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.
“Valve-in-valve” technique is an effective method to treat the bioprosthesis structural valve degeneration. In this paper, an 82-year-old male patient with severe aortic valve regurgitation had underwent surgical aortic valve replacement. He had a bioprosthesis structural valve degeneration which caused severe aortic stenosis more than 3 years after surgery. His symptoms of chest distress and short breath were aggravated progressively, and not relieved by conventional treatment. As the deterioration in his unstabled circulation system, an emergency transcatheter aortic valve replacement was conducted for him. The operation was finally successful, the symptoms were relived significantly after operation, and then the follow-up indicated that he had a good recovery.
We reported a case of a 61-year-old female patient, six years status post her last cardiac surgery, who was admitted with a chief complaint of bilateral lower extremity edema for over a year, which had acutely worsened with associated chest pain for two days. The patient had a complex cardiac surgical history: 12 years prior, she underwent double valve replacement (aortic and mitral) plus tricuspid valvuloplasty for mitral valve prolapse with severe regurgitation and moderate-to-severe aortic regurgitation. Nine years ago, she underwent bioprosthetic mitral valve replacement and vegetation removal for prosthetic valve vegetation with severe regurgitation. Six years ago, she underwent a transapical transcatheter mitral valve replacement and mitral balloon valvuloplasty due to prosthetic mitral valve prolapse with severe regurgitation. Following evaluation during this admission, she successfully underwent a valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve replacement (ViV-TAVR). The patient had an uneventful postoperative recovery. This case report aims to explore the clinical strategy and application of the ViV-TAVR technique for managing bioprosthetic valve failure in patients with a history of complex valvular surgeries.
This article reports a case of a 70-year-old female patient who developed bioprosthetic mitral valve deterioration 4 months after her initial valve replacement surgery, manifesting as severe regurgitation and New York Heart Association Class Ⅲ. Due to the high risk of a redo open-heart surgery, she underwent a transapical transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve procedure. Intraoperatively, a J-Valve prosthesis was successfully implanted under echocardiographic and fluoroscopic guidance. Immediate transesophageal echocardiography confirmed an optimal valve position, complete resolution of regurgitation, and no significant paravalvular leak or left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. The patient's postoperative course was uneventful. She was extubated 16 hours post-procedure with significant improvement in cardiac function. Follow-up echocardiography showed normal prosthetic valve function.
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.
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.
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.
Objective To summarize the clinical experience and mid-term outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation valve-in-valve (TAVI-ViV) for failed surgical bioprostheses in the aortic position. Methods Patients who underwent TAVI-ViV procedures at Tianjin University Chest Hospital between January 2019 and January 2025 were consecutively enrolled. Baseline characteristics, procedural details, and postoperative hemodynamic performance were collected and analyzed. Early postoperative and follow-up valve hemodynamics were evaluated, and surgical experiences were summarized. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, and the secondary endpoint was severe prosthetic valve stenosis. Results A total of 45 patients were included, with a mean age of (68.38±7.72) years and an average interval between surgeries of (11.00±3.67) years. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 6.80% (4.29%, 8.21%). The procedural success rate was 97.78% (44/45), with one case aborted due to coronary obstruction. The mean implantation depth was (6.87±3.45) mm, the annular expansion rate ranged from 10% to 40%, and the stent crown compression rate varied from 0% to 42%. The median follow-up duration was 21 months, with 27 patients completing the 2-year follow-up. At 2 years postoperatively, the overall follow-up rate was 92.59% (25/27), and the echocardiographic follow-up rate was 66.67% (18/27). The all-cause mortality rate was 7.41% (2/27). The mean peak aortic valve velocity was 2.96±0.69 m/s, the mean transvalvular gradient was (21.83±10.98) mm Hg, and 3 patients exhibited velocities ≥4 m/s (indicating severe stenosis). The regression analysis showed that the implant depth deviation [β=0.41, SE=0.18, OR=1.51, 95%CI (1.06, 2.30), P=0.024］, the compression rate of the corona [β=2.48, OR=11.93, 95%CI (1.21, 122.40), P=0.034], and the enlargement rate of the annulus [β=1.96, OR=7.13, 95%CI (1.28, 35.50), P=0.026] were the independent predictors of high flow velocity after surgery. Conclusion The optimal implantation depth for TAVI-ViV using a self-expanding valve system is 4 to 5 mm. When the annular expansion rate approaches 10%, hemodynamic performance can be significantly improved. The degree of crown compression in the valve stent is strongly correlated with elevated postoperative transvalvular gradients.
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.