Search

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Funding was received from St Paul's Foundation and the Providence Health Care Research Institute (PHCRI) Early Career Research Initiative. Dr Akodad has received research funding from Medtronic, Biotronik, MUSE Explore, and Federation Française de Cardiologie. Dr Sathananthan has received speaker fees from Edwards Lifesciences and NVT Medical; and has reported consulting for Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. Dr Tzimas has reported support from the Fondation Vaudoise de Cardiologie. Dr Gulsin has reported support from a British Heart Foundation Travel Fellowship (FS/TF/21/33008). Dr Blanke has reported consulting for Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Neovasc; and has provided computed tomography core laboratory services for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Neovasc, Boston Scientific, and Abbott, for which no direct compensation was received. Dr Sondergaard has received consultant fees and/or institutional research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, and SMT. Dr Wood has reported consulting for and has received research funding from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott. Dr Webb has reported consulting for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr Leipsic has reported support from a Canadian Research Chair in Advanced Cardiopulmonary Imaging; has reported consulting for MVRX, HeartFlow, and Circle Cardiovascular Imaging; and has provided computed tomography core laboratory services for Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Neovasc, Boston Scientific, and Abbott, for which no direct compensation is received. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Background: Valve-in-valve (VIV) treatment with transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a viable option for patients with failing aortic bioprosthetic valves. Optimal management of those with concomitant mitral regurgitation (MR) remains undetermined. Therefore, we sought to assess the implications of concomitant MR in patients undergoing VIV-TAVR., Methods and Results: The PARTNER 2 VIV registry enrolled patients with degenerated surgical aortic bioprosthesis at high risk for reoperation. Patients with core-laboratory echocardiographic assessment of MR were analyzed; severe MR was excluded. We compared patients with ≤mild MR versus moderate MR and assessed changes in MR severity and clinical outcomes. A total of 339 patients (89 initial registry, 250 continued access) underwent VIV procedures; mean age 79.0 ± 10.2 years, mean Society of Thoracic Surgeon score 8.9 ± 4.5%. At baseline, 228/339 (67.3%) had ≤mild MR and 111/339 (32.7%) had moderate MR. In paired analysis, there was significant improvement in ≥moderate MR from baseline to 30 days (32.6% vs. 14.5%, p < .0001 [n = 304]), and no significant change between 30 days and 1 year (13.4% vs. 12.1%, p = .56 [n = 224]) or 1 year and 2 years (11.0% vs. 10.4%, p = .81 [n = 182]). There was no difference in death or stroke between ≤mild MR and moderate MR at 30 days (4.0% vs. 7.2%, p = .20), 1 year (15.5% vs. 15.3%, p = .98) or 2 years (26.5% vs. 23.5%, p = .67)., Conclusion: Moderate concomitant MR tends to improve with VIV-TAVR, and was not a predictor of long-term adverse outcomes in this cohort. In selected patients undergoing VIV-TAVR, it may be appropriate to conservatively manage concomitant MR., Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT# 03225001., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The commonly used valve-in-valve (VIV) app recommends sizing based on dimensions of both the transcatheter heart valve (THV) and bioprosthetic surgical valve. The implications of hydrodynamic testing to guide VIV sizing are poorly understood. This bench study assessed the hydrodynamic performance of different sizes of self-expanding supra-annular THVs in three different surgical aortic bioprostheses at different implantation depths., Methods: A small versus medium ACURATE neo (ACn), and a 26 mm versus 29 mm Evolut R were assessed after VIV implantation in 25 mm Mitroflow, Mosaic, and Magna Ease aortic surgical bioprostheses, at three implantation depths (+2 mm, -2 mm, and -6 mm)., Results: The medium-sized ACn had lower gradients compared to the small ACn when the THV was implanted high (+2 mm, or -2 mm). The 29 mm Evolut R had lower gradients compared to a 26 mm Evolut R for all implantation depths, except for a depth of -2 mm in the 25 mm Mitroflow. The medium ACn and 29 mm Evolut R had larger effective orifice areas compared to the small ACn and 26 mm Evolut R, respectively. Both Evolut R sizes had acceptable regurgitant fractions (<15%), while both ACn sizes were above the acceptable performance criteria (>15%), at all implantation depths., Conclusions: Use of a larger self-expanding THV was