Surgical bioprosthetic valve in the mitral position typically degenerates in 10-15 years, when intervention is required again. In the past, redo surgical mitral valve replacement has been the only treatment choice for such patients suffering from bioprosthetic valve failure, despite the even higher risk associated with redo open-heart surgery. In recent years, transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in the mitral position has evolved as an reasonable alternative to redo surgery for the treatment of surgical mitral bioprosthetic valve failure. Here we report an 81-year-old female patient with surgical mitral bioprosthetic valve failure, who successfully underwent valve-in-valve transcatheter mitral valve replacement via the transfemoral-transseptal approach. The procedure was successful owing to comprehensive CT imaging work-up, despite the technical challenges associated with bilateral giant atria and small left ventricle.
Reoperation due to degenerated bioprostheses is an important factor of high-risk thoracic surgeries. In 2020 ACC/AHA guideline, Valve in Valve (ViV) was recommended for high-risk patient instead of surgical mitral valve replacement. This report described a 77-year-old male patient with a failed mitral bioprosthetic valve, evaluated at high risk of surgery, received a transvenous, transseptal transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR). Tracheal intubation was removed at CCU 3 h after surgery without discomfort such as polypnea. The patient was transferred out of the CCU and discharged on the 3rd day. Compared with transapical access, transvenous transseptal access was less invasive, with shorter duration in CCU and hospitalization.
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficiency and safety of intraprocedural valve-in-valve deployment for treatment of aortic regurgitation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).MethodsConsecutive patients (n=333) who diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis and underwent TAVR in Zhongshan Hospital affiliated to Fudan University from October 3rd, 2010 to April 21st, 2021 were included. There were 208 males and 125 females aged 76.0±7.0 years. There were 316 patients underwent simple TAVR (simple TAVR group) and 17 patients underwent intraprocedural valve-in-valve deployment following TAVR (valve-in-valve group). Their clinical and echocardiographic outcomes were evaluated and compared.ResultsThere was no significant difference between the two groups of patients at postoperative 30 d and 1 year in all-cause mortality (4.4% vs. 0, P=1.000; 6.3% vs. 0, P=1.000), incidence of pacemaker implantation (10.4% vs. 17.6%, P=1.000; 11.8% vs. 17.6%, P=1.000), incidence of ischemic stroke (1.3% vs. 0, P=1.000; 1.3% vs. 0, P=1.000), mean trans-aortic pressure gradient (11.4±6.4 mm Hg vs. 8.9±4.9 mm Hg, P=0.099; 10.5±7.6 mm Hg vs. 11.2±5.2 mm Hg, P=0.432), left ventricular ejection fraction (62.0%±9.0% vs. 57.0%±12.0%, P=0.189; 63.0%±7.0% vs. 60.0%±8.0%, P=0.170), and incidence of mitral valve dysfunction (0.6% vs. 5.9%, P=1.000; 0.6% vs. 5.9%, P=1.000).ConclusionIt is feasible to treat perivalvular leakage with valve-in-valve technology in the procedure of TAVR, and the short and medium-term effects are satisfied.
Along with the coming of aged society, the prevalence of heart valvular disease is significantly increasing, and the use of bioprosthetic valves for treating patients with severe valve disease has increased over the last two decades. As a consequence, a growing number of patients with surgical bioprosthesis degeneration is predicted in the near future. In this setting, valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic/mitral valve replacement (TAVR/TMVR) has emerged as an alternative to redo surgery. A deep knowledge of the mechanism and features of the failed bioprosthetic heart valve is pivotal to plan an adequate procedure. Multimodal imaging is fundamental in the diagnostic and pre-procedural phases. The immediate and mid-term clinical and hemodynamic results have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of ViV techniques, but the development of these techniques faces several specific challenges, such as coronary obstruction, potential post-procedural mismatch and leaflet thrombosis. This article reviews the current status and prospects of ViV-TAVR technology in the treatment for biological valve degeneration, and suggests that ViV-TAVR should be promoted and implemented in existing medical centers with good surgical aortic valve replacement experience, so as to provide better treatment for patients.
