent in TMViMAC (P < 0.05). The MV gradient was 14.3 ± 5.3 mmHg and the MV area was 1.5±0.6 cm². The 29 mm valve was frequently used in TMViV and TMViMAC, while the 23 mm valve was frequently used in TMViR (P=0.003^∗). The procedural and fluoroscopy times were 58.7 ± 8.9 and 41.1 ± 8.2 minutes, respectively. Technical success was reported in 62 (98.4%) patients; 1 TMViR patient experienced valve embolization and salvage surgery, and 1 TMViMAC patient experienced slight valve malposition. At 3 months, 2 (3.1%) patients showed valve thrombosis (treated with anticoagulation), and 1 (1.6%) patient developed a paravalvular leak (underwent surgical MV replacement). At 6 months, 3 (4.7%) patients showed valve degeneration (underwent surgical MV replacement). Throughout follow-up, no patient exhibited mortality.

Conclusions

TMVR is a feasible and safe approach in patients with high surgical risk. TMViV and TMViR are reasonable as the first treatment approaches, and TMViMAC seems encouraging.

Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implant of a Balloon-Expandable Valve Guided by 3-Dimensional Printing

Background

Our goal was to explore the role of 3-dimensional (3D) printing in facilitating the outcome of a mitral valve-in-valve (V-in-V) implant of a balloon-expandable valve.

Methods

From November 2020 to April 2021, 6 patients with degenerated mitral valves were treated by a transcatheter mitral V-in-V implant of a balloon-expandable valve. 3D printed mitral valve pre- and post-procedure models were prepared to facilitate the process by making individualized plans and evaluating the outcomes.

Results

Each of the 6 patients was successfully implanted with a balloon-expandable valve. From post-procedural images and the 3D printed models, we could clearly observe the valve at the ideal position, with the proper shape and no regurgitation. 3D printed mitral valve models contributed to precise decisions, the avoidance of complications, and the valuation of outcomes.

Conclusions

3D printing plays an important role in guiding the transcatheter mitral V-in-V implant of a balloon-expandable valve.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration System (NCT02917980).

Five-year outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve implantation and redo surgery for mitral prosthesis degeneration

BACKGROUND

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) has emerged as a feasible alternative to redo surgical mitral valve replacement (SMVR) in patients with degenerated mitral prostheses, with limited comparative data.

METHODS

We compared mid-term outcomes in patients with degenerated mitral valve prostheses treated with TMVR or redo SMVR. The primary endpoint was survival at 5 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

From 2014 to 2020, 215 patients presented with degenerated mitral valve prostheses. Of whom 86 (40%) were treated with TMVR (75[87%] valve-in-valve and 11[13%] valve-in-ring), while 129 patients (60%) underwent SMVR. The TMVR cohort was older (p < 0.0001), more symptomatic (p = 0.0003) and had more chronic lung disease (p = 0.02), worse renal function (p = 0.02) and higher right ventricular systolic pressures (p < 0.0001). Thirty-day mortality was lower with TMVR versus SMVR (2.4% vs. 10.2%, OR4.69 [95% CI 1.25-30.5], p = 0.04) with probability of mortality at 1, 2, and 5 years being 14.7% versus 17.5%, 24.5% versus 20.7%, and 49.9% versus 34.0%, respectively. Mode of prosthesis degeneration, baseline hemodynamics, and valve selection did not appreciably impact outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

TMVR for degenerated mitral prostheses is associated with better early survival compared to SMVR despite a greater burden of comorbidities. In contrast, 5 year survival rates appear more favorable with SMVR, which may reflect the lower baseline risk of this population. Clinical, hemodynamic, and echocardiographic follow-up support the mid-term durability of TMVR for degenerated mitral prostheses. Further dedicated studies, however, are required to optimize outcomes in this challenging patient cohort and to navigate the choice of approach for each individual patient.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement for degenerated mitral bioprostheses: a systematic review

Background

Treatment of degenerated mitral bioprostheses with transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (MVIV) implantation is increasingly used. The goal of this review was to evaluate the one-year outcomes of this therapy using the most recent evidence.

