Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become a common theraputic option for aortic stenosis, but the evidence for precise anatomy for TAVR is accumulating. This paper presents the case of an 71-year-old female patient who had an extremely high risk of coronary obstruction due to both coronary ostia lying too low. The patient underwent TAVR with the help of coronary protection successfully. During the procedure, the patient was protected with wires only for both coronaries. After deployment, angiofluoroscopy suggested that chimney stenting should be applied for left coronary. The whole procedure was unenventful and both coronaries were seen.
ObjectiveTo compare and analyze the clinical effects of two kinds of frame design valves after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 124 patients who underwent TAVR and were followed up for 1 year. There were 71 males and 53 females aged 75.57±6.21 years. These patients were treated with Venus-A or Edwards Sapien aortic valves. The hemodynamics and cardiac function of these two kinds of transcatheter aortic valves (THV) were evaluated by echocardiography. The 30-day mortality and 1-year clinical effect of the patients were calculated.ResultsEight-one patients used Venus-A valve and 43 patients used Edwards Sapien valve. The aortic valve transaortic pressure gradient was reduced and the rate of perivalvular leakage was low (both 2.6%) in both groups, and there was no statistical difference between the two groups. The implantation rate of permanent pacemaker was 17.3% and 11.6%, respectively. The 1-month survival (94.0% and 93.0%) and 1-year survival (94.0% and 91.0%) rates were not statistically different.ConclusionThe two groups of THV with different stent structures have good short-term clinical effect and low implantation rate of permanent pacemaker.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) for severe aortic stenosis is growing rapidly. The use of new heart valves prosthesis has improved surgical safety and efficacy. This report described a 72-year-old male patient with severe aortic stenosis combined with severe aortic regurgitation, who was evaluated at moderate-high risk of surgery and received a transapical TAVR using the Ken-Valve heart valve. The transcatheter operation time was 8 min, and the blood loss was 50 mL. The tracheal intubation was removed immediately after the surgery. Transesophageal echocardiography on the 4th postoperative day showed that the aortic valve leaflets worked well, and there was no valve orifice and paravalvular leakage. The patient was discharged on the 5th day after the surgery without complications. Transapical TAVR using Ken-Valve was an easy surgical procedure for aortic valve disease, and had short operation time.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the efficacy and safety of transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TFTAVR) under local anesthesia (LA) and general anesthesia (GA). MethodsElectronic databases including PubMed, EMbase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, WanFang and CBM were searched to collect randomized controlled trial and cohort studies on clinical outcomes of TFTAVR under LA and GA from inception to September 2020. Two authors independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the quality of studies, and a meta-analysis was performed by using Stata 16.0 software. ResultsA total of 30 studies involving 52 087 patients were included in this study. There were 18 719 patients in the LA group and 33 368 patients in the GA group. The results of meta-analysis showed that the in-hospital all-cause mortality rate [RR=0.65, 95%CI (0.45, 0.94), P=0.021], 30-day all-cause mortality rate [RR=0.73, 95%CI (0.62, 0.86), P＜0.001], 30-day stroke [RR=0.82, 95%CI (0.68, 0.98), P=0.025], cardiac arrest [RR=0.50, 95%CI (0.34, 0.73), P＜0.001], ICU stay time [RR=−6.86, 95%CI (−12.31, −1.42), P=0.013], and total hospital stay time [RR=−2.02, 95%CI (−2.59, −1.45), P＜0.001] in the LA group were all better than those in the GA group. There was no significant difference in the in-hospital stroke [RR=0.83, 95%CI (0.69, 1.00), P=0.053], in-hospital myocardial infarction (MI) [RR=1.74, 95%CI (0.43, 7.00), P=0.434], or 30-day MI [RR=0.77, 95%CI (0.42, 1.42), P=0.404] between the two groups. ConclusionLA provides a safe and effective way to induce sedation without intubation, and may be a good alternative to GA for TFTAVR.