associated with superior hydrodynamic performance if the THV was implanted high. Hydrodynamic testing can provide additional information to the VIV app to help guide VIV sizing., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of different transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on valve leaflet displacement when deployed within bioprosthetic surgical valves and, thereby, risk for coronary obstruction., Background: Coronary obstruction is a potentially devastating complication during valve-in-valve (ViV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement. Strategies such as provisional stenting and intentional bioprosthetic valve leaflet laceration have been developed to mitigate this risk. Alternatively, the use of a THV that retracts the bioprosthetic leaflet away from the coronary ostium may prevent coronary obstruction., Methods: A 25-mm J-Valve, a 26-mm Evolut Pro, and a 23-mm JenaValve were implanted into both a 25-mm Trifecta surgical valve and a 25-mm Mitroflow surgical valve. A 23-mm and a 26-mm SAPIEN 3 were deployed into the Trifecta and Mitroflow, respectively. Displacement of the surgical valve leaflets (retraction vs. expansion) was measured with implantation of each THV by measuring displacement angle and maximal displacement distance., Results: Within both the Trifecta and Mitroflow valves, implantation of the J-Valve and JenaValve resulted in retraction of the surgical valve leaflets, and placement of the Evolut Pro and SAPIEN 3 resulted in tubular expansion of the surgical valve leaflets. There were significant differences in displacement angles and distances between both the J-Valve and JenaValve and the SAPIEN 3 and Evolut Pro (p < 0.0001)., Conclusions: ViV implantation with new-generation THVs that directly interact with bioprosthetic valve leaflets results in surgical valve leaflet retraction. This might mitigate the risk for coronary obstruction in selected cases of ViV transcatheter aortic valve replacement and also facilitate coronary reaccess after ViV TAVR., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We aimed to assess the impact of implant depth on hydrodynamic function following valve-in-valve (VIV) intervention using the ALLEGRA transcatheter heart valve (THV) in three different surgical valve designs., Methods and Results: Multiple implantation depths (+2 mm, -2 mm and -6 mm) were tested using a 23 mm ALLEGRA THV for VIV intervention in 19 mm, 21 mm, 23 mm, and 25 mm Epic, Mitroflow and Magna Ease bioprosthetic valves. Multimodality imaging and hydrodynamic evaluation was performed at each implantation depth. The 23 mm ALLEGRA valve had gradients <20 mmHg in the Mitroflow and Epic valves sized ≥21 mm, and in all sizes of the Magna Ease valve. Gradients did not increase significantly at lower implantation depths. The 19 mm Epic (+2 mm: 20.1±0.6 mmHg, -2 mm: 18.8±0.5 mmHg, -6 mm: 22.8±0.3 mmHg) and 19 mm Mitroflow (+2 mm: 24.1±0.2 mmHg, -2 mm: 31.5±0.3 mmHg, -6 mm: 25.6±0.2 mmHg) valves had elevated mean gradients. In larger sized surgical valves (≥23 mm) the regurgitant fraction was higher at low implantation depths. Pinwheeling was significantly worse in the smaller sized (≤21 mm) surgical valves and also at low (<-2 mm) implantation depth., Conclusions: The 23 mm ALLEGRA valve had favourable (<20 mmHg) gradients in all surgical valves sized ≥21 mm, even when the THV was implanted low. In 19 mm sized Mitroflow and Epic valves, gradients were elevated (>20 mmHg). While there was no major difference in mean transvalvular gradients, leaflet pinwheeling was worse at lower implantation depths.

Objectives: This study assessed the long-term durability of nominally deployed transcatheter heart valves (THV) to 1 billion cycles (equivalent to 25 years) and non-nominal (overexpansion, underexpansion, and elliptical) THV deployments to 200 million cycles (equivalent to 5 years) with accelerated wear testing., Background: The long-term durability of THVs is currently unknown. As transcatheter aortic valve replacement expands to lower-risk patients, durability will be of increasing importance., Methods: SAPIEN 3 THVs, sized 20, 23, 26, and 29 mm were assessed. Nominally deployed THVs underwent hydrodynamic performance and mechanical durability as assessed with accelerated wear testing to 1 billion cycles. Magna Ease surgical valves were used as comparators. Durability of non-nominal THV deployments was tested to 200 million cycles. Valves were tested to International Standards Organization 5840:2013 standard., Results: THV durability was excellent for both the nominal and non-nominal THV deployments to 1 billion and 200 million cycles, respectively. At 1 billion cycles the regurgitant fraction for the 20-, 23-, 26-, and 29-mm SAPIEN 3 was 0.92 ± 0.47%, 1.29 ± 0.04%, 1.73 ± 0.46%, and 2.47 ± 0.15%, respectively. There was also excellent durability in the