Methods

A MEDLINE, Cochrane database and SCOPUS search was performed of published observational studies involving patients undergoing transcatheter MVIV for degenerated bioprosthesis to determine procedural success, thirty-day and one-year survival.

Results

A total of 2,684 patients undergoing transcatheter MVIV were identified from five studies with mean age of 73-75 years, 57-63% female and Society for Thoracic Surgery (STS) risk score ranging from 9-13%. Procedural technical success ranged from 94-98%, with 1-3% rates of periprocedural death, 0-2% stroke and 1-5% risk of left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction. Thirty-day post-procedure mean mitral prosthetic gradient ranged from 6-7 mmHg and residual mitral regurgitation was mild or less in 96-100% of patients. Thirty-day survival and one-year survival ranged from 93-97% and 83-89% respectively.

Conclusions

Transcatheter MVIV is an effective treatment for structural degeneration of biologic mitral valve replacement with low complication rates and favorable one-year outcomes. Accordingly, MVIV should be considered as a reasonable alternative to re-do surgical mitral valve replacement in high risk patients with comorbidities. Further study of long-term outcomes of this treatment is needed.

Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring replacement: Lessons learned from bioprosthetic surgical valve failures

INTRODUCTION

Limited data are available about the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) using transseptal approach in patients with prior mitral valve repair (valve-in-ring) or replacement (valve-in-valve) (TMViVR) and on modes of the prior surgical valve failures. We report our tertiary center TMVR experience in high surgical risk patients with prior mitral valve repair or replacement.

METHODS

From December 2016 to January 2020, patients with symptomatic severe mitral valve stenosis and/or insufficiency at increased redo surgical risk were included. TMViVR was performed off-label with Sapien S3 valve (Edwards Lifesciences). Patients were followed within 30-days and 1-year from the procedure.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients underwent transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (n = 21) or valve-in-ring (n = 6) replacement. Mean ± SD age was 71.8 ± 11 years with Society of Thoracic Surgeons' calculated mortality 7.1 ± 4.6%. The etiology of valve failure was stenosis in 17 (63%) patients, insufficiency in 4 (14.8%) patients, and both in 6 (22.2%) patients. TMViVR technical success was 100% in all patients. Left ventricular outflow track (LVOT) obstruction was observed in only one (3.7%) patient. Zero patients had moderate or severe central mitral valve regurgitation or paravalvular leak. All patients had symptomatic improvement at 30 days. The mean transmitral diastolic pressure gradient decreased from 14.1 ± 4.6 to 6.9 ± 4.6 mm Hg (p < .001) at 30 days. The one patient with LOVT obstruction required readmission at 5-months. One-year survival was 95%. At 1-year mean gradients remained lower than the baseline (7.0 ± 3.0 vs. 12.4 ± 4.0, p = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring replacement is feasible and safe. The improvement in mitral valve hemodynamics appears to be durable.

Current Devices and Complications Related to Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: The Bumpy Road to the Top

Mitral regurgitation is the most common valvular lesion in the developed world, with increasing prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. The experience with surgical mitral valve repair or replacement is very well-validated. However, more than 45% of these patients get denied surgery due to an elevated risk profile and advanced disease of the left ventricle at the time of presentation, promoting the need for less invasive transcatheter options such as transcatheter repair and transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). Early available TMVR studies have shown promising results, and several dedicated devices are under clinical evaluation. However, TMVR is still in the early developmental stages and is associated with a non-negligible risk of periprocedural and post-procedural complications. In this review, we discuss the current challenges facing TMVR and the potential TMVR-related complications, offering an overview on the measures implemented to mitigate these complications, and future implications.

Effects of Transapical Transcatheter Mitral Valve Implantation

Purpose: In this study, transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation (TAMVI) was compared with surgical redo mitral valve replacement (SRMVR) in terms of clinical outcomes.

Methods: We retrospectively identified patients with degenerated mitral bioprosthesis or failed annuloplasty rings who underwent redo SRMVR or TAMVI at our medical center. Clinical outcomes were based on echocardiography results.

