Impact of significant paravalvular leaks after transcatheter aortic valve implantation on anaemia and mortality

The Clinical Impact of Paravalvular Leaks With Transcutaneous Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) Versus Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (SAVR): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Aortic valve stenosis is a common cardiac condition that requires intervention for symptomatic and/or prognostic reasons. The two most common interventions are surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The ratio of TAVI:SAVR has increased twofold over the past few years and is now being considered in intermediate-risk patients as well. One of the significant benefits of TAVI is that it is less invasive; however, one of the drawbacks is a high paravalvular leaks (PVLs) rate compared to SAVR. To assess the impact of PVLs on survival, progression of heart failure, and the need for re-intervention.

METHOD

We conducted a comprehensive systematic literature search from the conception of TAVI 2002 until December 2022 through Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Science Direct, and CENTRAL (Wiley). We followed PRISMA guidelines and checklists. Review protocol registration ID in PROSPERO: CRD42023393742.

RESULTS

We identified 28 studies that met our eligibility criteria, and only 24 studies were suitable for pooling in a meta-analysis (including their hazard ratio with a confidence interval of 95%) assessing our primary outcome (all-cause mortality). The remaining four studies were narratively synthesised. RevMan V5.4 (Version 5.4. Cochrane Collaboration, 2020) was utilised to pool meta-analysis data to assess effect estimates of PVLs in both intervention arms, using a random effect model for calculation (hazard ratio 1.14 confidence interval 95% 1.08-1.21 [p<0.0001]), with a follow-up duration between 30 days to 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Patients with mild or higher degrees of PVLs in both intervention arms incurred unfavourable outcomes. The incidence of PVLs was significantly higher with TAVI; even a mild degree led to poor quality of life and increased all-cause mortality on long-term follow-up.

Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Redo-Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Aortic Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Aortic stenosis is a common and significant valve condition requiring bioprosthetic heart valves with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) being strongly recommended for high-risk patients or patients over 75 years. This meta-analysis aimed to pool existing data on postprocedural clinical as well as echocardiographic outcomes comparing valve-in-valve (ViV)-TAVR to redo-surgical aortic valve replacement to assess the short-term and medium-term outcomes for both treatment methods. A systematic literature search on Cochrane Central, Scopus, and Medline (PubMed interface) electronic databases from inception to August 2023. We used odds ratios (OR) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes. Twenty-four studies (25,216 patients) were pooled with a mean follow-up of 16.4 months. The analysis revealed that ViV-TAVR group showed a significant reduction in 30-day mortality (OR 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.43 to 0.58, p <0.00001), new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.67, p = 0.002), major bleeding event (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.45, p <0.00001) and lower rate of device success (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.53, p = 0.0003). There were no significant differences between either group when assessing 1-year mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, postoperative left ventricular ejection fraction, and effective orifice area. ViV-TAVR cohort showed a significantly increased incidence of paravalvular leaks, aortic regurgitation, and increased mean aortic valve gradient. ViV-TAVR is a viable short-term option for older patients with high co-morbidities and operative risks, reducing perioperative complications and improving 30-day mortality with no significant cardiovascular adverse events. However, both treatment methods present similar results on short-term to medium-term complications assessment.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with bicuspid valve morphology: a roadmap towards standardization

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.

Clinical outcomes of bicuspid versus tricuspid aortic valve stenosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expandable valves

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of available data on specific prognostic comparisons between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using self-expandable valves (SEV) in patients with stenotic Type 0, Type 1 bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association between aortic valve morphology and outcomes following self-expandable TAVR.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with aortic stenosis(AS) undergoing self-expandable TAVR were enrolled and categorized into three groups (Type 0/Type 1 BAV or TAV) according to the Sievers classification. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and rehospitalization for heart failure (HF) within 2 years. Secondary outcomes included procedural complications and major cardiovascular events observed in clinical follow-ups. Clinical outcomes at 2 years following TAVR were compared among three groups using Kaplan-Meier curve and multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models.

RESULTS

A total of 344 AS patients (Type 0: 86; Type 1: 109; TAV: 149) were enrolled. The presence of moderate or severe paravalvular leak (PVL) was significantly higher in patients with Type 0 and Type 1 BAV versus TAV (10.47% vs. 16.51% vs. 6.71%, p = 0.043). All-cause 30-day mortality (2.33% vs. 0.92% vs. 2.68%, p = 0.626) and 2-year mortality (3.49% vs. 5.50% vs. 6.71%, p = 0.657) was comparable among the three groups. However, rehospitalization for HF within 2 years was significantly higher in Type 1 BAV (11.63% vs. 20.18% vs. 8.72%, p = 0.020). Multivariate Cox analysis showed that a higher STS score, Type 1 BAV morphology and excess leaflet calcification (≥ median calcium volume (CV) of the entire population) were independent predictors for HF rehospitalization. Additional intragroup Kaplan‒Meier analysis showed that excess leaflet calcification could predict higher long-term mortality and rehospitalization risk for HF(HR (95% CI): 3.430 (1.166-10.090), log rank p = 0.017) in Type 1 BAV patients.

CONCLUSION

Outcomes of self-expandable TAVR in BAV-AS patients might vary depending on valve subtypes. BAV patients with excess leaflet calcification and a raphe, especially calcified, had an increased risk of moderate PVL and HF readmission in mid-to-long term follow-ups.

Mitral Paravalvular Leak: Clinical Implications, Diagnosis and Management

Paravalvular leak incidence after mitral surgical replacement ranges from 7% to 17%. Between 1% and 5% of these are clinically significant. Large PVLs can cause important clinical manifestations such as heart failure or haemolysis. Current guidelines consider that surgical reparation is the gold-standard therapy in symptomatic patients with paravalvular leak. However, these recommendations are based in non-randomized observational registries. On the other hand, transcatheter paravalvular leak closure has shown excellent results with a low rate of complications, and nowadays it is considered the first option in selected patients in some experienced centres. In this review, we summarize the clinical manifestations, diagnosis, procedural details, and results of transcatheter mitral PVL closure.