ObjectiveTo determine the clinical efficacy of transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve treatment for patients with deteriorated mitral bioprosthesis after aortic-mitral double valve replacement.MethodsThe clinical data of 9 patients who underwent transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation after aortic-mitral double valve replacement due to mitral bioprosthesis deterioration from May 2020 to January 2021 in our hospital were retrospectively analyzed, including 4 males and 5 females with a mean age of 72.44±7.57 years.ResultsSurgeries were performed successfully in all patients with no conversion to median sternotomy. The mean procedural time was 101.33±48.49 min, the mechanical ventilation time was 23.11±26.54 h, the ICU stay was 1.89±1.05 d and the postoperative hospital stay was 6.11±2.02 d. Residual mild mitral regurgitation was only observed in 1 patient. Only 1 patient needed postoperative blood transfusion. No major complications were observed in all patients. There was no death in postoperative 90 days.ConclusionFor patients with deteriorated mitral bioprosthesis after aortic-mitral double valve replacement, transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantation achieves good clinical results and effectively improves the hemodynamics without increasing the risk of postoperative left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. The surgery is feasible and effective.
Objective To summarize the early results and clinical experience of using the J-Valve for transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation in patients with degenerated bioprosthesis at different anatomic positions. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted to evaluate the short-term outcomes of 39 consecutive patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation using the J-Valve System in the Department of Cardiac Surgery of Guangdong Provincial People’s Hospital from April 2020 to August 2021 due to bioprosthetic degeneration at different anatomic positions. Among them, 35 patients underwent transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (TMViV) implantation, 1 transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve (TAViV) implantation, 1 transcatheter tricuspid valve-in-valve (TTViV) implantation, 1 TMViV implantation with simultaneous TAViV implantation, and another one TMViV implantation with simultaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and perivalvular leakage (PVL) closure. Results Among the 35 patients who underwent isolated TMViV implantation, 17 were male and 18 were female with a mean age of 72.6±10.8 years. Mean duration between two operations was 10.5±2.7 years. The mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons and EuroSCORE Ⅱ scores were 12.95%±9.61% and 13.91%±8.94%, respectively. The device success rate was 97.1% and no death occured during the operation. One patient was transferred to thoracotomy due to device displacement, 1 was re-opened for uncontrolled bleeding, and 1 presented left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. One patient underwent craniotomy due to intracranial hemorrhage within 30 days after surgery, and no other complications occurred including death, stroke, permanent pacemaker implantation, cardiac tamponade, or re-hospitalization. The mean follow-up time was 6.0±4.4 months, the mean mitral valve gradient was significantly improved (10.4±2.0 mm Hg vs. 5.5±1.2 mm Hg, P<0.05), and the New York Heart Association class≤Ⅱ in all the patients at the last follow-up. Among the other 4 patients who did not undergo isolated TMViV implantation, the transapical TAViV implantation and the trans-right atrium TTViV implantation were successful without intra- or post-operative complications. The patient who underwent TMViV and TAViV implantation simultaneously via transapical approach died of severe pulmonary hemorrhage and multiple organ failure 16 days after surgery. The other patient who underwent transapical TMViV combined with TAVR and PVL closure died of septic shock 10 days after the surgery. Conclusion Transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation using the J-Valve system is shown to be a safe and effective procedure to treat mitral, aortic and tricuspid bioprosthetic valve dysfunction in high-risk patients, providing a new alternative to surgical surgery for degenerated bioprosthesis at different anatomic positions. However, simultaneous different valves intervention should be very cautious.