Results: We retrospectively identified patients with symptomatic mitral bioprosthetic valve dysfunction (n = 58) and failed annuloplasty rings (n = 14) who underwent redo SRMVR (n = 36) or TAMVI (n = 36). The Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality scores were higher in the TAMVI group (median: 9.52) than in the SRMVR group (median: 5.59) (p-value = 0.02). TAMVI patients were more severe in New York Heart Association (p-value = 0.04). The total procedure time (skin to skin) and length of stay after procedures were significantly shorter in the TAMVI group, and no significant difference in mortality was noted after adjustment for confounding factors (p-value = 0.11). The overall mean mitral valve pressure gradient was lower in the TAMVI group than in the SRMVR group at 24 months (p < 0.01). Both groups presented a decrease in the severity of mitral and tricuspid regurgitation at 3–24 months.

Conclusions: In conclusion, the statistical analysis is still not robust enough to make a claim that TAMVI is an appropriate alternative. The outcome of the patient appears only to be related to the patient's pre-operative STS score. Additional multi-center, longitudinal studies are warranted to adequately assess the effect of TAMVI.

Left ventricular outflow tract area after percutaneous transseptal transcatheter mitral valve implantation: A three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography study

BACKGROUND

Left ventricular (LV) outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction increases mortality in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) in degenerated bioprostheses, annuloplasty rings, and native mitral valves. We aimed to evaluate the LVOT area after TMVI using 3-dimensional (3D) transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and to investigate the preprocedural cardiac geometry that affects the LVOT area after TMVI.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed echocardiography data in 43 patients who had TMVI. A change in pressure gradient across LVOT from before to after TMVI (∆PG) and postprocedure 3D LVOT cross-sectional area at the level of the most distal portion of the mitral valve stent that was closest to the LV apex were assessed as evidence of LVOT narrowing.

RESULTS

Transcatheter mitral valve implantation with the use of balloon-expandable valve system was performed for 24 bioprostheses, 7 annuloplasty rings, and 12 native valves. Compared to patients without increase in LVOT gradient (∆PG <10 mm Hg; n = 33), patients with increase in LVOT gradient (∆PG ≥10 mm Hg; n = 10) had smaller LV end-systolic volume (LVESV), greater LV ejection fraction (LVEF), and smaller aorto-mitral (AM) angle. The LVOT area at the valve stent distal edge showed strong association with ∆PG (r = -.68, P < .0001). Only a small AM angle was associated with a small LVOT area at the valve stent distal edge on multivariable analysis, independent of LVESV and LVEF.

CONCLUSION

Small LV size, preserved LVEF, and small AM angle were associated with LVOT narrowing. 3D-derived AM angle might be independently associated with LVOT narrowing in patients undergoing transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve, valve-in-ring, and valve-in-native valve implantation, independent of LVESV and LVEF.

Transcatheter mitral valve thrombosis: A case report and literature review

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is an exciting alternative therapy for complex patients with mitral valve disease. Experience with TMVR is new and there is a lot yet to discover about their durability, long-term outcomes, and complications including mitral transcatheter heart valve (THV) thrombosis. Many factors have been speculated to increased risk of THV thrombosis. Here, we report a case of a 72-year-old woman who developed mitral THV thrombosis after undergoing TMVR for severe mitral regurgitation with mitral annular calcification. We reviewed 42 TMVR papers with 1,484 patients, including 60 with mitral THV thrombosis. We discussed the most common strategies used for mitral THV thromboprophylaxis and treatment.

Current and Future Application of Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement

Mitral valve anatomy is complex, and one size does not fit all. More recently, percutaneous mitral valve interventions have revolutionized the management of primary and secondary mitral regurgitation (MR). However, edge-to-edge leaflet repair is not suitable for a large proportion of individuals including those with a failing bioprosthetic mitral valve/annuloplasty ring, and patients with significant mitral annular calcification resulting in mixed mitral valve disease/mitral stenosis. For this high risk cohort, transcatheter mitral valve replacement seems to be an attractive alternative.