comparator Magna Ease valves. The regurgitant fraction of non-nominal overexpanded (20 mm, 4.36 ± 0.53; 23 mm, 7.68 ± 1.39; 26 mm, 6.80 ± 1.17; 29 mm, 9.00 ± 0.37), underexpanded (20 mm, 3.06 ± 0.28; 23 mm, 4.46 ± 0.45; 26 mm, 7.72 ± 0.48; 29 mm, 8.65 ± 2.01), and elliptical (20 mm, 3.30 ± 0.38; 23 mm, 6.13 ± 0.94; 26 mm, 6.77 ± 1.22; 29 mm, 8.72 ± 0.24) THVs were excellent at 200 million cycles., Conclusions: Nominal SAPIEN 3 THVs demonstrated excellent durability, to an equivalent of 25-years wear. THV durability was similar to the comparator surgical valves tested. Non-nominal (overexpansion, underexpansion, and elliptical) THV deployments also had excellent durability to an equivalent of 5 years wear., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We aimed to assess the impact of implant depth on hydrodynamic function following valve-in-valve (VIV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) using the ACURATE neo transcatheter heart valve (THV) through an ex vivo bench study., Methods and Results: Multiple implantation depths were tested at incremental depths of 2 mm using a small size ACURATE neo valve for VIV TAVR in 19 mm, 21 mm, 23 mm, and 25 mm Mitroflow bioprosthetic valves. Multimodality imaging and hydrodynamic evaluation was performed at each implantation depth. A low implantation was associated with higher transvalvular gradients. The highest transvalvular gradient was observed at -10 mm depth for 19 mm (40.0±0.5 mmHg), -8 mm for 21 mm (15.3±0.2 mmHg), -6 mm for 23 mm (14.7±0.3 mmHg) and -8 mm for 25 mm (8.4±0.2 mmHg) surgical valves. The lowest transvalvular gradient was observed at 0 mm depth for the 19 mm (14.9±0.2 mmHg)/21 mm (7.2±0.1 mmHg), and +2 mm depth for the 23 mm (5.7±0.1 mmHg)/25 mm (5.8±0.1 mmHg) surgical valves. At low implantation depth, there was worse leaflet pin-wheeling and also evidence of interaction of THV leaflets with those of the surgical valve that impaired leaflet coaptation, resulting in a high regurgitant fraction (42.5% in the 21 mm and 83.3% in the 23 mm surgical valve at -10 mm depths)., Conclusions: A high implant is desirable to facilitate favourable hydrodynamic function when performing VIV TAVR using the ACURATE neo THV for Mitroflow aortic bioprostheses sized ±25 mm. In a 19 mm Mitroflow valve, positioning the upper crown of the ACURATE neo THV above the posts of the surgical valve is desirable to facilitate favourable transvalvular gradients. Low implantation results in higher transvalvular gradients and worse pin-wheeling, and THV leaflet dysfunction can be severe due to interaction with the surgical valve.

Objectives: The authors assessed the effect of valve-in-valve (VIV) transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) followed by bioprosthetic valve fracture (BVF), testing different transcatheter heart valve (THV) designs in an ex vivo bench study., Background: Bioprosthetic valve fracture can be performed to improve residual transvalvular gradients following VIV TAVR., Methods: The authors evaluated VIV TAVR and BVF with the SAPIEN 3 (S3) (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, California) and ACURATE neo (Boston Scientific Corporation, Natick, Massachusetts) THVs. A 20-mm and 23-mm S3 were deployed in a 19-mm and 21-mm Mitroflow (Sorin Group USA, Arvada, Colorado), respectively. A small ACURATE neo was deployed in both sizes of Mitroflow tested. VIV TAVR samples underwent multimodality imaging, and hydrodynamic evaluation before and after BVF., Results: A high implantation was required to enable full expansion of the upper crown of the ACURATE neo and allow optimal leaflet function. Marked underexpansion of the lower crown of the THV within the surgical valve was also observed. Before BVF, VIV TAVR in the 19-mm Mitroflow had high transvalvular gradients using either THV design (22.0 mm Hg S3, and 19.1 mm Hg ACURATE neo). After BVF, gradients improved and were similar for both THVs (14.2 mm Hg S3, and 13.8 mm Hg ACURATE neo). The effective orifice area increased with BVF from 1.2 to 1.6 cm 2 with the S3 and from 1.4 to 1.6 cm 2 with the ACURATE neo. Before BVF, VIV TAVR with the ACURATE neo in the 21-mm Mitroflow had lower gradients compared with S3 (11.3 mm Hg vs. 16 mm Hg). However, after BVF valve gradients were similar for both THVs (8.4 mm Hg ACURATE neo vs. 7.8 mm Hg S3). The effective orifice area increased from 1.5 to 2.1 cm 2 with the S3 and from 1.8 to 2.2 cm 2 with the ACURATE neo., Conclusions: BVF performed after VIV TAVR results in improved residual gradients. Following BVF, residual gradients were similar irrespective of THV design. Use of a small ACURATE neo for VIV TAVR in small (≤21 mm) surgical valves may be associated with challenges in achieving optimum THV position and expansion. BVF could be considered in selected clinical cases., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)