Valve-in-Surgical-Valve With SAPIEN 3 for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Based on Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background: The use of valve-in-valve–transcatheter aortic valve replacement (VIV-TAVR) in degenerated aortic bioprosthesis has been increasing, but the Food and Drug Administration approval is limited to high-risk patients. We analyzed the real-world experience of SAPIEN 3 VIV-TAVR, especially in lower-risk patients, based on the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score. Methods: All transfemoral VIV-TAVR with the SAPIEN 3 and Ultra valves between June 2015 and January 2020 were identified using the STS/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapies Registry. Patients were grouped based on STS score (low score: <4%, intermediate score: 4%≤ and≤8%, high score: >8%). Propensity-matched (1:3) analysis was conducted to compare to patients undergoing native TAVR. Results: Of 145 917 SAPIEN 3 TAVR patients, 4460 (3%) underwent transfemoral VIV-TAVR with available baseline STS data in 4276 patients. Average age was 73.9±11.2, 66.4% were male, and the mean STS score was 6.9±6.0%. Overall 30-day mortality was 2.4% (observed to expected ratio, 0.33), and 1-year mortality was 10.8%. 30-day mortality and observed to expected ratio were 0.9% and 0.32 in low-score, 2.2% and 0.38 in the intermediate-score, and 4.3% and 0.31 in the high-score group. Based on propensity-matched analysis, 30-day mortality was similar and 1-year mortality was lower in VIV compared to native TAVR among all risk groups. When the groups were analyzed based on the Heart Team risk stratification using high-risk and non–high risk, the findings remained consistent. Conclusions: In this real-world study, VIV-TAVR had excellent 30-day and 1-year outcomes, especially in lower-risk patients. These findings may suggest the feasibility and expansion of VIV-TAVR in lower-risk patients. However, long-term follow-up continues to be crucial.

[1]  A. Unbehaun,et al.  Long-term outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve implantation in failed bioprosthetic valves. , 2020, European heart journal.

[2]  M. Harloff,et al.  Comparison of in-hospital outcomes and readmissions for valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement vs. reoperative surgical aortic valve replacement: a contemporary assessment of real-world outcomes. , 2020, European heart journal.

[3]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Hemodynamic principles of prosthetic aortic valve evaluation in the transcatheter aortic valve replacement era , 2020, Echocardiography.

[4]  F. Burzotta,et al.  Coronary Protection to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During TAVR , 2020 .

[5]  F. Burzotta,et al.  Coronary Protection to Prevent Coronary Obstruction During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Multicenter International Registry. , 2020, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[6]  P. Austin,et al.  Transcatheter ViV Versus Redo Surgical AVR for the Management of Failed Biological Prosthesis: Early and Late Outcomes in a Propensity-Matched Cohort. , 2020, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[7]  D. Dvir,et al.  Bioprosthetic valve fracture: Technical insights from a multicenter study. , 2019, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.

[8]  H. Dauerman,et al.  Durability and Clinical Outcomes of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Failed Surgical Bioprostheses. , 2019, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[9]  R. Lederman,et al.  The BASILICA Trial: Prospective Multicenter Investigation of Intentional Leaflet Laceration to Prevent TAVR Coronary Obstruction. , 2019, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[10]  P. Pibarot,et al.  Invasive Versus Echocardiographic Evaluation of Transvalvular Gradients Immediately Post-Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement. , 2019, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[11]  J. Leipsic,et al.  3-Year Outcomes After Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprostheses: The PARTNER 2 Registry. , 2019, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[12]  J. Leipsic,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic‐Valve Replacement with a Balloon‐Expandable Valve in Low‐Risk Patients , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[13]  Andrew S. Mugglin,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic‐Valve Replacement with a Self‐Expanding Valve in Low‐Risk Patients , 2019, The New England journal of medicine.

[14]  C. Don,et al.  Clinical Valve Thrombosis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve-in-Valve Implantation , 2018, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.

[15]  J. Carroll,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement of Failed Surgically Implanted Bioprostheses: The STS/ACC Registry. , 2018, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  E. Navarese,et al.  Comparative performance of transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation versus conventional surgical redo aortic valve replacement in patients with degenerated aortic valve bioprostheses: systematic review and meta-analysis , 2018, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[17]  D. Adams,et al.  1-Year Results in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Failed Surgical Bioprostheses. , 2017, JACC. Cardiovascular interventions.

[18]  John D Carroll,et al.  2016 Annual Report of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[19]  John D Carroll,et al.  2016 Annual Report of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. , 2017, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[20]  L. Cohn,et al.  Reoperative Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement Versus Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Replacement for Degenerated Bioprosthetic Aortic Valves. , 2016, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[21]  M. Mack,et al.  Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic-Valve Replacement in Intermediate-Risk Patients. , 2016, The New England journal of medicine.

[22]  S. Aranki,et al.  Contemporary Outcomes of Repeat Aortic Valve Replacement: A Benchmark for Transcatheter Valve-in-Valve Procedures. , 2015, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[23]  Jonathon,et al.  Predictive factors, management, and clinical outcomes of coronary obstruction following transcatheter aortic valve implantation: insights from a large multicenter registry. , 2013, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[24]  C. Hengstenberg,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement for Degenerative Bioprosthetic Surgical Valves: Results From the Global Valve-in-Valve Registry , 2012, Circulation.

[25]  Stuart J Pocock,et al.  Transcatheter versus surgical aortic-valve replacement in high-risk patients. , 2011, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  B. Carabello Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery , 2011, Current cardiology reports.

[27]  H. Baumgartner,et al.  Doppler assessment of mechanical aortic valve prostheses: effect of valve design and size of the aorta. , 2004, The Journal of heart valve disease.

[28]  W. Keeling,et al.  Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation for Aortic Stenosis in Patients Who Cannot Undergo Surgery , 2011 .