Reoperative Mitral Surgery Versus Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review

Bioprosthetic mitral structural valve degeneration and failed mitral valve repair (MVr) have traditionally been treated with reoperative mitral valve surgery. Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (MVIV) and valve-in-ring (MVIR) replacement are now feasible, but data comparing these approaches are lacking. We sought to compare the outcomes of (1) reoperative mitral valve replacement (redo-MVR) and MVIV for structural valve degeneration, and (2) reoperative mitral valve repair (redo-MVr) or MVR and MVIR for failed MVr. A literature search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was conducted up to July 31, 2020. Thirty-two studies involving 25 832 patients were included. Redo-MVR was required in ≈35% of patients after index surgery at 10 years, with 5% to 15% 30-day mortality. MVIV resulted in >95% procedural success with 30-day and 1-year mortality of 0% to 8% and 11% to 16%, respectively. Recognized complications included left ventricular outflow tract obstruction (0%-6%), valve migration (0%-9%), and residual regurgitation (0%-6%). Comparisons of redo-MVR and MVIV showed no statistically significant differences in mortality (11.3% versus 11.9% at 1 year, P=0.92), albeit higher rates of major bleeding and arrhythmias with redo-MVR. MVIR resulted in 0% to 34% mortality at 1 year, whereas both redo-MVr and MVR for failed repairs were performed with minimal mortality and durable long-term results. MVIV is therefore a viable alternative to redo-MVR for structural valve degeneration, whereas redo-MVr or redo-MVR is preferred for failed MVr given the suboptimal results with MVIR. However, not all patients will be candidates for MVIV/MVIR because anatomical restrictions may preclude transcatheter options from adequately addressing the underlying pathology.

Current Devices in Mitral Valve Replacement and Their Potential Complications

Mitral regurgitation is one of the most prevalent valvulopathies worldwide, and its surgical treatment is not feasible in all cases. The elderly and frail with several comorbidities and left ventricular dysfunction are often managed conservatively. Percutaneous treatment (repair or replacement) of the mitral valve has emerged as a potential option for those patients who are at a high risk for surgery. Mitral valve repair with the Mitraclip device proved both increased safety and mortality reduction in patients with severe mitral regurgitation. On the other hand, in the last decade, percutaneous mitral replacement opened new frontiers in the field of cardiac structural interventions. There are few mitral devices; some are in the early phase of development and some are waiting for CE mark of approval. The evolution of these devices was more complicated compared to the aortic technology due to the native mitral valve's complexity and access. This review aims to provide an overview of the current devices, their specific features, and their potential complications.

Contemporary Reoperative Mitral Valve Surgery: Technical Considerations and Clinical Outcomes

As patients with cardiac disease live longer, reoperative mitral valve surgery has become more common. Although these operations are technically challenging and of high risk, outcomes continue to improve. Minimally invasive techniques, better cardioprotective strategies, and advanced perioperative care have contributed to this. In this review, we discuss surgical approaches, intraoperative strategies, novel catheter-directed devices, and clinical outcomes of contemporary reoperative mitral valve surgery.

Transcatheter heart valve interventions: where are we? Where are we going?

Transcatheter heart valve interventions have transformed the outcomes of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) who are unfavourable candidates for surgery. Technological advances have allowed extension of these interventions to younger or lower risk patients and those with other forms of VHD and may in the future permit earlier treatment of VHD in less symptomatic patients or those with moderate disease. The balance of risks and benefits is likely to differ between lower and higher risk patients, and more evidence is needed to evaluate the net benefit of transcatheter technology in these groups. As academic researchers, clinicians, industry, and patient stakeholders collaborate to research these broader indications for transcatheter valve interventions, it is essential to address (i) device durability and deliverability, (ii) specific anatomical needs (e.g. bicuspid aortic valves, aortic regurgitation, mitral and tricuspid valve disease), (iii) operator training, and (iv) the reinforced importance of the multidisciplinary Heart Team.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Ring Implantation in the Flexible Adjustable Attune Annuloplasty Ring

Transcatheter mitral valve-in-ring implantation (TMViR) poses unique challenges when compared to valve-in-valve implantation due to the large variation in the different annuloplasty rings used. Annuloplasty rings are often classified according to whether they are complete or incomplete, rigid, semi-rigid, or flexible, and whether their three-dimensional geometry is saddle-shaped or flat. A limited number of annuloplasty rings are available which are adjustable allowing the surgeon to increase or decrease the size of the ring once it has been sutured in place. To our knowledge there has been no description of TMViR in such adjustable complete rings and recommendations on THV sizing and implantation are not available on the Valve-in-Valve application. Here we report a case of TMViR in an adjustable annuloplasty ring (Attune ring, Abbott, Chicago, IL, USA) and review the literature on TMViR.

