1. Mitral regurgitation in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation for degenerated surgical aortic bioprosthesis: Insights from PARTNER 2 Valve-in-Valve Registry.
- Author
-
Murdoch DJ, Sathananthan J, Hensey M, Alu MC, Liu Y, Crowley A, Wood D, Cheung A, Ye J, Feldman T, Hahn RT, Jaber WA, Mack MJ, Malaisrie SC, Leon MB, and Webb JG
- Subjects
- Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aortic Valve diagnostic imaging, Aortic Valve physiopathology, Aortic Valve Insufficiency diagnostic imaging, Aortic Valve Insufficiency mortality, Aortic Valve Insufficiency physiopathology, Aortic Valve Stenosis diagnostic imaging, Aortic Valve Stenosis mortality, Aortic Valve Stenosis physiopathology, Female, Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation adverse effects, Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation mortality, Humans, Male, Mitral Valve diagnostic imaging, Mitral Valve Insufficiency diagnostic imaging, Mitral Valve Insufficiency mortality, Recovery of Function, Registries, Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Severity of Illness Index, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Aortic Valve surgery, Aortic Valve Insufficiency surgery, Aortic Valve Stenosis surgery, Bioprosthesis, Heart Valve Prosthesis, Heart Valve Prosthesis Implantation instrumentation, Mitral Valve physiopathology, Mitral Valve Insufficiency physiopathology, Prosthesis Failure, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement adverse effects, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement instrumentation, Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement mortality
- Abstract
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.)
- Published
- 2020
- Full Text
- View/download PDF