ObjectiveTo summarize the results and clinical experience of transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation using domestic self-expanding valve in patients with aortic degenerated bio-prosthesis. MethodsFrom January 2019 to April 2023, the patients who underwent transcatheter valve-in-valve surgery in the Department of Cardiac Surgery of Tianjin Chest Hospital due to surgical bio-prosthesis failure were included. Characteristics of valves, perioperative complications, and hemodynamic manifestations during the early postoperative and follow-up period were analyzed. ResultsA total of 24 patients were enrolled, including 14 males and 10 females with an average age of 68.17±7.72 years, and the average interval between the two operations was 10.48±4.09 years. All patients were successfully discharged without complications such as coronary artery obstruction and pacemaker implantation, and the average transvalvular pressure gradient was 16.39±6.52 mm Hg before discharge. During the median follow-up time of 16 months, the left ventricular diastolic inner diameter and ejection fraction were continuously improved. ConclusionTranscatheter valve-in-valve using domestic self-expanding valves is safe and feasible to treat aortic bioprosthetic valve failure. Sound patient selection and surgical strategies are critical to achieve good hemodynamics.
ObjectiveTo explore the short-term follow-up clinical effect of transcatheter valve-in-valve implantation treatment for mitral bioprosthesis deterioration.MethodsThe single center data of elderly patients with mitral valve bioprosthetic dysfunction who received transapical J-Valve intervention between January 2019 and May 2020 were reviewed and summarized. After the informed consent was signed, single lumen endotracheal intubation was performed under general anesthesia in hybrid operating room. The left intercostal small incision was used to explore the apical area. Fluoroscopy and three-dimensional esophageal ultrasound were used to guide the puncture needle. Then the guide wire entered the left atrium through the mitral valve biological valve. The catheter was exchanged, and the rigid support wire was exchanged. The reverse loaded J-Valve system was guided and implanted into the biological mitral valve with beating heart. The appropriate implantation depth was adjusted, and stent valve was released under rapid pacing. Post balloon dilation of the valve was performed if necessary.ResultsFrom January 2019 to May 2020, transcatheter J-Valve implantation was completed in 20 patients with mitral valve dysfunction and high-risk evaluation of routine thoracotomy and cardiopulmonary bypass (the Society of Thoracic Surgeon score above 6). In terms of the type of the the mitral bioprosthesis, there were 6 cases of Hancock valves, 7 cases of Perimount valves, 6 cases of Epic valves, and 1 case of Baxiter valve. In terms of the size of the the mitral bioprosthesis, there were 2 cases of size 29 valves, 11 cases of size 27 valves, and 7 cases of size 25 valves. One valve fell into the left ventricle at early stage. One patient had mild valve displacement during operation, and a second valve was implanted at the same time. The success rate of valve-in-valve implantation was 95%. The length of stay in intensive care unit was less than 6 h in 5 cases, 6-24 h in 13 cases, 24-48 h in 1 case, and more than 48 h in 1 case. No patient’s postoperative mitral regurgitation was moderate or above. The mean mitral valve pressure gradient was (5.2±2.3) mm Hg (1 mm Hg=0.133 kPa). Patients recovered well after the valve-in-valve implantation treatment, with no death within postoperative one month. One patient died of infection and multiple organ failure during follow-up after one month. Other patients recovered smoothly without serious complications.ConclusionsThe clinical effect of J-Valve intervention in the treatment of mitral valve bioprosthetic dysfunction through apical approach is good. The implantation can be completed under beating heart, avoiding cardiopulmonary bypass and routine thoracotomy cardiac arrest, which is worthy of further observation and follow-up.
Biological valves can lead to structural valve degeneration (SVD) over time and due to various factors, reducing their durability. SVD patients need to undergo valve replacement surgery again, while traditional open chest surgery can cause significant trauma and patients often give up treatment due to intolerance. Research has shown that as an alternative treatment option for reoperation of thoracic valve replacement surgery, redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement for SVD is safe and effective, but still faces many challenges, including prosthesis-patient mismatch, high cross valve pressure difference, and coronary obstruction. This article aims to review the strategies, clinical research status and progress of redo-transcatheter aortic valve replacement in SVD patients.