Transesophageal echocardiography guidance of percutaneous mitral valve replacement in failed annuloplasty ring: A case report

Severe mitral regurgitation and stenosis due to failed mitral annuloplasty ring can be managed with percutaneous mitral valve in ring in high surgical risk patients. A 66-year-old male underwent coronary artery bypass surgery and mitral valve ring annuloplasty 7 years previously. He started to have shortness of breath with minimal effort in the past 2 years. Transthoracic echocardiogram revealed a new severe mitral regurgitation and severe mitral stenosis. The patient was turned down from surgery due to high surgical risk. The transcatheter mitral valve in ring implantation was decided. In this case, there was a low probability of left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. A stiff wire crossed the mitral valve ring and positioned in the left ventricular apex. The Sapien 3 valve size 26 mm (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) was positioned to have 80% ventricular and 20% atrial side. Transesophageal echocardiogram evaluation revealed a mean gradient of 5 mmHg. The left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) had laminar color flow and the mean pressure gradient across LVOT was 1 mmHg. The patient was discharged after 2 days in good condition. At one year follow up, he had no shortness of breath and no rehospitalization. In conclusion, the percutaneous mitral valve in ring is feasible in selected patients. The risk of LVOT obstruction should be assessed carefully before the procedure with a transthoracic and transesophageal echocardiogram. 〈Learning objective: Understand how to guide the mitral valve in ring procedure with a transesophageal echocardiogram and how to avoid left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. Understand how to position the Sapien valve in mitral valve ring.〉.

Commissural fusion as etiology of bioprosthetic mitral stenosis in a patient with rheumatic heart disease

We report commissural fusion as a unique morphologic etiology of early bioprosthetic mitral valve failure in a woman with a history of rheumatic mitral stenosis. She had undergone mitral valve replacement with a 25-mm Edwards Magna Ease bovine pericardial bioprosthesis 3 years earlier and presented with progressive dyspnea. Transesophageal echocardiography revealed severe bioprosthetic stenosis due to commissural fusion. She underwent percutaneous valve-in-valve implantation with a 26-mm Edwards Sapien 3 prosthesis. Marked symptomatic improvement was noted postprocedurally. We speculate that commissural fusion may be a unique pathologic feature of failing bioprosthetic valves in patients with prior rheumatic mitral valve disease.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Implantation (TMVI) Using Edwards SAPIEN 3 Prostheses in Patients at Very High or Prohibitive Surgical Risk: A Single-Center Experience

Background

Mitral valve surgery in patients with failing bioprosthesis, annuloplasty rings, or in patients with advanced mitral annular calcification (MAC) is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Percutaneous antegrade transseptal transcatheter mitral valve implantation (TMVI) has recently successfully been performed in those patients at high or prohibitive surgical risk, but data on patients treated by TMVI are sparse. This study sought to evaluate short- and midterm outcomes of patients treated by TMVI at our site in clinical practice.

Methods and Results

From October 2016 to February 2018, seven patients (six women and one man) at high or prohibitive surgical risk underwent TMVI at our site. Three procedures were performed as TMVI in failed mitral valve bioprostheses (TMVI-VIV, “valve-in-valve”), one procedure was performed as TMVI in a failed mitral annuloplasty ring (TMVI-R), and three procedures were performed as TMVI in advanced native mitral annular calcification (TMVI-MAC). Mean age of the population treated was 77 ± 8.1 years, and mean log EuroScore I was 39 ± 0.12%. In all patients, an Edwards SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve was implanted under 3D-TOE and fluoroscopic guidance using a transvenous/transseptal access. Indication for TMVI was the presence of advanced heart failure symptoms in all patients (NYHA class III/IV). The predominant dysfunction of the mitral valve treated was severe regurgitation in 72% (n = 5) and severe stenosis in 29% (n = 2) of all patients. TMVI was technically successful in all procedures. Clinical success with functional improvement of at least one NYHA class after procedure compared with before procedure was also achieved in all patients. Median NYHA class improved significantly from 4 before procedure to 2 after TMVI (p=0.008). Mitral valve regurgitation was reduced to trace or mild in all but one patient, who showed moderate MR after TMVI-MAC. No patient-prosthesis mismatch or LVOT obstruction occurred after TMVI. Two patients underwent interventional ASD closure during the in-hospital course due to a large and persisting atrial septal defect after transseptal access. One patient underwent pacemaker implantation due to complete AV-block after TMVI. One patient died in hospital 12 days after the procedure due to severe hospital-acquired pneumonia and sepsis. In-hospital mortality rate was 14% (1/7) in this high-risk population. After hospital discharge, no death occurred and clinical improvement—according to NYHA functional class—remained stable during one-year follow-up.