An 81-year-old male patient was admitted to Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital due to chest distress and shortness of breath after activity for half a year. Examination after admission revealed severe aortic insufficiency, tricuspid aortic valve and extremely horizontal aorta with an aortic root angulation of 99°. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 7%. And taking the strong demand of the patient and his family into consideration, we decided to perform transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement after multidisciplinary evaluation. The procedure was successfully performed by means of low deployment land zone and traction of pre-exist Prolene suture. Three-month follow-up confirmed the normal function of aortic prosthetic valve without residual regurgitation. This case provides a reference for the interventional treatment in patients with extremely horizontal aorta.
Objective To evaluate the efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for native aortic valve regurgitation. MethodsLiterature from The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMbase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and China Biomedical Literature Database from January 2002 to May 2021 were searched by computer. The literature on TAVI or transcatheter aortic valve replacement treatment for simple aortic reflux were collected. Two reviewers independently screened the literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the quality of the literature. Meta-analysis was performed using STATA 14.0 software. ResultsA total of 15 studies including 1 394 patients were included. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scales of the studies were≥6 points. The success rate of prosthetic valve implantation was 72.0%-100.0%, and there was no report of serious complications such as surgical death, myocardial infarction, and valve annulus rupture. The 30-day all-cause mortality rate was 6.3% [95%CI (3.4%, 9.1%)]. The incidence of stroke within 30 days and the rate of postoperative permanent pacemaker implantation were 2.0% [95%CI (1.0%, 4.0%)] and 6.0% [95%CI (4.0%, 10.0%)], respectively, and were both within acceptable limits. ConclusionFor patients with simple high-risk aortic regurgitation, TAVI can obtain satisfactory treatment effects and has low postoperative complications rate, and it may be a potential treatment option for such patients.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred treatment for severe aortic stenosis. The localization and anchor of many transcatheter heart valves available in the clinic today are dependent on the calcific aortic valve leaflet of patients. We reported here a successful case of transapical aortic valve implantation with Ken-Valve heart valve in an 82-year-old male patient with pure severe aortic regurgitation without native valve calcium. Postoperative follow-up (3 months after the surgery) showed that the cardiac function significantly improved. The echocardiography indicated that the Ken-Valve prosthesis worked well without perivalvular regurgitation. The short-term clinical effect was satisfactory. The Ken-Valve with three position anchors is proved to be suitable for the treatment of pure aortic regurgitation.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement and endovascular abdominal aortic repair have now become the first-line treatment options for aortic stenosis and abdominal aortic disease, respectively. For patients with both diseases, combined procedures have been reported in a few domestic and foreign publications. However, all the procedures were performed under general anesthesia. Here, we reported a case of simultaneous minimalist transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement and endovascular repair of the abdominal aorta for a 78-year-old male patient with aortic stenosis and abdominal aortic ulcer, and the surgical results were satisfactory.
In recent years, the number of interventions for valvular heart disease has been increasing day by day, and it has become a hot topic in the field of cardiovascular surgery. Given the aging global population and trends in the prevalence of valvular disease and the broadening of indications for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), a breakthrough of 130000 TAVR procedures is expected by 2026. In the new technology development period, the development potential and technical advantages of heart valve interventional therapy should be faced squarely. This paper focuses on key issues such as comparison of outcomes after TAVR versus surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), prosthetic valve endocarditis after TAVR, and broadening of indications for TAVR, as well as recommendations on how surgeons face the era of TAVR. We hope that this article will help and attract the attention of cardiac surgeons.
Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has been confirmed to be safety and efficacy for high-risk elderly aortic stenosis, and the clinical effect of TAVR for medium and low-risk aortic stenosis is not worse than that of surgery. The development of surgical techniques and instruments has made cardiologists attempt to broaden the surgical indications. Many elderly and high-risk patients with pure native aortic regurgitation have been treated “off label” with similar techniques, completing artificial valve replacement, restoring valve function and improving the prognosis. However, due to the high requirements of surgical techniques and surgical complications, there is a lack of randomized controlled studies to confirm its safety and effectiveness. Unlike aortic stenosis, native aortic regurgitation presents unique challenges for transcatheter valves. In this article, the authors review current advances in the treatment of aortic valve regurgitation with TAVR.