Conclusion

In this small single-center series, TMVI appears promising for patients at high or prohibitive surgical risk with either failing mitral bioprostheses/annuloplasty rings or native mitral valve dysfunction in combination with advanced MAC. Gaining experience in TMVI and new valves will further improve safety and efficacy of this new treatment option.

Cerebral Embolic Risk During Transcatheter Mitral Valve Interventions: An Unaddressed and Unmet Clinical Need?

As new transcatheter mitral valve (MV) interventions continuously evolve, potential procedure-related adverse events demand careful investigation. The risk of cerebral embolic damage is ubiquitous in any left-sided structural heart intervention (and potentially linked to long-term neurocognitive sequelae); therefore, efforts to evaluate these aspects in the field of catheter-based MV procedures are justified. Given the peculiarities of MV anatomy, MV disease, and MV procedures, the lessons learned from other transcatheter heart interventions (i.e., transcatheter aortic valve replacement) cannot be directly translated to MV applications. Through a systematic assessment of available evidence, the authors present and discuss procedure- and patient-related factors potentially associated with cerebral embolic risk during catheter-based MV interventions. Given the paucity of available data in this field, future large, dedicated studies are needed to understand whether cerebral embolic injury represents a real clinical issue during MV procedures.

Outcomes following transcatheter transseptal versus transapical mitral valve-in-valve and valve-in-ring procedures

Introduction: Transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (ViV) & valve-in-ring (ViR) are relatively novel therapeutic alternatives for patients with degenerated bioprostheses or failed annuloplasty rings whose reoperative risk is too high. The predominant procedural access for both procedures is transapical or transseptal. However, whether there are differences in outcomes of this procedure using transseptal versus transapical access has not yet been defined. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of all published articles from MEDLINE and EMBASE to explore the outcomes of these two procedural approaches. Results:total of 55 studies including 183 patients (154 ViV and 29 ViR) were included. Patients that underwent ViV (101 transapical and 53 transseptal) using the transseptal approach required more iatrogenic atrial septal defect (ASD) closure (19% versus 0.0 %; P < 0.001) and hence had a lower device success rate (68% versus 89%; P = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in procedural success and all-cause mortality at 30 days. Overall severe bleeding complications (major or life threatening) were not different the two groups (3.7% versus 7.9%; P = 0.321). In the ViR group (19 transapical and 10 transseptal), no difference in procedural success, device success or 30-day outcomes were identified between transseptal and transapical groups, although sample size was small. Conclusion: In conclusion, mitral ViV and ViR using the two different procedural approaches appear to confer equal and reasonable 30-day outcomes.

Percutaneous Techniques, Limitations and Challenges for the Failed Surgical Mitral Intervention

The advent of percutaneous therapies has significantly altered therapeutic options for patients with valvular heart disease. Building on the success of transcatheter aortic valve replacement, both expanded indications and purpose-built devices are now being used to address percutaneous approaches for mitral valve pathology. While surgical mitral valve repair remains the gold standard for addressing significant mitral valve pathology, there has been a progressive increase in the utilization of bioprosthetic valves despite their limited lifespan. The risks of reoperation to address mitral valve repair failure or bioprosthetic valve dysfunction is not insignificant. In light of the aging population and the potential for significant associated comorbidities, less invasive alternative techniques hold particular appeal. Utilization of commercially available transcatheter aortic valve replacement valves for failed surgical valves has been shown to have better short-term mortality than would be predicted for open reoperation. As a result, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the utilization of transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement for the failed bioprosthetic valve in high surgical risk patients. Despite the favorable outcomes, transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve is not without procedural challenges and potential complications including malpositioning, embolization, paravalvular leak, and outflow tract obstruction. Awareness of these challenges, mitigation strategies, and therapeutic options is imperative to optimizing outcomes in this high-risk patient population.

Clinical Outcomes of Mitral Valve Reoperations in the United States: An Analysis of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Database

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated outcomes of reoperative mitral valve surgery (MVS) in the United States.

METHODS

Adults undergoing isolated MVS with prior open-heart operation in The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) National Database between July 2011 and September 2016 were included. Urgent or emergent operations as well as all indications and causes for MVS were included. Primary outcomes were operative mortality and morbidity. Multivariable models were used for risk-adjustment, incorporating variables from the STS Valve Risk Model as well as type of prior operation and reoperative approach.

RESULTS

A total of 17,195 patients underwent isolated reoperative MVS at 962 centers. The STS predicted risk of mortality was 8.0%, with 20% having an STS predicted risk of mortality greater than 10%. Prior cardiac operations included previous MVS (61%), coronary artery bypass (39%), aortic valve surgery (18%), and tricuspid valve surgery (6%). Operative mortality for the overall study cohort was 6.6%, and postoperative stroke occurred in 2.4%. Observed-to-expected mortality for the overall cohort was 0.82. The strongest independent predictors of operative mortality included salvage operation, preoperative dialysis dependence, congestive heart failure, recent myocardial infarction, and active endocarditis. Prior aortic valve replacement was associated with increased mortality risk, whereas prior MVS reduced mortality risk. Surgical approach did not affect mortality. For patients with prior MVS undergoing elective, non-endocarditis operations, the operative mortality was 3.4%.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high-risk patient profile, surgical outcomes of reoperative MVS were acceptable, particularly in patients with prior MVS and without endocarditis undergoing elective operations.

Transseptal Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement for Post-Surgical Mitral Failures

Post-surgical deterioration of mitral valve repairs or replacements may present a clinical dilemma due to the high-risk nature of repeat surgery. Recent advances in transcatheter techniques and surgery have enabled the implantation of balloon-expandable valves in the mitral position when surgical rings and valves are present. Valves may be implanted either via transseptal or transapical access, with a reported success rate between 88-100 %.

Transseptal transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve for treatment of severe mitral regurgitation in failed bioprosthesis complicated with cardiogenic shock: Case report and review of the literature

Patients in cardiogenic shock due to severe failure of a mitral bioprosthesis have extremely high risk for repeat standard cardiac surgery. This patient population may benefit the most form the least invasive intervention. We report a successful transseptal mitral valve-in-valve implant performed in a patient in cardiogenic shock due to a flail mitral bioprosthesis requiring bridging intravenous inotropic and intra-aortic balloon pump support.

Recent advances in cardiac catheterization for congenital heart disease

The field of pediatric and adult congenital cardiac catheterization has evolved rapidly in recent years. This review will focus on some of the newer endovascular technological and management strategies now being applied in the pediatric interventional laboratory. Emerging imaging techniques such as three-dimensional (3D) rotational angiography, multi-modal image fusion, 3D printing, and holographic imaging have the potential to enhance our understanding of complex congenital heart lesions for diagnostic or interventional purposes. While fluoroscopy and standard angiography remain procedural cornerstones, improved equipment design has allowed for effective radiation exposure reduction strategies. Innovations in device design and implantation techniques have enabled the application of percutaneous therapies in a wider range of patients, especially those with prohibitive surgical risk. For example, there is growing experience in transcatheter duct occlusion in symptomatic low-weight or premature infants and stent implantation into the right ventricular outflow tract or arterial duct in cyanotic neonates with duct-dependent pulmonary circulations. The application of percutaneous pulmonary valve implantation has been extended to a broader patient population with dysfunctional ‘native’ right ventricular outflow tracts and has spurred the development of novel techniques and devices to solve associated anatomic challenges. Finally, hybrid strategies, combining cardiosurgical and interventional approaches, have enhanced our capabilities to provide care for those with the most complex of lesions while optimizing efficacy and safety.